Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Papacy built on pious fiction and forgery, part 1
Beggars All ^ | May 26, 2010 | John Bugay

Posted on 02/13/2015 5:56:00 PM PST by RnMomof7

Papacy built on pious fiction and forgery, part 1

J. Gresham Machen said, in his 1915 lecture "History and Faith," that "The student of the New Testament should be primarily an historian."

And in fact, thanks to the last few centuries' worth of historical criticism, and a couple of “historical Jesus” quests, both the life of Jesus and the history of the New Testament have undergone a thorough historical examination, and in the process, have only had their historical reliability enhanced.

On the other hand, what we've been told about the early papacy has fallen away like chaff. Instead of boasts about the papacy being "instituted by Christ" and "immediately and directly" given to Peter and "perpetual successors," now, Joseph Ratzinger has stepped back and said that the papacy "goes back to the Lord and was developed faithfully in the nascent church." (Ratzinger, "Called to Communion," page 72.)

How was it "faithfully developed"?

In the first place, some Catholics will say that it is no contradiction that this "immediate" and "perpetual" power nevertheless had to "develop." But I am writing to individuals who, able to read and think, will easily be able to see the disjunction at this point.

Eamon Duffy, who was President of Magdalene College at Cambridge, and a church historian, wrote the following summary ("Saints and Sinners: A History of the Popes")

Irenaeus thought that the Church had been 'founded and organised at Rome by the two glorious Apostles, Peter and Paul,' and that its faith had been reliably passed down to posterity by an unbroken succession of bishops, the first of them chosen and consecrated by the Apostles themselves. He named the bishops who had succeeded the Apostles, in the process providing us with the earliest surviving list of the popes -- Linus, Anacletus, Clement, Evaristus, Alexander, Sixtus, and so on down to Irenaeus' contemporary and friend Eleutherius, Bishop of Rome from AD 174 to 189.

All the essential claims of the modern papacy, it might seem, are contained in this Gospel saying about the Rock, and in Irenaeus' account of the apostolic pedigree of the early bishops of Rome. Yet matters are not so simple. The popes trace their commission from Christ through Peter, yet for Irenaeus the authority of the Church at Rome came from its foundation by two Apostles, not one, Peter and Paul, not Peter alone. The tradition that Peter and Paul had been put to death at the hands of Nero in Rome about the year ad 64 was universally accepted in the second century, and by the end of that century pilgrims to Rome were being shown the 'trophies' of the Apostles, their tombs or cenotaphs, Peter's on the Vatical Hill, and Paul's on the Via Ostiensis, outside the walls on the road to the coast. Yet on all of this the New Testament is silent. Later legend would fill out the details of Peter's life and death in Rome -- his struggles with the magician and father of heresy, Simon Magus, his miracles, his attempted escape from persecution in Rome, a flight from which he was turned back by a reproachful vision by Christ (the 'Quo Vadis' legend), and finally his crucifixion upside down in the Vatican Circus at the time of the Emperor Nero. These stories were to be accepted as sober history by some of the greatest minds of the early Church -- Origen, Ambrose, Augustine. But they are pious romance, not history, and the fact is that we have no reliable accounts either of Peter's later life or the manner or place of his death. Neither Peter nor Paul founded the Church at Rome, for there were Christians in the city before either of the Apostles set foot there. Nor can we assume, as Irenaeus did, that the Apostles established there a succession of bishops to carry on their work in the city, for all the indications are that there was no single bishop at Rome for almost a century after the deaths of the Apostles. In fact, wherever we turn, the solid outlines of the Petrine succession at Rome seem to blur and dissolve. (Duffy, pg 2.)
In a world where history affirms the life of Christ, the testimony of his resurrection, and in which the New Testament has been affirmed as reliable history, and the movements of Paul and the events in his life pinned down to the very year they happened, this same study of history has washed away the underpinnings of the historical papacy.

In fact, the city of Rome was very geographically diverse, and throughout the first half of the second century, the Roman church was led by a network of presbyters in a network of house churches.
These presbyters fought among themselves as to who was greatest. I've quoted Hermas from "The Shepherd of Hermas as saying, "They had a certain jealousy of one another over questions of preeminence and about some kind of distinction. But they are all fools to be jealous of one another regarding preeminence.”

Roger Collins relates, "The sheer size of Rome would have made it hard for Christians to create a single organizational structure or congregate in one part of the city. Because the earliest Christian groups grew out of the Jewish community, their presence in Rome probably mirrored that of the Jews, with particular concentrations in certain neighborhoods, notably Trastavere. As the new faith began making converts, probably mostly amongst immigrants and across a growing range of social classes, the dispersal of Christians throughout the city intensified. Because of the persecution of Christians by Nero around ad 64, it became prudent to live and meet in small groups, and avoid congregating in public in large numbers. Because they worshiped in rooms dedicated to the purpose in private houses and kept their meetings very discreet creating a clerical hierarchy exercising authority over the different Christian groups in the city proved a slow process." (Roger Collins, "Keepers of the Keys of Heaven, pg. 13)
Indications of this can be found in text produced by Christian writers in Rome in the late first and second centuries. The author of the Epistle of Clement may have been the man of this name later described as the person responsible for drafting communications sent on behalf of the Christians of Rome to other churches. But by the time of Tertullian and Irenaeus, Clement was listed as the second or third bishop of Rome.

This difference of perspective on Clement is telling. The late-second-century authors were probably reporting a tradition that had grown up in Rome in which leading figures amongst the elders of their day were retrospectively turned into bishops, to produce a continuous list of holders of the office stretching back to Peter. Why this happened can be explained, but it would be helpful to ask which of the people named by Irenaeus and Tertullian should be regarded as the first real bishop of the city. Most scholars now agree that the answer would be Anicetus, who comes in tenth on both lists, and whose episcopate likely covered the years 155 to 166.

Not everyone is convinced that what has been called a monarchic bishop, with unquestioned authority over all the Christian clergy in the city, was to be found in Rome even as early as this, and Fabian (236-250) has been proposed as the first bishop of Rome in the full sense. (Collins, 13-14)
As I've mentioned, committed Roman Catholics will simply dismiss this historical work as "modernist" or worse, and with the wave of a hand, they will assert, in Newmanesque fashion, that the burden of proof lies with the modern historian to "prove" that there was not simply an unbroken succession from Peter onward. But what I've given you are mere summary treatments of histories that are much more detailed, much more widely respected, and rarely ever contradicted. This is becoming the accepted historical account of the early papacy. Catholics should be asked to make some case about what is actually lacking in this historical research that is to be doubted. (Especially given the clarity that now exists regarding the life of Christ and the testimony of the earliest church.)

Robert Eno, S.S. (Order of Sulpicians, whose mission is to teach Catholic seminarians), in his 1990 work, "The Rise of the Papacy," suggests that:

Such a view is becoming increasingly widespread. The evidence here, as with most subjects of this period, is fragmentary, and the issue can be debated in both ways. But the evidence available seems to point predominantly if not decisively in the direction of a collective leadership. Dogmatic a priori theses should not force us into presuming or requiring something that the evidence leans against. (pg. 26)
This historical information is evidence in addition to Scriptural "proofs" (Matthew 16, Luke 22, and John 21) that Roman Catholics provide as "evidence" for the papacy, as described by Robert Reymond, in his “A New Systematic Theology of the Christian Faith,” pg 818:

Rome’s exegesis of Matthew 16 and its historically developed claim to authoritative primacy in the Christian world simply cannot be demonstrated and sustained from Scripture itself. This claim is surely one of the great hoaxes foisted upon professing Christendom, upon which false base rests the whole papal sacerdotal system.


TOPICS: Charismatic Christian; Evangelical Christian; Other Christian; Religion & Politics
KEYWORDS: catholicbashing; catholicism; infallibilitypapcy
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-125 next last
To: hockeyCEO
It doesn't take long to watch a Protestant twist words around.

Show...

Us...

WORDS!!!!



81 posted on 02/14/2015 4:42:17 AM PST by Elsie ( Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: hockeyCEO
I especially like how opinion is stated in bold, since bold type must make it true.

I just like opinion; period; with NO facts to back it up.

82 posted on 02/14/2015 4:43:15 AM PST by Elsie ( Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: Salvation



83 posted on 02/14/2015 4:45:19 AM PST by Elsie ( Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: redleghunter
Go ask an SSPX member. They will say Vat2 Catholics are out of communion with true Catholicism.



I was walking across a bridge one day, and I saw a man standing on the edge, about to jump off. So I ran over and said, "Stop! Don't do it!"
"Why shouldn't I?" he said.
 
I said, "Well, there's so much to live for!"
He said, "Like what?"
 
I said, "Well...are you religious or atheist?"
He said, "Religious."
 
I said, "Me too! Are you Christian or Buddhist?"
He said, "Christian."
 
I said, "Me too! Are you Catholic or Protestant?"
He said, "Protestant."
 
I said, "Me too! Are you Episcopalian or Baptist?"
He said, "Baptist!"
 
I said,"Wow! Me too! Are you Baptist Church of GOD or Baptist Church of the Lord?"
He said, "Baptist Church of GOD!"
 
I said, "Me too! Are you Original Baptist Church of GOD, or are you Reformed Baptist Church of GOD?"
He said,"Reformed Baptist Church of GOD!"
 
I said, "Me too! Are you Reformed Baptist Church of GOD, reformation of 1879, or Reformed Baptist Church of GOD, reformation of 1915?"
He said, "Reformed Baptist Church of GOD, reformation of 1915!"
 
I said, "Die, heretic scum", and pushed him off.
-- Emo Phillips

84 posted on 02/14/2015 4:46:22 AM PST by Elsie ( Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: NRx; RnMomof7

Welcome to FR.


85 posted on 02/14/2015 5:22:28 AM PST by metmom (...fixing our eyes on Jesus, the Author and Perfecter of our faith...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Elsie
John Paul II: Mary is the “mother of all who are reborn to life” Evangelium Vitae (1995)

He exalted Mary as MEDIATRIX and CO-REDEMPTRESS. In his general audience of December 13, 1995, he observed that the Vatican II Council applied the title of Mediatix to Mary and spoke of her “mediating role” and “her cooperation in a wholly singular way in the work of restoring supernatural life to souls” and “her exceptional role in the work of redemption” (“Council’s Teaching on Mary Is Rich and Positive,” Dec. 13, 1995, L’Osservatore Romano, English edition).

John Paul II even used the term “worship” to describe devotion to Mary. In his general audience of May 7, 1997, the Pope said that “MARIAN WORSHIP in the ecclesial community ... is based on the will of Christ” and “MARY IS THE PATH THAT LEADS TO CHRIST...” (Vatican Information Service, May 7, 1997). He concluded by urging all Christians to acknowledge Mary’s “providential role in the path of salvation.”

http://www.wayoflife.org/index_files/john_paul_II_marys_in_life_and_death.html

86 posted on 02/14/2015 5:41:18 AM PST by .45 Long Colt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: DuncanWaring
Her goal is to save the souls of us Catholics.

Man cannot save souls. Including their own.
87 posted on 02/14/2015 5:51:01 AM PST by Old Yeller (Civil rights are for civilized people.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: DuncanWaring
I don't believe in "once saved, always saved" but I sure believe in the Perseverance of the Saints. As someone has said, "grace secures us for glory!"

1 Peter 1:3-9 teaches the certainty of the Christian’s destiny in glory.

Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! According to his great mercy, he has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, to an inheritance that is imperishable, undefiled, and unfading, kept in heaven for you, who by God’s power are being guarded through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time. In this you rejoice, though now for a little while, if necessary, you have been grieved by various trials, so that the tested genuineness of your faith–more precious than gold that perishes though it is tested by fire–may be found to result in praise and glory and honor at the revelation of Jesus Christ. Though you have not seen him, you love him. Though you do not now see him, you believe in him and rejoice with joy that is inexpressible and filled with glory, obtaining the outcome of your faith, the salvation of your souls.

Now to him who is able to keep you from stumbling and to present you blameless before the presence of his glory with great joy. (Jude 1:24)

And I am sure of this, that he who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ. (Philippians 1:6)

Michael Horton from Putting the Amazing Back into Grace (pg. 171)

Those who think they can lose their salvation are not trusting in Jesus Christ alone for salvation but partly trusting in their own righteousness. Such teaching would have you believe that the sacrifice of Jesus was insufficient to make his people perfect forever (Heb 10:14) or save them to the uttermost (Heb 7:25) [i.e. that Jesus is not enough]. ... such that, in addition to what Christ did, they must join their own ability to persevere to the end in order to maintain their own just standing before God. The book of Hebrews and Galatians severely warns against this and all teaching that rejects the sufficiency of Christ alone (Heb 6 & 10; Gal 3:3). Such persons think Christ made the down payment on their salvation but that they have to keep up the monthly installments (so to speak). I total misapprehension of the meaning of paid in full.

88 posted on 02/14/2015 6:09:58 AM PST by .45 Long Colt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: redleghunter

I belong to the Roman Catholic “sect” of Roman Catholicism.

The parish I belong to observes the Vatican II form of the Mass.

I’m leaning toward switching to another parish that observes the pre-Vatican II Latin mass.


89 posted on 02/14/2015 6:25:25 AM PST by DuncanWaring (The Lord uses the good ones; the bad ones use the Lord.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman
"I see you had to make do with a graphic of pagans attacking a Catholic."

I used that particular image in reference to the previous comment mentioning the other Indian practice of counting coup.

"We wouldn’t have to stoop to such tactics, since there are plenty of illustrations of Catholics burning Protestants at the stake, back when they could get away with it."

Oh I know. I've learned here on the FRRF that only Catholics burned people.

90 posted on 02/14/2015 7:18:46 AM PST by Wyrd bið ful aræd ("We are condemned by men who are themselves condemned" -- The Most Reverend Marcel Lefebvre)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: redleghunter; metmom
Then again, I think each comment removed by the RM get “Purgatory points.”

:)

The truth will set you free ...but some people love bondage

91 posted on 02/14/2015 8:19:43 AM PST by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: Elsie
No facts? Do you dispute what I wrote? I welcome your rebuttal to them.

What is the point of dissecting the article further when its opening statements are shown to be so very wrong?
92 posted on 02/14/2015 8:26:23 AM PST by hockeyCEO
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7

Thanks for posting this.


93 posted on 02/14/2015 8:39:27 AM PST by zot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GreyFriar; SeraphimApprentice

Ping


94 posted on 02/14/2015 8:40:53 AM PST by zot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: .45 Long Colt
John Paul II even used the term “worship” to describe devotion to Mary.

So??

Do you not realize every ONE of his comments ever uttered can be dismissed by today's Catholics!

Unless his words were filtered through the Magisterium do they count.

Try again; HATER!

95 posted on 02/14/2015 9:51:43 AM PST by Elsie ( Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: DuncanWaring
I’m leaning toward switching to another parish that observes the pre-Vatican II Latin mass.

But WHY?

What does IT offer for your soul's salvation that the VII doesn't?

96 posted on 02/14/2015 9:53:24 AM PST by Elsie ( Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: hockeyCEO
No facts? Do you dispute what I wrote?

Do YOU document what you claim?

This article continues on with more heresy.

97 posted on 02/14/2015 9:56:06 AM PST by Elsie ( Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: hockeyCEO; DuncanWaring

Happy Valentine's Day you guys!!


 
 
 
http://www.tripadvisor.com/LocationPhotoDirectLink-g187791-d3780509-i99317571-Basilica_di_Santa_Maria_in_Cosmedin-Rome_Lazio.html
 
 

98 posted on 02/14/2015 9:57:49 AM PST by Elsie ( Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: metmom

:)


99 posted on 02/14/2015 10:33:34 AM PST by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7

The Orthodox Church is on a firm foundation. If you eliminate the Roman Church, Catholics will just go to Orthodox parishes. Playing sola scriptura on the Vatican does nothing but move chess pieces around the board.


100 posted on 02/14/2015 10:37:29 AM PST by x_plus_one
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-125 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson