FOX'S BOOK OF MARTYRS, CHAPTER IV, Papal Persecutions

Christian Classics Ethereal Library ^ | John Fox

[jude24]

Do not post to me.

[MarMema]

When I pray, with my Eastern-Orthodox sister "Marmema", that Protestants and Orthodox may one day celebrate Communion together "Next Year In Constantinople", I sincerely believe that we both cherish that Ideal.

Yep. Trust is something that must be earned with trustworthy behavior.

[wmfights]

"I am more trusting. I see the sea change since Vatican II - though my viewpoints have been influenced by the writings of Mark Noll, the Wheaton historian."
________________________________________

I'm not sure, but didn't Vatican II encourage RC's to study the BIBLE, even absent a Priest's guidance?

[jude24]

I'm not sure, but didn't Vatican II encourage RC's to study the BIBLE, even absent a Priest's guidance.

You'll have to ask Campion for more guidence, but it is my understanding that they were never forbidden to do so. The only prohibitions they ever were under was that they could not read Protestant translations of the Bible - and that largely because of the biased notes contained within their Bibles.

[Campion]

I'm not sure, but didn't Vatican II encourage RC's to study the BIBLE, even absent a Priest's guidance?

There's pretty strong encouragement of lay Bible study going back at least to the encyclical Spiritus Paraclitus of Pope Benedict XV (IIRC) in the 1920's. It probably goes back further than that, but I don't know the details.

I don't think Catholics should ever study the Bible "absent a Priest's guidance," though. I mean that in the sense that they should consult a reliable priest or lay catechist if they run into trouble, not that they need Father Murphy looking over their shoulder. And they should use a good Catholic translation for their study. (Though I have to admit that I like the NKJV a whole lot, and wish there were a Catholic version.)

[jude24]

And they should use a good Catholic translation for their study. (Though I have to admit that I like the NKJV a whole lot, and wish there were a Catholic version.)

I can't wait till the NET Bible includes the Apocrypha.

[wmfights]

"There's pretty strong encouragement of lay Bible study going back at least to the encyclical Spiritus Paraclitus of Pope Benedict XV (IIRC) in the 1920's."
__________________________

Thanks for the quick response.

[annalex]

Your is a fundamental fallacy that if an eccentric website quotes something, then (1) Vladimir is quoting from the eccentric website and (2) the eccentricity of the website disproves everything that it contains.

Incidentally, I'd second the challenge to prove heliocentrism. I have not visited the site, but I have studued enough physics to understand the fundamental principle, that the laws of nature are valid in any coordinate system. An observer on earth sees the sun going around in circle. An observer on the moon will see the earth rotating around the moon. Geocentrism, Lunocentrisms, and Mytreehousecentrism cannot be scientifically disproven.

[annalex]

I find you longing for the Orthodox embrace very touching. I am sure they won't tarry with it, in particular since you, too have your own Tradition and your own Church, so that must make you Orthodox, does it not?

[annalex]

"Ignorance of the scripture is ignorance of Christ"

That would be St. Jerome, AD 340-420.

[jude24]

Your is a fundamental fallacy that if an eccentric website quotes something, then (1) Vladimir is quoting from the eccentric website

When his post is substantively identical to the website, it is readily apparent he did so. Res ipsa loquitor.

and (2) the eccentricity of the website disproves everything that it contains.

No - but they have absolutely no credibility.

Incidentally, I'd second the challenge to prove heliocentrism

Absolutely unbelievable. Even a second-grader knows the earth orbits the sun, not vice versa. NASA relies upon this fact to send space probes to other planets. Retrogade motion is unexplainable in a geocentric model.

I'm done jaunting through the twilight zone. I'm done talking with idiots. "Do not answer a fool according to his folly, lest you become like him. Give the fool the answer his folly deserves."

[vladimir998]

You can pretend otherwise, but it is undeniable that the allegations against Calvin are based upon the testimony of an eyewitness who saw the original legal document. At least two other men attested to the existence of the document.

[Campion]

Absolutely unbelievable. Even a second-grader knows the earth orbits the sun, not vice versa. NASA relies upon this fact to send space probes to other planets. Retrogade motion is unexplainable in a geocentric model.

Hey, Jude (isn't that a song?), annalex is right on that one. There are no fixed points in space; all inertial frames of reference are equivalent. "Geocentrism" [strictly understood in the mathematical sense, not in the way it was historically used] is simply a convention of putting your coordinate system's origin at the center of the earth. I have it on pretty good authority (a friend of mine who works for NASA at JSC, is that good enough?) that NASA absolutely uses a geocentric model for earth satellite navigation.

Of course, if you're (e.g.) navigating to Mars, using a geocentric model is going to make the math a bear, and a heliocentric origin is going to make it much simpler.

Sungenis' "geocentrism" is sort of like mercury -- the element, not the planet -- in that he'll alter or modify his theory every time you bring up a counterexample. When last I tangled with one of his disciples, the most glaring error he made was not in putting his coordinate origin at the center of the earth, but in insisting that the earth didn't rotate around its axis, but that everything in the universe rotated around the earth. That means that things millions of lightyears away are zipping around in a circle at speeds many times that of light. Sungenis explains this by reference to them being embedded in the "aether," which of course has never been shown to exist. But the simple and obvious refutation of the "earth doesn't rotate" theory is simply that the earth is flat on the poles and fatter at the equator, and the only thing that can explain that is that it rotates on its axis.

Oh, and -- picky point -- the earth does not really orbit around the sun, no matter what coordinate origin you use. The earth and the sun each orbit their common center of gravity. Obscure factoid: Jupiter is so heavy that the center of gravity of the Sun-Jupiter system is actually well above the Sun's visible surface.

[jude24]

allegations against Calvin are based upon the testimony of an eyewitness who saw the original legal document.

Allegedly. I don't believe your source.

[annalex]

second-grader knows

Most of the knowledge of second graders does not extend long past the third grade. How old are you?

[wmfights]

"Ignorance of the scripture is ignorance of Christ"

That would be St. Jerome, AD 340-420.
___________________________

I agree. I had asked if it was after Vatican II that RC's were encouraged to take up Bible studies without a Priest for this reason. Obviously most RC posters here are pretty knowledgeable about SCRIPTURE, their church history and their church's dogma but my experience has been that most RC's I talk with have a very weak knowledge of SCRIPTURE.

[Campion]

most RC's I talk with have a very weak knowledge of SCRIPTURE.

Most of them probably have a very weak knowledge of every aspect of their faith. One reason for that is the near complete destruction of children's catechesis in the US between about 1960 and 1985. Things are better now, at least somewhat better in many places.

[annalex]

Bible studies without a Priest

You don't have to have a physically present priest, but the Church always taught that the study of the scripture should be illuminated by the teaching of the Church, because it is the Church that is the container of the deposit of Christian faith, of which the scripture is but one product. In other words, one who reads the scripture and arrives to notions contrary to the sense of the Church, misunderstands what he reads.

30 And Philip running thither, heard [the eunuch] reading the prophet Isaias. And he said: Thinkest thou that thou understandest what thou readest? 31 Who said: And how can I, unless some man shew me? And he desired Philip that he would come up and sit with him. (Acts 8)

[wmfights]

"In other words, one who reads the scripture and arrives to notions contrary to the sense of the Church, misunderstands what he reads."
____________________________

From my perspective, as a Baptist, I see the opportunity for believers to be misguided when they depend on a church for understanding rather than "GOD-BREATHED" SCRIPTURE.

[annalex]

All kinds of heretics, -- Arians, Nestorians, Gnostics. Pelagians, Monophysites, Lutherans, Calvinists, Jehova's Witnesses -- read the same scripture. It was the Church, not the scripture alone, that exposed their errors.

A message from Orthodox Presbyterian's future home:

Each Christian has the need to read Holy Scripture, yet each Christian does not also have the authority or ability to teach and interpret the words of Scripture. This privileged authority is reserved for the Church via its holy clergy and theologians, men who are instructed in and knowledgeable of the true faith. When we consider how our Saviour gave the grace of teaching to His Holy Apostles (Mat. 28:20) and not to the masses it is easy for us to see that the prerogative to teach is held only by the bishops, priests and theologians of our Church. It was the Apostles who were sent by Christ to teach and to celebrate the Holy Mysteries (Sacraments). Our Apostle Paul says: “How shall they preach, except they be sent?” (Rom. 10:15). Accordingly, the bishops are the lawful successors to the Apostles and those sent for the preaching (kerygma) to the people. Paul entrusts the heavy burden of the instruction of the people to Timothy and not to the faithful. He speaks of this elsewhere: “Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers?” (1 Cor. 12:29) Again he says to Timothy that the clergy must be “apt to teach” others (1 Tim. 3:2). He does not, however, say the same thing for the faithful. He makes a distinction between shepherd and sheep, between teacher and those taught.

[...]

No, [the Holy Scripture] is not sufficient to guide man to salvation, [2] inasmuch as, firstly, it wasn’t given to man from the beginning and, secondly, when it was given it wasn’t the only authentic text, with regard to the salvation of human souls, because before it there was the Holy Tradition. Many years before Moses began writing the first books of the Old Testament, there was sacred piety in the community of the people of Israel. Similarly, the books of the New Testament began to be written ten years after the formal foundation of the Church, which took place on the day of Pentecost. The Church chose and sealed as inspired by God the books of the two Testaments over one hundred years later.[3] These then comprised the declared Canon of the books of Holy Scripture. Thereafter the Church maintained this Canon of Truth, inasmuch as it is the very “pillar and ground of truth” (1 Tim. 3:15). The Holy Spirit operates within all of this for the preservation of the truth about salvation. Where the Church is, says Saint Jerome, there also is the Spirit of God and where the Spirit of God is, there also is the Church and all grace - since the Spirit is truth.

(On Holy Scripture)

***

Holy Tradition is the teaching of the Church, God-given with a living voice, from which a portion was later written down. As with Holy Scripture, so, too, Holy Tradition contains Holy Revelation, and is, therefore, fundamental for our salvation. Holy Tradition is the life of the Church in the Holy Spirit and, consonant with the enduring life of the Church, is thus a wellspring of Holy Revelation, such that, consequently, it possesses the same authority as Holy Scripture.

From the time of Adam until that of Abraham, according to the old chronologies, 3,678 years passed, and if we add 430 years when the Israelites remained in Egypt, we have 4,108 years. Throughout this period of time Holy Scripture neither existed nor was the Sabbath considered as a feast among the people. During this period of many thousands of years the faithful and chosen people were guided to the path of salvation only by Holy Tradition, namely, from the teachings about God which they received from a living voice. Only for the duration of 1400 years - from the time of Moses until the advent of Christ - were they guided by the Holy Scriptures of the Old Testament.

Just as before the books of the Old Testament were written the people were guided in the knowledge of God and on the path of salvation only by Holy Tradition (Tradition with a living voice, orally), so too were they precisely before the writing of the books of the New Testament. The Holy Tradition was the guide by which the first Christians were directed to the path of salvation. The first to impart the teachings of the New Testament with a living voice to the ears of the people was our Saviour Jesus Christ Himself, who for three and a half years continually taught the people, distributing His Gospel without, however, writing anything. Inasmuch as He was carrying out obedience to His Father, He didn’t send His Apostles to write but to preach the Gospel to the whole world, saying to them: “Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen” (Mat. 28:19-20). From the day of its establishment (33 AD) until the year 44 AD, when the the Holy Apostle Matthew wrote the first Gospel [1], the Church was governed without the Scriptures of the New Testament, but only with the Holy Tradition of which only a part was later recorded. Although there were many other writers for whom it was claimed that they were inspired and faithful scribes of the Apostles, the Church is She who did or did not recognise them, for She is unerring. The Church lived the truth of the Gospel even before anything was committed to writing, having lived with the Holy Tradition from the outset.

So then, this is the Holy Tradition: The source and the root of the two Testaments - the Old and the New - and thus the reason why we call it a source of Holy Revelation, since it carries the same weight as Holy Scripture.

[...]

... the law of God is not only contained in Holy Scripture. Listen to what the divine Evangelist John says: “And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen” (Jn. 21:25). Again the same Evangelist declares in one of his epistles: “Having many things to write unto you, I would not write with paper and ink: but I trust to come unto you, and speak face to face, that our joy may be full” (2 Jn. 1:12). So, you see that the holy evangelist, when he had the ability, taught his disciples more with the living voice of Tradition than by sending them epistles. While your friends keep at all costs only so much as is written, they don’t take into account that both the Saviour and the majority of His Apostles did not leave anything written, but rather taught orally, with the living voice of Tradition.

(On Holy Tradition)

(from Luther and Erasmus:2428)