Replies

A repost:

“Yes, they could.”

What, is Roman exegesis summed up in the ability to say “I disagree!”?

“Sez who? You?”

Says Jerome, whose argument I took, and the plain teachings of the scripture that do not hold that a man can supplant God in the forgiveness of sins.

Besides, when your Priests are not too busy molesting little boys, they have need of forgiveness themselves. Such is the extreme foolishness of depending on men for forgiveness instead of God.

“Oh, you mean James, Bishop of Jerusalem, presiding over the Conference in Jerusalem. I see.”

From the Catechism:

882 The Pope, Bishop of Rome and Peter’s successor, “is the perpetual and visible source and foundation of the unity both of the bishops and of the whole company of the faithful.”402 “For the Roman Pontiff, by reason of his office as Vicar of Christ, and as pastor of the entire Church has full, supreme, and universal power over the whole Church, a power which he can always exercise unhindered.”403

883 “The college or body of bishops has no authority unless united with the Roman Pontiff, Peter’s successor, as its head.” As such, this college has “supreme and full authority over the universal Church; but this power cannot be exercised without the agreement of the Roman Pontiff.”404

884 “The college of bishops exercises power over the universal Church in a solemn manner in an ecumenical council.”405 But “there never is an ecumenical council which is not confirmed or at least recognized as such by Peter’s successor.”406

Thus, if Rome is correct, then James, who was presiding over the council, contradicted Peter’s judgment and declared his OWN sentence, must, in fact, be the Pope.

“This is an argument from silence”

Indeed, if the early Christians did not see fit to mention that there is a POPE somewhere in whom UNIVERSAL AUTHORITY was owed, then it is illogical to claim that any existed.

If Ignatius DOES say that the head of Polycarp is GOD, and not Peter who is here called the HEAD OF THE CHURCH, I can see it as nothing less than a direct contradiction of Roman theology.

From the Catechism: “The episcopal college and its HEAD, the Pope”.

“Tertullian argues for Apostolic succession through the bishop of Rome from St. Peter to Clement.”

Tertullian also argues against the Eucharist being the literal body of Christ:

“Wherefore, because they thought his saying hard and intolerable, as if he had really decreed that his flesh was to be eaten by them, in order that he might place salvation in the spirit, he first said, It is the spirit which quickeneth, and then added, the flesh profiteth nothing, that is to say, to quickening. And what he meant by the spirit, follows, the words which I have spoken are spirit and life. As above, he who hears my words and believes in him, who sent me, has eternal life, and .shall not come into judgment, but shall pass from death to life. Therefore, appointing the word to be life-giving, because the word is spirit and life, he called the same his flesh, because the word was made flesh, and therefore was to be desired as the origin of life, to be devoured by hearing, to be chewed in the mind, and to be digested by faith.” — Upon the Resurrection of the Body

“The bread which he had taken and distributed to his disciples he made his body, by saying, This is my body, that is, the figure of my body.”

Tertullian holds the chairs of the Apostles as all being equal, and lists Rome as merely another “place” in a long list of places where the seats of the Apostles presides:

“But come now, thou who art impatient to exercise thy curiosity more profitably in the work of thy salvation ; survey the apostolical churches in which the very chairs of the apostles still preside over their stations, in which their own letters are recited, uttering the voice and representing the presence of each of them. Is Achaia nearest to thee, thou hast Corinth. If thou art not far from Macedonia, thou hast •the Philippians and the Thessalonians. If thou canst go to Asia, thou hast Ephesus, but if thou art near Italy, thou hast Rome, whence to us also authority is near at hand,” (On the Prescriptions against Heretics)

Confession and penance in the church is Public, not secret as it is in the Roman church:

“For the most part they were wont to nourish their prayers by fastings, to groan, to cry, to lament day and night to the Lord their God, to prostrate themselves before the priests, to embrace the knees of the saints, to impose embassies of deprecation upon all the brethren. Confession comprehends all these things. Many however presume to avoid this work, as being a publishing of their condition to put it off from day to day, thinking more of their shame than their salvation.... But the church is Christ. When therefore you clasp the knees of the brethren, you touch Christ, and you supplicate Christ. And in the same manner when they weep over you, Christ suffers and Christ intercedes with the Father.... Whether is it better to be condemned in secret, than to be openly absolved?” (Concerning Penance)

According to Tertulian, the rule of Faith is scripture, not in the decision of the Magesterium:

“Let the school of Hermogenes show that it is written, if it is not written, let him fear the curse directed against those, who add or di minish.” — Against Hermogenes,

According to Tertullian, idolatry is service to ANY kind of image:

“Every form or little form must be called an idol. Wherefore idolatry is the service and attendance of every kind of idol.... God forbids as well the making as the worshipping of an idol. In order to root out that which is the substance of idolatry, the divine law proclaims, Thou shalt not make an idol ; and by adding, nor the likeness of any thing that is in heaven or upon the earth or in the sea, prohibits the act to the whole world.”(On Idolatry)

So, are you sure Tertullian isn’t a better friend to me than he is to you?