Posted on 11/28/2014 9:44:39 PM PST by Steelfish
The Early Church Fathers
The Early Church Fathers were the disciples of the 12 apostles, the disciples of the disciples of the 12 apostles, the disciples of the disciples of the disciples of the 12 apostles, etc. In short they were the Christian leaders who took charge of the Church following the death of the 12 apostles.
They were not only taught by the 12 apostles, they were also first-hand witnesses to the creation of the Church worldwide. Most, if not all, were martyred by being crucified, beheaded, fed to the lions at the Roman Coliseum, boiled in oil, or skinned alive. They were the ones empowered by the Holy Spirit (John 16:13 and 1 John 4:6), and who personally handed on the oral teaching of Jesus Christ, before the New Testament canon was created by the Catholic Church in the late 4th century, at the councils of Rome, Hippo, and Carthage.
One of the great early ones, St. Clement, is actually mentioned in the bible in Philippians 4:3. None of these early Church Fathers just stood up and started preaching on his own. They followed the Biblical model in Acts of “being sent” (Romans 10:15). Who sent them? Jesus sent the 12 apostles (“as the Father sent me, so I send you”). The 12 apostles then laid hands on others and sent them (Acts 6:6).
This apostolic tradition has been followed for 2000 years by the Catholic Church, who continuously lays hands on new disciples in every generation since Jesus walked the earth, and then sends them to the four corners of the earth to preach the good news of Jesus Christ, to forgive sins in His Name, and to bring Jesus in the Eucharist to us all. We, the members of the 21rst Century, owe these early Church Fathers a lot of gratitude, because they died horrible deaths in order to preserve and to hand on the Word of God to us today.
A lot of Protestants ignore these early Christian leaders, preferring instead to believe that the history of Christianity began with Jesus and the 12 apostles, and then somehow skipped over 15 centuries to Martin Luther. That would be like saying that the history of the United States began with George Washington in 1776, and then skipped over to Franklin Roosevelt in 1932. For some reason, a lot of Protestants will refuse to read any of the writings of the early Church Fathers, proudly proclaiming to everyone that “Those writings are not in my Bible!”
But they will read the writings of Martin Luther, Billy Graham, and Max Lucado, even though those aren’t in the Bible either! They will even read and believe the heretical "Left Behind" books of LaHeye and Jenkins (there is no "secret" rapture of believers mentioned anywhere in the bible. When it happens, according to the bible, there will be trumpet blasts, and every eye will see Jesus). The writings of the early Church Fathers elucidate what is taught in the Bible, so that it’s no mystery whether or not the Eucharist is the actual body, blood, soul, and divinity of Jesus Christ, whether or not Mary is the new Eve, or whether or not there is a purgatory.
After all, the early Church Fathers were taught by the 12 apostles, handed on the faith to the next generation, and were then martyred for their actions! Why someone would trust more in the writings of people coming along 15 centuries later over their writings is very strange indeed.
Some of the greatest early Church Fathers are mentioned below. To read about them, just click on their name.
St. Polycarp
St. Iraneaus
St. Justin Martyr
St. Ambrose
St. Ignatius of Antioch
St. Cyril of Jerusalem
St. Athanasius
St. Clement of Rome
St. Augustine
St. Jerome
To read about what they thought about the following issues, click on each one of the topics below.
Purgatory
Homosexuality
Contraception
Old Testament Canon
Good Works
The Catholic Church
The Pope
The Eucharist
Apostolic Succession and Tradition
The Blessed Virgin Mary
The Mass
Divorce
Against Heresy
Unity of the Church
Infant Baptism
Degrees of Sin
Abortion
Some great writings of these early Church Fathers are below:
The First Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians
The Epistle of Polycarp to the Phillipians
The Epistle of Ignatius to the Ephesians
The Martyrdom of Ignatius
The First Apology of Justin Martyr
Iranaeus Against Heresies
Confessions of St. Augustine
A Complete Index of the Early Church Fathers' Writings
Jimmy Akin's New Blog on the Early Church Fathers
So don't get trapped in the Protestant philosophy that actually says that if it isn't in the Bible, then it can't possibly be true. If that were truly the case, then none of Martin Luther's writings can be seen as true, because they aren't in the Bible either! Take the time to read what our Catholic martyred ancestors had to say. After all, we are all united through time and space in the Eucharist. St. John says in his gospel that if we eat the body of Christ and drink His blood, then Christ abides in us, and we in Him! And because we are all united in Christ, we are all united with each other.
And once non-Catholic Christians start to read these writings of the early Church Fathers, they will soon discover that there were NO Baptists, Lutherans, Methodists, Mormons, Episcopaleans, etc., anywhere in the Early Church. Those traditions of men were all started centuries later, based on what people thought Jesus' Church was all about, rather than on what it actually was.
then how do you explain the verses that notes Jesus has brothers and sisters?
then how do you explain the verses that notes Jesus has brothers and sisters?
I have two nephews who are step brothers and they call each other brothers.
I have a niece who is Navajo, she says it is not unusual for cousins to refer to each other as brothers or sisters.
You've just opened the door to Mormonism and pretty much anyone else. You've also opened the door to allowing Mary to be named a Redemtrix alongside of Christ. That's the next step for her. The votes aren't there for that just yet...but it's coming.
Catholicism already wrongly teaches we can't get to Christ except we go through Mary.
That right there disqualifies every other non-biblical teaching of the catholic church. In fact, it makes me double and triple check everything I read by catholics.
Jesus set the example of how we should respond to these challenges by stating..."It is written...." He appealed to the written Word on more than one occasion while trashing the traditions of the pharisees.
There is only Petrine authority in the minds of catholics. We know the ECFs did not all adhere to this interpretation. They're all over the board on this.
If we're not adhering to the Word as the final authority we open ourselves up man-made doctrine as we see in the false teachings on Mary. I posted earlier regarding the false book these teachings are based on.
Paul relied upon the Word being the final authority in 2 Timothy 3:16-17.
Regarding the Eucharist, I've already posted on that. It is not the actual blood or flesh we're partaking...it is the faith in Christ that saves us.
But then again, catholics believe you have to go through Mary to get to Christ so why should I believe they are correct on this??
If the Eucharist is the end all be all for salvation, then the individual who believes in Christ and dies on the battlefield without benefit of the Eucharist, or an individual in a car wreck or some other situation where the Eucharist or a priest is not available, then based on what you're saying, they are not saved and do not go to Heaven. That flies against John 3:16 and pretty much everything Paul has written in the NT.
I tell you, if I were catholic and really believed what ya'll on this board say it teaches, I wouldn't let a priest out of my sight.
To throw the name of Billy Graham in with the charlatans you mention is rather disingenuous on your part.
Your last paragraph, regarding throwing out "swatches of scriptures", is more along catholic lines of picking and choosing verses, and goodness knows what else, out of context to support the false teaching of catholicism.
Oh good grief. You're bringing in the Navajo to justify this?? All due respect to your neice...this is one of the weakest replies I've seen on FR on this topic.
Oh good grief. You’re bringing in the Navajo to justify this?? All due respect to your neice...this is one of the weakest replies I’ve seen on FR on this topic.
Regarding the Eucharist, I’ve already posted on that. It is not the actual blood or flesh we’re partaking...it is the faith in Christ that saves us.
Nope...I try not to get mad about these topics. I apologize if my replies might suggest so. Glad to hear we are "brothers" in Christ!
Glad to hear we are “brothers” in Christ!
John 21: 25 opens the door to no one. It allows the use of Petrine authority to authoritatively state and interpret the Word of God, no less and no more than what the early Church fathers did in assembling together the authentic Word of God. This authority was not given to Baptists, AnaBaptists, Lutherans, Methodists, Moonies, or your corner street Foursquare Church paster. Mary may well be the co-redeemtrix. It was her “Be it done according to thy will” that enabled the greatest event in human history, the incarnation of the Word of God.
Sophomoric and shallow interpretations by so-called Bible Christians have been dissected to the point of ridicule. No wonder the largest paster of Sweden’s largest and most influential Protestant church Ulf Elkman decided to jettison this nonsense and convert to Catholicism.
your interpretation of john 21:25 certainly does open the door to anyone. It opened the door to the false teaching that you have to go through Mary to get to Christ. Not supported in the NT anywhere.
Elkman is a proponent of the word of faith health and wealth doctrine. You might want to read up on this guy before you triumph his movement to catholicism. He was ordained in the church of Sweden....a liberal church embracing homosexuality.
looks like he's bouncing from one set of false teachings to another.
Of course, we have seen the false Lutheran and Protestant cults with their shallow Bible-interpretations who seduce the untutored. Isn’t this what Jim Jones, David Koresh, and cult leader Victor Barnard, all drew upon “their” superficial readings of scripture untethered from Petrine authority?
Yet 2000 years of unbroken scriptural interpretation supported by the broadest constellation of theologians from colleges and universities throughout out the world have confirmed Petrine authority. Not the shallow stuff that Bible Christians spout off from the nonsense of Joel Osteen to the scriptural musings of the Billy Grahams and Jimmy Swaggarts, each supplying their own interpretation of scripture or every Tom, Dick, and Harry who think they can crack open the pages of the Bible and throw off swatches of scripture and tell us Catholics whose early Church fathers assembled the books in the Bible about what the “Word” of God is. This goes for the Mormons, the Moonies, and Jehovah’s Witnesses.
You getting paid for using the word swatches? That must be the catholic word of the day. I find it comical that the group who tortures scripture, and people too while we’re at it, to get the meaning they want are lecturing others. Now why don’t you go be happy y’all have a word of faith liberal theologian in your ranks from Sweden?
you will never hear me defend the false teaching of osteen. He's part of that false health and wealth gospel your new Swedish convert espouses. To keep trying to link jim jones as a legit pastor is simply beyond amazing. Meanwhile the Catholic Church has a real problem with gay pedophile priests.....and you're lecturing non-caths???? Hysterical!
There is you go again with your pedophile stuff. We are not taking about the lives of individuals, we are speaking about dogma. The ONE truth and the ONE Church. You know well of Lutheran pastors who have been charged with murder, adultery etc.. We here are not ready the cast these first stones. The sophomoric renditions of scripture will continue and and like others before it will fade away: to each his own from the Sharptons, Moonies, Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Billy Grahams, Rev. Schullers etc while they all build a sizable family inheritance.
That is an excellent point and one that will lead me to further research as I cannot give you an answer right now.
Thanks for the input.
Thanks for the input.
Seems to me that would be a big insult to the younger brothers and sisters, I can not imagine Jesus doing that?
And I can not imagine the brothers and sisters ( if there were any ) going for it.
But once you read the actual words of Jesus (forget those church fathers) one can see that there were Baptists, but no Catholics...
Better to have a bunch of mixed interpretations than one such as yours which is completely wrong from start to finish...
Doesn't it always??? They don't have anything else...
Wrong again.
Those early Church fathers acted on the basis of Petrine authority. They did not simply sit together in a coffee-klatch and, tossed ions, and decide to include some books in the Bible and and toss away others. Perhaps some deeper historical reading would help understand this just like those famous Protestant theologians who spent their entire lives in teaching and preaching and converted to Catholicism.
Pope Linus (the second Pope) is the Linus mentioned by St. Paul in his 2 Timothy 4:21.
After the Holy Apostles (Peter and Paul) had founded and set the Church in order (in Rome) they gave over the exercise of the episcopal office to Linus. The same Linus is mentioned by St. Paul in his Epistle to Timothy. His successor was Anacletus.
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.