1 Clement & Papal Infallibility

[Steveabrous]

Irenaeus uses Rome as the example because that it the Apostolic See that his readers are most familiar with, writing from Lugdunum in Gaul (modern day Lyons in France), but he made it clear from the beginning that his proof could be demonstrated in any of the churchesIt is within the power of all, therefore, in every Church, who may wish to see the truth, to contemplate clearly the tradition of the apostles manifested throughout the whole world; and we are in a position to reckon up those who were by the apostles instituted bishops in the Churches, and [to demonstrate] the succession of these men to our own times; those who neither taught nor knew of anything like what these [heretics] rave about.
Since, however, it would be very tedious, in such a volume as this, to reckon up the successions of all the Churches, we do put to confusion all those who, in whatever manner, whether by an evil self-pleasing, by vainglory, or by blindness and perverse opinion, assemble in unauthorized meetings; [we do this, I say,] by indicating that tradition derived from the apostles, of the very great, the very ancient, and universally known Church founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul
So Irenaeus starts by saying that the heretics can be put to shame by demonstrating the apostolic succession in all the churches, but since that would be tedious, he will demonstrate it with Rome, it being the best known church in the west. Unfortunately the next part has been translated in a manner which does not agree with the sense of his introduction and this has been dealt with extensively by Abbe Guettee in his work on the papacy. Basically the word translated as “agree with” should read “go to”.For it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its pre-eminent authority, that is, the faithful everywhere, inasmuch as the apostolical tradition has been preserved continuously by those [faithful men] who exist everywhere.

Yes he says all this about the other churches, but you curiously left out that it is clearly the church in Rome that has the pre-eminant authority that all churches must agree with. As my post clearly shows.

 

[prodromos]

Yes he says all this about the other churches, but you curiously left out that it is clearly the church in Rome that has the pre-eminant authority that all churches must agree with. As my post clearly shows.

I suspect you skipped reading most of what I posted. I’ve quoted that paragraph right at the end (which puts it directly above where you claim I leave it out in your own post)
Perhaps you can demonstrate the flaw in Abbe Guettee’s analysis of Irenaeus?

 

[Steveabrous]

I suspect you skipped reading most of what I posted. I’ve quoted that paragraph right at the end (which puts it directly above where you claim I leave it out in your own post)
Perhaps you can demonstrate the flaw in Abbe Guettee’s analysis of Irenaeus?

considering Fr Guettee had been ordained in the Roman Catholic Church in France but left it and was received into the Russian Orthodox Church, I’d say his analysis might be slanted.

 

[prodromos]

considering Fr Guettee had been ordained in the Roman Catholic Church in France but left it and was received into the Russian Orthodox Church, I’d say his analysis might be slanted.

That is not a critique of his analysis though, is it. Its more of an ad hominem argument which is generally not considered reasonable discussion on these forums.

 

[Steveabrous]

That is not a critique of his analysis though, is it. Its more of an ad hominem argument which is generally not considered reasonable discussion on these forums.

Honestly I have not read his critique. But then I can read the material myself and come to my own conclusion which I have, so why would I?

Stating that the man being orthodox clouds his judgement on the matter is simply being realistic. Your not going to find a Roman Catholic arguing for sola fida or sola scriptura, nor would you find a protestant arguing for apostolic succession at all. In my opinion taking a persons religious affiliation into account when determining whether or not to listen to what they have to say is prudent.

 

[LionHeart777]

That is not a critique of his analysis though, is it. Its more of an ad hominem argument which is generally not considered reasonable discussion on these forums.

I suspect that the thrust of the Abbe Guettee’s argument is that, to quote him from your link:

“The good father [St. Irenaeus] then has simply said that, the concourse of Believers from all countries, drawn to Rome by the necessities of their business, because that city was the first and most powerful of the Empire, contributed to preserve there the Apostolic tradition, because those Believers carried there the Faith of the Churches to which they belonged.”

If I understand his argument correctly, than it is dealt with by The Catholic Encyclopedia (actually, to my understanding, there has been much ink spilled over this passage):

“…Non-Catholic writers have sought to rob the passage of its importance by translating the word convenire ‘to resort to’, and thus understanding it to mean no more than that the faithful from every side (undique) resorted to Rome, so that thus the stream of doctrine in that Church was kept immune from error. Such a rendering, however, is excluded by the construction of the argument, which is based entirely on the contention that the Roman doctrine is pure by reason of its derivation from the two great Apostolic founders of the Church, Sts. Peter and Paul. The frequent visits made to Rome by members of other Christian Churches could contribute nothing to this. On the other hand the traditional rendering is postulated by the context, and, though the object of innumerable attacks, none other possessing any real degree of probability has been suggested in its place (see Dom. J. Chapman in ‘Revue Benedictine’, 1895, p. 48).”

Source: Joyce, George. “The Pope.” The Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 12. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1911. 24 Nov. 2013 http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12260a.htm.