a question for "Bible Only" churches

[PJM]

=Rightlydivide;6460966]How carefully did you read the Apostolic Fathers? Not meant as an accusatory but more rhetorical. Did they believe in the Assumption of Mary? Did they venerate images? Did Eusebius write about how no images were found in churches? Did they choose their own leaders? Lets be fair here. The doctrines I believe are also found in the Apostolic writings. As it advances to the Ante-Nicene writings a little later, starting around 175 AD lets say, what I believe and what you believe starts to really shape up. Please understand a crucial distinction, the canon is not dependent on man. Men DO recognize different truths but that does not make their truth…Truth.

I do not think you can historically prove the distinctions that exist between us prior to around 200 AD. There is only ONE that I can think of and I will readily admit…I am sure it will be brought up. However, documents like the Didache support a meal instead of a religious ceremony and local choosing of bishops by individual churches and baptism by full immersion UNLESS it was not available.

***Friend I agree; let’s be. fair here.

You have a proble with “images”? Funny, God doesn’t!***

Exodus 25:1 "The LORD said to Moses, "

Exodus 25:17 “Then you shall make a mercy seat of pure gold; two cubits and a half shall be its length, and a cubit and a half its breadth. And you shall make two cherubim of gold; of hammered work shall you make them, on the two ends of the mercy seat. Make one cherub on the one end, and one cherub on the other end; of one piece with the mercy seat shall you make the cherubim on its two ends. The cherubim shall spread out their wings above, overshadowing the mercy seat with their wings, their faces one to another; toward the mercy seat shall the faces of the cherubim be.”

[The Assumption of Mary is a Roman Catholic doctrine, and to a lesser degree it is also taught by the Eastern Orthodox Church. Pope Pius XII proclaimed this doctrine on November 1, 1950 in his Munificentissimus Deus. This dogma states that the “Immaculate Virgin,” the mother of Jesus, “after the completion of her earthly life was assumed body and soul into the glory of Heaven.” This means that after her death, Mary was resurrected and taken up into heaven, body and soul. The doctrine further states that Mary was glorified in heaven and is “exalted by the Lord as Queen over all things.” /COLOR] See John 14 and John 17 to see why God Himself personally assures he truth of this position.

They did not choose there own leadership because thast is NOT the hireachy set up by Christ. If you wish to debate to position an authority of Peter, I ll gladly oblidge but we lack the space needed here.

As for differences before 200 AD,lets look at OSAS, Justification by Faith Alone, The Eucharist as Christ TRULY present [all four Gospels an 1 Cor. 11], forgiveness of sin John 20:20-23 as a few notable differences.

As for your "meal therory"lease expalin this:

**CCC #1345 **As early as the second century we have the witness of St. Justin Martyr for the basic lines of the order of the Eucharistic celebration. They have stayed the same until our own day for all the great liturgical families. St. Justin wrote to the pagan emperor Antoninus Pius (138-161) around the year 155, explaining what Christians did: On the day we call the day of the sun, all who dwell in the city or country gather in the same place.

The memoirs of the apostles and the writings of the prophets are read, as much as time permits.

When the reader has finished, he who presides over those gathered admonishes and challenges them to imitate these beautiful things.

Then we all rise together and offer prayers* for ourselves . . .and for all others, wherever they may be, so that we may be found righteous by our life and actions, and faithful to the commandments, so as to obtain eternal salvation.

When the prayers are concluded we exchange the kiss.

Then someone brings bread and a cup of water and wine mixed together to him who presides over the brethren.

He takes them and offers praise and glory to the Father of the universe, through the name of the Son and of the Holy Spirit and for a considerable time he gives thanks (in Greek: eucharistian) that we have been judged worthy of these gifts.

When he has concluded the prayers and thanksgivings, all present give voice to an acclamation by saying: ‘Amen.’

When he who presides has given thanks and the people have responded, those whom we call deacons give to those present the “eucharisted” bread, wine and water and take them to those who are absent.

I could refute other of your positions, but space does not permit it.

 

[Rightlydivide]

PJM

First lets get to what Justin Martyr wrote about images

CHAPTER IX – FOLLY OF IDOL, WORSHIP.

And neither do we honour with many sacrifices and garlands of flowers such deities as men have formed and set in shrines and called gods; since we see that these are soulless and dead, and have not the form of God (for we do not consider that God has such a form as some say that they imitate to His honour), but have the names and forms of those wicked demons which have appeared. For why need we tell you who already know, into what forms the craftsmen, carving and cutting, casting and hammering, fashion the materials? And often out of vessels of dishonour, by merely changing the form, and making an image of the requisite shape, they make what they call a god; which we consider not only senseless, but to be even insulting to God, who, having ineffable glory and form, thus gets His name attached to things that are corruptible, and require constant service. And that the artificers of these are both intemperate, and, not to enter into particulars, are practised in every vice, you very well know; even their own girls who work along with them they corrupt. What infatuation! that dissolute men should be said to fashion and make gods for your worship, and that you should appoint such men the guardians of the temples where they are enshrined; not recognising that it is unlawful even to think or say that men are the guardians of gods.

As far as the early Christian service, lets look at that carefully

And on the day called Sunday, all who live in cities or in the country gather together to one place, and the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as time permits; then, when the reader has ceased, the president verbally instructs, and exhorts to the imitation of these good things. Then we all rise together and pray, and, as we before said, when our prayer is ended, bread and wine and water are brought, and the president in like manner offers prayers and thanksgivings, according to his ability, and the people assent, saying Amen; and there is a distribution to each

Do you read as long as time permits?
Does your Priest…offer prayers and thanksgiving ACCORDING TO HIS ABILITY…or from a script that never changes? I am glad you went this route.

 

[Rightlydivide]

“Monarchial,” no - those trappings came later. But there was certainly a Bishop, and he was certainly the head of the Church, which is why the pagans and the Jews were both so single-mindedly interested in finding and killing him.

This is awkward. Monarchial has nothing to do with trappings. It denotes the extent of leadership exercised by the bishop and specifically a change from a plural leadership to a single head.

tgulcm.tripod.com/ohc/clergy.html

 

[Rightlydivide]

Based on two facts:

Infallibility of the Church Teachings ONLY on matters of Faith and or Morals… See John Chapters 14 and 17.

Catholics do not claim infallibility “in actions” because: 1. we ourselves are NOT God; and 2. Like all of humanity, we are created by this same God with minds, intellects and freewills; that can be far less than perfect [EXCEPT FOR DEFINED, FORMAL TEACHINGS ON FAITH AND MORALS BY THE POPE AND THE CATHOLIC MAGISTERIUM.] Which have the personal assurence of God Himself.

The formalized Canon of the Catholic Bible was approved by Church Council and God, about 1,200 years before the KJB. But I recon that’s insignifiant, right?

Love and prayers Brother,
Pat

Can you be a little more specific?

 

[Rightlydivide]

Maybe it’s just semantics, but I doubt it. When do we sit down to a meal that makes us ‘guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord’? When do we sit down to a meal that is ‘eating and drinking judgment unto ourselves, not discerning the body of the Lord’?

1Co 11:26 For as often as you shall eat this bread and drink the chalice, you shall shew the death of the Lord, until he come.
1Co 11:27 Therefore, whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord.
1Co 11:28 But let a man prove himself: and so let him eat of that bread and drink of the chalice.
1Co 11:29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord.

To Catholics, the Lord’s Supper is the Eucharist. We do it at every Mass, 7 days a week, 365(6) days a year.

To answer your question about our Church sharing a meal for physical nourishment, we have done it every Friday during Lent. It happens more throughout the year, and I know other Catholic Churches that do the same.

There was an apostolic succession through the imposition of hands. That’s from the Apostles, the men they appointed and the men they appointed and on to present time.

Congregations did not have authority to impose hands and make appointments. The authoritative men of the Church did.

Ananias was a ‘disciple’.

Yes congregations did.
I tell you what. I am going to find as many Catholic links as I can on this.

ncronline.org/blogs/essays-theology/leo-great%E2%80%99s-legacy-remains-challenge-church-today

 

[jmcrae]

This is awkward. Monarchial has nothing to do with trappings. It denotes the extent of leadership exercised by the bishop and specifically a change from a plural leadership to a single head.

tgulcm.tripod.com/ohc/clergy.html

As someone has already pointed out, in 80 AD, the Corinthians were calling for the Bishop of Rome (St. Clement) to correct and discipline their Bishops. If he hadn’t had the authority to do this, then why would he do it? Corinth is hundreds of miles away from Rome; surely there was another Bishop closer to hand, if all they needed was a “fellow Bishop” to correct their Bishops. No. They needed someone with the power to fire their Bishops, if necessary.

 

[Rightlydivide]

The constitution of the Church under the apostles exhibits both a hierarchical and a democratic principle. As the apostles were the first appointed officers of the Church, so also they were its highest authority, and the starting-point from which all subordinate authority was derived. This was the hierarchical principle. But in the manner in which the apostles used their authority, as also in the prevalent conception of the Christian priesthood, a democratic principle came into operation. The apostles administered the Church much in the spirit of Peter’s instruction to the elders, “not as being lords over God’s heritage, but being ensamples to the flock” (1 Pet. v. 3). So far as was practicable, they acted in co-operation with the Christian congregation. Hence, we find the congregation apparently sharing in such a matter as the election of a member to the apostolic college in place of Judas; and as respects the first deacons, the apostles did not so much as claim the prerogative of nomination, but left the selection to the free choice of the assembly, and simply ordained the candidates presented. A similar respect was shown to the will of the congregation in the appointment of presbyters. Their ordination was ordinarily the function of an apostle or the delegate of an apostle; though it would appear that presbyters themselves were competent to take part in, if not indeed to execute, the ordination ceremony [In the Alexandrian Church, even down to the beginning of the fourth century, it was an established custom that the body of presbyters should ordain the bishop. See Lightfoot on the Epistle to the Philippians, Dissertation I.] (1 Tim. iv. 14). Perhaps, also, in case of less competent and experienced churches, the apostles may have nominated presbyters; but it was no doubt the general custom to employ the vote of the congregation, and to give it practically a determining power. Clement of Pome testifies that the ministry were appointed " with the consent of the whole church." [Epist. ad. Corinth., xliv.] The Coptic constitution of the Church of Alexandria witnesses to the existence of the right of election at the middle of the second century, a fact strongly indicative of the existence of the right from the beginning." [Pressensé Apostolic Era, Book II., chap. v.] Even in a matter of discipline, we find Paul addressing, not a select corps of officers, but the whole Corinthian Church. In short, the apostles treated their fellow-Christians as citizens, rather than as mere subjects. All were regarded as belonging to a royal priesthood (1 Pet. ii. 9). Liberty to teach and to participate in the worship was limited only by the talents of individual members, and by the demands of good order (1 Cor. xiv. 23-26).

edwardtbabinski.us/sheldon/church_government.html

 

[jmcrae]

Yes congregations did.
I tell you what. I am going to find as many Catholic links as I can on this.

ncronline.org/blogs/essays-theology/leo-great%E2%80%99s-legacy-remains-challenge-church-today

Sorry, but Richard McBrien is not a credible source, for Catholics.

 

[Rightlydivide]

As someone has already pointed out, in 80 AD, the Corinthians were calling for the Bishop of Rome (St. Clement) to correct and discipline their Bishops. If he hadn’t had the authority to do this, then why would he do it? Corinth is hundreds of miles away from Rome; surely there was another Bishop closer to hand, if all they needed was a “fellow Bishop” to correct their Bishops. No. They needed someone with the power to fire their Bishops, if necessary.

80 AD
Thats interesting…even Catholics do not say he was a “Pope” in 80 AD…his “papacy” according to the legends (emphasis on that part) starts in the 90’s
Clement is associated with Paul…who for all practical purposes told them what to do. Of course there were other church leaders around. Say, you do realize that other church leaders wrote to and corrected other cities? Because the Catholics on here have studied the history…I am sure they know that already…

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

PJM

First lets get to what Justin Martyr wrote about images

CHAPTER IX – FOLLY OF IDOL, WORSHIP.

As far as the early Christian service, lets look at that carefully

Do you read as long as time permits?
Does your Priest…offer prayers and thanksgiving ACCORDING TO HIS ABILITY…or from a script that never changes? I am glad you went this route.

That appears to be deliberate ‘anti-Catholic’ rhetoric. In effect, you are bearing false witness.

There is no other God than the one true God.

Catholics do not worship ‘idols’. That the ignorance of people who prefer to tell Catholics what they believe, as opposed to listening and trying to understand what we tell you we believe.

What’s your source for the second quote? We don’t have ‘presidents’? While you’re comfortable hiding your Church, it has appearances of being deceiving. However, you must provide the sources for ‘copy and pasted’ documents.

 

[Rightlydivide]

Sorry, but Richard McBrien is not a credible source, for Catholics.

Okay. Did not know that. I have time this week. I will keep looking. The funny thing is…any Catholic seminary is going to teach your priests that same thing I am saying.
Okay lets do it this way. Does anyone know the name of the basic textbook for Catholic seminaries regarding Christian history? I am willing to buy it and quote from it…I am that sure.

 

[Rightlydivide]

That appears to be deliberate ‘anti-Catholic’ rhetoric. In effect, you are bearing false witness.

There is no other God than the one true God.

Catholics do not worship ‘idols’. That the ignorance of people who prefer to tell Catholics what they believe, as opposed to listening and trying to understand what we tell you we believe.

What’s your source for the second quote? We don’t have ‘presidents’? While you’re comfortable hiding your Church, it has appearances of being deceiving. However, you must provide the sources for ‘copy and pasted’ documents.

Oh…that is from the same document. I figured you would recognize Justin Martyr since you studied this stuff prior to converting.
Or not.
newadvent.org/fathers/0126.htm

 

[jmcrae]

80 AD
Thats interesting…even Catholics do not say he was a “Pope” in 80 AD…his “papacy” according to the legends (emphasis on that part) starts in the 90’s
Clement is associated with Paul…who for all practical purposes told them what to do.

If St. Paul were to write to your church, would your pastor and leaders pay attention to his writings, or would they say, “Oh, he is a Catholic. We don’t need to listen to him.”

Of course there were other church leaders around.

No one has said that there weren’t. There was a heirarchy - it was not just one guy running the whole thing.

Say, you do realize that other church leaders wrote to and corrected other cities?

Did you know that my Bishop can do that, since our Diocese extends across several cities and towns?

But it is unlikely that Corinth was in the Diocese of Rome, due to the distances involved.

 

[jmcrae]

Does anyone know the name of the basic textbook for Catholic seminaries regarding Christian history? I am willing to buy it and quote from it…I am that sure.

It’s called The Sources of Catholic Dogma, by Denzinger. It’s put out by Loreto Press. There is also The Faith of the Early Fathers, edited by Jurgens, and published by The Liturgical Press in Collegeville, Minnesota.

Other text books used in Seminary are The Church Teaches, which is put out by Tan Press, and Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, by Ludwig Ott.

Have at - this ought to be interesting.

 

[Rightlydivide]

I have a quote for you Prodigal. See what you can do with this its from Epiphanius in the year 400 AD. Christians still were not using images then for the most part. I have lots of quotes on this topic…but this one is a good one to begin with.

When I accompanied you to the holy place called Bethel, there to join you in celebrating the Collect, after the use of the Church, I came to a villa called Anablatha and, as I was passing, saw a lamp burning there. Asking what place it was, and learning it to be a church, I went in to pray, and found there a curtain hanging on the doors of the said church, dyed and embroidered. It bore an image either of Christ or of one of the saints; I do not rightly remember whose the image was. Seeing this, and being loth that an image of a man should be hung up in Christ’s church contrary to the teaching of the Scriptures, I tore it asunder and advised the custodians of the place to use it as a winding sheet for some poor person. They, however, murmured, and said that if I made up my mind to tear it, it was only fair that I should give them another curtain in its place. As soon as I heard this, I promised that I would give one, and said that I would send it at once. Since then there has been some little delay, due to the fact that I have been seeking a curtain of the best quality to give to them instead of the former one, and thought it right to send to Cyprus for one. I have now sent the best that I could find, and I beg that you will order the presbyter of the place to take the curtain which I have s ent from the hands of the Reader, and that you will afterwards give directions that curtains of the other sort — opposed as they are to our religion — shall not be hung up in any church of Christ. A than of your uprightness should be careful to remove an occasion of offense unworthy alike of the Church of Christ and of those Christians who are committed to your charge.”

One link to add
wedgewords.wordpress.com/2009/09/28/a-few-patristic-sources-against-icons/

 

[Rightlydivide]

It’s called The Sources of Catholic Dogma, by Denzinger. It’s put out by Loreto Press. There is also The Faith of the Early Fathers, edited by Jurgens, and published by The Liturgical Press in Collegeville, Minnesota.

I am on it!!! Lets see what we find out!

 

[Rightlydivide]

If St. Paul were to write to your church, would your pastor and leaders pay attention to his writings, or would they say, “Oh, he is a Catholic. We don’t need to listen to him.”

No one has said that there weren’t. There was a heirarchy - it was not just one guy running the whole thing.

Did you know that my Bishop can do that, since our Diocese extends across several cities and towns?

But it is unlikely that Corinth was in the Diocese of Rome, due to the distances involved.

There really is not much to comment on. I think I am going to engage Prodigal for awhile, see what he thinks. Take care.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Oh…that is from the same document. I figured you would recognize Justin Martyr since you studied this stuff prior to converting.
Or not.
newadvent.org/fathers/0126.htm

Your condescending tone is duly noted. The falsehood presented are also noted.

**And on the day called Sunday, all who live in cities or in the country gather together to one place, and the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as time permits; then, when the reader has ceased, the president verbally instructs, and exhorts to the imitation of these good things. Then we all rise together and pray, and, as we before said, when our prayer is ended, bread and wine and water are brought, and the president in like manner offers prayers and thanksgivings, according to his ability, and the people assent, saying Amen; and there is a distribution to each **

Where does it prevent a priest from reading a selected prayer?

As long as time permits is vague and not considering the differences in the times.

Does your Church do this, or is this something you’re only holding out to bash Catholicism with? It certainly appears to be ‘selecting’ certain passages that you can misread.

Do you believe the following by Justin Martyr?

For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh.

 

[jmcrae]

There really is not much to comment on. I think I am going to engage Prodigal for awhile, see what he thinks. Take care.

Right - I’m off to Mass.

 

[Dokimas]

As long as it was written by a credible eye-witness at the time.