History of the Roman Catholic Church

[wisdomseeker]

People don’t have to agree with you to have “common sense.” Your posts make me sick and I would never in a million years believe a word you said.

outside the Church you all are blind and confused because all you really want is to find something wrong with Church. there is nothing wrong with the Church.

while you live your lives looking for sometthing wrong with the Church you fail to see what is really wrong here are your ways of looking at the True the Church.
**

BLESSED TO BE CATHOLIC…**

 

[Benjamin8o8]

come on guys, lets stick to the original topic. Can any non-Catholic name me just one church that can trace its roots back to the apostles. I need names people NAMES!!!

 

[po18guy]

Implying that we should ignore 4000 years of religious history?

NO! You sound like a Judaizer, wishing to keep the Mosaic law. Please read Paul in Romans. We are freed from the Mosaic law! Jesus Christ is superior to the Mosaic law. He is the Word made Flesh. He trumps all that came before. Period. If you don’t believe this, are you really Christian?

From where did the New Covenant originate?

God.

What is the New Covenant?

Jesus Christ, Who revealed this in Luke 22:20 (and several other passages), and Whom Paul quoted in 1 Corinthians 11:25.

Can you state what God said the New Covenant would be and to who the New Covenant was meant originally?

Of course! Your point is? You sound like an OT Jew, frankly.

If you are trying to say that the Old Testament is no longer relevant for the Christian then why use it in any Litergical Ceremonies? Why refer to anything in the Old Testament at all if this is the case?

The SDA agrees with the Catholic Church that scripture is a seamless garment. Ever since Pope Damasus decared the canon of the bible, it has been inseparable. One, solid history of God’s Covenants with man.

It is from the Old Testament that we learn how to relate to God, we learn by others mistakes and we learn how to rely on God in ALL things. We cannot understand the New Testament (Covenant) without understand in the Old Testament (Covenant)

Certainly, but there was very little faith in the OT. Only a few were shining examples. The NT is Christ Jesus our perfect example for all things for all time. Do you reject Christ as the fulfillment of the law? It sounds like you do. Please correct me if this is not the case.

 

[po18guy]

Implying that we should ignore 4000 years of religious history? From where did the New Covenant originate? What is the New Covenant? Can you state what God said the New Covenant would be and to who the New Covenant was meant originally?

If you are trying to say that the Old Testament is no longer relevant for the Christian then why use it in any Litergical Ceremonies? Why refer to anything in the Old Testament at all if this is the case?

It is from the Old Testament that we learn how to relate to God, we learn by others mistakes and we learn how to rely on God in
ALL things. We cannot understand the New Testament (Covenant) without understand in the Old Testament (Covenant)

This was a simple “Yes” or “No” question. Let your Yes be Yes and your No be No. Anything more than this comes form the evil one (Matthew 5:37).

 

[po18guy]

With statements like this I wonder if you have even researched what it was that Luther was trying to do. Did you know that Luther was a staunch supporter of the Pope? Did you know that he was trying to correct a preceived wrong, that of buying one’s or another’s salvation when Christ had already paid the price? Luther did not want to start his own seperate church nor did he want to be seperated from the CC. But because of political and religious greed, combined with a sense of one’s own self-importance the Vatican persecuted him and any that supported him. I find it miraculous that Luther and those that did support him were able to stand against the power of the Roman church at that time seeing that others were being subjected to torturous inquistions and burnings.

What does this have to do with tracing your faith tradition back to the Apostles?

If comparing New Testament Scripture with Old Testament Scripture or the teachings fo the Church with all Scripture is private interpretation than I stand guilty as charged. As for Sola Scripture, it is the Scriptures that verify what is being taught, the Jews are evidence as to how badly TRADITION can be corrupted.

You have no authority to make such a statement, being a child of man-made tradition (sola scriptura).

As to “Obedience” I remind you what Peter said when told by the Sanhedrin that he was to no longer preach the Gospel within the synigogues “What is better, to obey man or to obey GOD?” For me and my house, I will obey God rather than man and to do that I will aways reference the Scriptures.

You are stating, in effect, that Christ did not found a Church, but rather a world of individuals all straining to find their way to Heaven. Odd. Peter also warned of those who twist scripture. Very sorry to have to say this, but the SDA is one of the worst in this regard.

Per the OP, please demonstrate that the SDA is the original church. Use the bible alone, since that is all you have.

 

[po18guy]

Looks like you are the one who has been “flushed out” by your support of butchery in the name of God.

Ok. show that the SDA traces in an unbroken line back to the Apostles.

 

[Ferde_Rombola]

Christ did not need Peter to build his church, he had eleven other disciples to do the job. And this statement is really insulting.

Excuse me? Why insulting and who is insulted?

Christ didn’t need anything. He chose* Peter to lead His Church. You claim to rely on common sense, but I see very little of it from you.

Of course Christ started his Church in the 1st century, no body said he didn’t. If you really want to be technical in the whole matter of the first Church then admit that the First Church was a bunch of converted Jews who viewed faith in Christ as an extension of the Hewbrew religion, only now, with out the ceremonial laws for they realized that Christ had fulfilled all that these laws represented.

There is no ‘the First Church.’ There is THE Church. The Church Jesus came to build. The ONE Church He came to build, The CATHOLIC Church. The rest of your stuff is made-up dicta.

All throughout history God has guided and protected Christ’s bride. There has always been some remnant of the true Church, slowly building upon itself, keeping the truth, preserving, as the Hebrew nation did, God’s word.

Scratch the ‘remnant’ part and you’re close.

Self-exalting truth is no truth at all. Until comparisons are made to what is being taught by the supposedly True Church and what is written in Sacred Scripture the light will be hidden. Take the blinders of and search for yourself.

What you call ‘self-exalting truth’ is a matter of history, which protestants have been in denial about for almost 500 years. You uphold the tradition. Take your own blinders off and read the text for content next time.

It’s easier than what the RCC tries to make it out to be.

That’s in response to my references to John 6 and the Lord’s words at the Last Supper. What does the Catholic Church teach about those words beyond what the words say?

There are no mysteries of what Christ or the Apostles taught. They were straight forward in their teachings as should be all who profess Christianity as their faith. I understand completely because I give myself over to the Holy Spirit entirely and I make determination to the truth by what is written in the Word.

What Christ and the Apostles taught is clear. It’s your conclusion that is murky. If the final determination is your interpretation, you claim the right to overrule Christ and the Apostles. And you do with John 6 and the Lord’s words at the Last Supper. Among other things.

This is based on what Paul wrote, therefore Sola Scriptura can be found in Scripture, if you try hard enough.

No. You read Paul to insert sola scriptura, as did Luther. It isn’t there. I think I covered that in my last to you.

Are you a member of Christ’s body, or his Church? If you are then you are a preist and as such have authority to teach and preach his word.

Protestant false teaching to justify individual interpretation which has translated itself into over 33,000 different sects. A true tower of babble. (sic)

As I have stated before, there are members of Christ’s Church in all denominations, these are true believers who hold fast to the truth, of what truth they are knowledgeable.

Translated from protestantese, that means they hold fast to what they have decided is the truth. Which bears no resemblance whatsoever to the Truth.

If you choose to follow with out questioning then you can expect to be lead down a path of distruction, blindly following only leads one into a pit of death.

I’m uncertain why you’re questioning if you ‘hold fast to the truth’ but that’s your business. The Catholic Church is, and has been for almost 2000 years, led to the Truth by the Holy Spirit as promised by Our Lord. Catholics do not question the authority or the wisdom of the Holy Spirit.

Your final remark seems to be an instruction to me and I will give it the attention it deserves.

A Dio*

 

[Protestant101]

Ok. show that the SDA traces in an unbroken line back to the Apostles.

So it’s OK to butcher people in the name of God; as long as you belong to one of the many groups who say they can trace their history back to the Apostles. That is an unbroken line of history that seems to make Catholics want to change the subject.

 

[po18guy]

So it’s OK to butcher people in the name of God; as long as you belong to one of the many groups who say they can trace their history back to the Apostles. That is an unbroken line of history that seems to make Catholics want to change the subject.

Backwards, friend. The OP asks you to defend your faith tradition as unarguably and continuously tracing back to Christ - not to attack the actions of individual members of the Catholic Church. You fail to separate the sinful actions of the individual members of the Church (especially the popes) from the truth the Church teaches. I know of crimes committed by SDA members. Should that cause you to abandon your faith tradition? No.

Instead of attack, DEFEND! Let’s hear it for the truth of the SDA. Trace it back to Christ. That’s all we ask.

 

[wisdomseeker]

So it’s OK to butcher people in the name of God; as long as you belong to one of the many groups who say they can trace their history back to the Apostles. That is an unbroken line of history that seems to make Catholics want to change the subject.

that is funny you say that because i know of many evangelicals who are not only supporting but also enticing Israel to commit crimes against others. and this is happening today.

and stop with your false history of accusing the Catholic Church of these crimes it is not true neither is your history.

why dont you read your history when your teacher ML and calvin persecuted and killed many Catholics for refusing to follow him and his false theology.

:byzsoc:

 

[DCD]

Sabbath Keeper,

“With statements like this I wonder if you have even researched what it was that Luther was trying to do. Did you know that Luther was a staunch supporter of the Pope? Did you know that he was trying to correct a preceived wrong, that of buying one’s or another’s salvation when Christ had already paid the price? Luther did not want to start his own seperate church nor did he want to be seperated from the CC. But because of political and religious greed, combined with a sense of one’s own self-importance the Vatican persecuted him and any that supported him. I find it miraculous that Luther and those that did support him were able to stand against the power of the Roman church at that time seeing that others were being subjected to torturous inquistions and burnings.”

What source are you reading? I would like to read them.

Pax,
David

 

[guanophore]

If I may, questions appear and accusations laid concerning evedience in history about the "True Church".  What I have been trying to do is lay a ground work steeped in scripture as relates to the church.

Yes, this is obvious. HOwever, the groundwork for the Church was laid before a word of the NT was ever written. The scripture came out of the Church, so if we are looking for history, it predates your 'ground".

Before accurate historical proof can be presented a foundation upon the formation of the Church and its original structure needs to be built.

I think, if you cannot accept that this was done prior to the creation of the NT by the Church, then there is no amount of history that will “prove” anything to you.

Jesus and the Apostles built the original structure of the Church.
It was this “structure” and the revelation of God that produced the NT.

This formational foundation needs to be built upon ALL the scritpture that pertains to the formation of the Church including anything relating to the Church, or body of Christ, before and after the birth, life, death and resurrection of Christ.

I think this is a fundamental part of the problem. This statement seems to presuppose that the Church is founded upon the scripture, and this is an error. Building upon such an erroneous premise will no doubt result in erroneous conclusions.

Much of this foundational formation is found in the OLD TESTAMENT as it is these scriptures from which Christ himself taught and, before the Apostles wrote their Epistles from which they taught. If the present Church does not conform or mirror the early Church can we actually say that it is the True Chruch?

I think not, but then, many do not recognize the early church, and cannot see that the Teachings of the Church have not changed.
Jesus was clear that the small mustard seed would grow into a giant tree. Many look at this tree, and cannot perceive the mustard seed from whence it came.

If none of the present churches conform nor mirror the early True Church what must be done to bring it into conformity?

This is a good question that seems entirely irrelevant to this thread.

Have errors been introduced into the modern church and if so what are these?

What has this got to do with the OP?

The reason there are so many "denominations" is because of the disagreements concerning these "possible" errors.

I agree, but then again, seems unrelated to the topic.

It's no so much that there may or may not be errors, it's more that many refuse to even investigate the possibility because much of what is today observed in religious ceremony is to entrenched that pride over all else rules rather than reason.

Perhaps it seems that way because you are separated from the Apostolic tradition upon which the Church was built? Holding fast to the traditions that were handed down to us is a matter of responsibility to God, not a source of “pride”.

So my point in all this is to get back to the basics of BIBLICAL teaching and investigative research, laying aside religious bias, and conducting a honest study of what the Word has to say, starting with God’s relationship with the Nation of Isreal.

Perhaps you would consider starting with laying aside your own religious bias? Would you consider investigating the nature of the Church prior to the formation of the NT?

 

[guanophore]

People don't have to agree with you to have "common sense."

I am glad to hear this. We are in agreement on this point, at least!

Your posts make me sick and I would never in a million years believe a word you said.

Really? Why is that? What did I say that was sickening?

Looks like you are the one who has been “flushed out” by your support of butchery in the name of God.

P101, I think it is important to note that both Catholics and Protestants have engaged over history in"butchery in the name of God". However, these sins should not be charged to those of the present day who have not participated in them. No one here is currently supporting butchery in the name of God. Such an accusation is uncharitable, and contrary to civil discussion.

So it’s OK to butcher people in the name of God; as long as you belong to one of the many groups who say they can trace their history back to the Apostles.

P101, no one here (except you ) has said any such thing. What we are asking is that you respond to the OP. You seem to have some unresolved resentment over the misdeeds of so called Catholics that occurred centuries ago. May I suggest that you consider forgiving these offenders? Holding on to such resentments is like drinking poison, and expecting the other person to die.

That is an unbroken line of history that seems to make Catholics want to change the subject.

It is not the subject of the OP, for one thing, and there is not an unbroken line of butchery. Even if there were, it would be spurious, because the Catholic Church does not teach or promote such barbaric behavior.

It seems as if you believe that, if certain persons committing unconscionable acts called themselves Catholic, that somehow invalidates the Catholic Church. This is like saying, “Judas acted wrongfully, therefore, everything that Jesus taugth is without merit”.

If you are unable to exercise forgiveness and address the OP, maybe it would be better if you opened another thread where you can air your unresolved resentments and grievances.

 

[guanophore]

Christ did not need Peter to build his church, he had eleven other disciples to do the job. And this statement is really insulting.

How is this insulting?

Self-exalting truth is no truth at all. Take the blinders of and search for yourself.

I understand completely because I give myself over to the Holy Spirit entirely and I make determination to the truth by what is written in the Word.

These statements seem to speak for themselves.

Sola Scriptura can be found in Scripture, if you try hard enough.

I suppose pretty much anything can…

This topic seems to be a particularly difficult one for you.

 

[guanophore]

I really dont know where youre going with this. What are you trying to say, the RCC isn`t the same Catholic Church Paul and others wrote about?

The Catholic Church is not “Roman”. It was not then, and is not now.

 

[Cinette]

*I have just read through this thread and would like to participate in the discussion because there is much to learn. Protestants and other Christians and non Christians add to the interest generated because of diversity. We gain knowledge of other people this way.

Naturally, when people of different faiths and denominations debate there will be disagreements and sometimes it can get heated. That is why we should pray for one another. We should always endeavour to be respectful.

I notice that there are people on this thread who have anger and distrust and one wonders what is their objective. Should they not discard their anger before embarking on the threads?

In the final analysis, all sides should come away with a better understanding of each other.

There will be some posters who are blunt and this can be offensive and is something which we should try to avoid in my opinion. We don’t want to hurt and offend even if the truth hurts. If we want to state the truth then let us do so by quoting verses from the bible – let the bible “offend”!!!

I also think that we should not be hypersensitive. If one is offended then one should speak up. I also do not think that we should make accusations without substantiation. In any case these threads are not for accusations.

I do not envy the role of Moderators – it must be difficult to harmonize. So let us make their job easier by trying to be harmonious ourselves.

After all – we are supposed to love one another. Jesus said so. Perhaps we could agree on that.

God bless all
Cinette

P S Do I join or should I stay away?

 

[Sabbath_Keeper]

*I have just read through this thread and would like to participate in the discussion because there is much to learn. Protestants and other Christians and non Christians add to the interest generated because of diversity. We gain knowledge of other people this way.

Naturally, when people of different faiths and denominations debate there will be disagreements and sometimes it can get heated. That is why we should pray for one another. We should always endeavour to be respectful.

I notice that there are people on this thread who have anger and distrust and one wonders what is their objective. Should they not discard their anger before embarking on the threads?

In the final analysis, all sides should come away with a better understanding of each other.

There will be some posters who are blunt and this can be offensive and is something which we should try to avoid in my opinion. We don’t want to hurt and offend even if the truth hurts. If we want to state the truth then let us do so by quoting verses from the bible – let the bible “offend”!!!

I also think that we should not be hypersensitive. If one is offended then one should speak up. I also do not think that we should make accusations without substantiation. In any case these threads are not for accusations.

I do not envy the role of Moderators – it must be difficult to harmonize. So let us make their job easier by trying to be harmonious ourselves.

After all – we are supposed to love one another. Jesus said so. Perhaps we could agree on that.

God bless all
Cinette

P S Do I join or should I stay away?

Thank you for that.

(Stepping back, taking a deep breath.)

Ok,let me try this again, without making any accusations or pointing fingers.

I know that CC (notice I am refraining from using RCC) relies heavily upon Tradition to support claims to being the church that Christ founded. I am not denying the documentation that is used to support this claim either. However, and correct me if I am wrong, it is my understanding, through reading scripture, that God does not change. And if God does not change than the relationship he had with the Nation of Isreal should be that same relationship that he has with us, barring the ceremonial laws of which Christ is the fulfillment thereof. Granted, the Bride of Christ (the Church) has possession of the NEW COVENANT, but the NEW COVENANT was originally made with the Nation of Isreal or the Jews. The nature of the New Covenant only differs from the Nature of the Old Covenant in that the Law is now written on the hearts of the Believers and Followers of Christ. The argument concerning the validity of the Moral Law, Decalogue, has raged and raged on this forum since even before I joined, the archives here show this to be true. And in each case it has been shown, by Catholics, that the Moral Law is still valid. Being the case and knowing the history of the Nation of Isreal and its relationship with God, would how a church’s relates to God be evidence as to whether or not it could be the One True Chruch the Christ founded? Could a church claiming to be Christ’s One True Church violate these Laws, even though the Church is under Grace, and still lay claim to being such? Does being under Grace give Christ’s Bride license to violate his Laws?

In my earlier posts I was just trying to lay a foundation for intellegent discussion on the OP’s subject instead of jumping to conclusions or resorting to accussations (sic) through sound reasoning. I don’t really care that the SDA or any other denomination, including the CC (Roman Rite), can or cannot trace their lineage back to the beginning, what is important to know is that God preserved the Nation of Isreal for over 3000 years and he has preserved the Bride of Christ since it’s inception and will continue to do so until Christ returns. Christ knows who are his and he’ll sort them out in the end.

 

[twb1621]

**

So it’s OK to butcher people in the name of God; as long as you belong to one of the many groups who say they can trace their history back to the Apostles. That is an unbroken line of history that seems to make Catholics want to change the subject.

**
This is addressed to Sabbath Keeper also;
Again I submit references to the History of the one true Church since it was blown over initially the first time.
You also need to research the historic fact of the period you refer to regarding the Butchering of people by “the Catholic Church”. This is a long time statement used by anti-Catholics that has been refuted and corrected through out history. Asidde from that, no one ever said there would be no sinners or evil attacking the CC but Jesus Himself
warned there would be such occurances just as He Himself had Judas among His apostles. This is not “the Church” that was evil or that sinned, but some men within her. That is also Biblical. Catholic Church is the Church Founded by Christ through the Apostles and Historically proven as such.
The Church Fathers.

“See that ye all follow the bishop, even as Christ Jesus does the Father, and the presbytery as ye would the apostles. Do ye also reverence the deacons, as those that carry out[through their office] the appointment of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper Eucharist, which is[administered] either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude[of the people] also be; by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude[of the people] also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church.”
Ignatius of Antioch,Epistle to the Smyrneans, 8:2(A.D. 110),in ANF,I:89

“[A]ll the people wondered that there should be such a difference between the unbelievers and the elect, of whom this most admirable Polycarp was one, having in our own times been an apostolic and prophetic teacher, and bishop of the Catholic Church which is in Smyrna. For every word that went out of his mouth either has been or shall yet be accomplished.”
Martyrdom of Polycarp,16:2(A.D. 155),in ANF,I:42

“[N]or does it consist in this, that he should again falsely imagine, as being above this [fancied being], a Pleroma at one time supposed to contain thirty, and at another time an innumerable tribe of Aeons, as these teachers who are destitute of truly divine wisdom maintain; while the Catholic Church possesses one and the same faith throughout the whole world, as we have already said.”
Irenaeus,Against Heresies,1:10,3(A.D. 180),in ANF,I:331-332

“For the blessed apostle Paul himself,following the rule of his predecessor John, writes only by name to seven Churches in the following order–to the Corinthians afirst…there is a second to the Corinthians and to the Thessalonians, yet one Church is recognized as being spread over the entire world…Howbeit to Philemon one, to Titus one, and to Timothy two were put in writing…to be in honour however with the Catholic Church for the ordering of ecclesiastical discipline…one to the Laodicenes, another to the Alexandrians, both forged in Paul’s name to suit the heresy of Marcion, and several others, which cannot be received into the Catholic Church; for it is not fitting that gall be mixed with honey. The Epistle of Jude no doubt, and the couple bearing the name of John, are accepted by the Catholic Church…But of Arsinous,called also Valentinus,or of Militiades we receive nothing at all.”
The fragment of Muratori (A.D. 177),in NE,124

“Was anything withheld from the knowledge of Peter, who is called the rock on which the church should be built,’ who also obtained the keys of the kingdom of heaven,’ with the power of loosing and binding in heaven and on earth?’…Where was Marcion then, that shipmaster of Pontus, the zealous student of Stoicism? Where was Valentinus then, the disciple of Platonism? For it is evident that those menlived not so long ago,–in the reign of Antoninus for the most part,–and that they at first were believers in the doctrine of the Catholic Church, in the church of Rome under the episcopate of the blessed Eleutherus,until on account of their ever restless curiosity,with which they even infected the brethren, they were more than once expelled.”
Tertullian,On the Prescription Against Heretics,22,30(A.D.200),in ANF,III:253,257
continued at cin.org/users/jgallegos/catholic.htm

I. SAINT PETER: First Vicar of Christ, Timeline
II. SAINT JUSTIN MARTYR: Preeminent Apologist, Timeline
III. SAINT ANTHONY: Founder of Monasticism, Timeline
IV. SAINT JEROME: God�s Battler, Timeline
V. SAINT PATRICK: Light of the North, Timeline
VI. SAINT BENEDICT: The Ideal Monk, Timeline
VII. SAINT COLUMBAN: Vagrant of Heaven, Timeline
VIII. SAINT BONIFACE: Tamer of Tribes, Timeline
IX. SAINT ANSGAR: Apostle of the Vikings, Timeline
X. SAINT BERNARD OF MENTHON: Apostle of the Alps, Timeline
XI. SAINT EDWARD THE CONFESSOR: Sans Peur et Sans Reproche, Timeline
XII. SAINT BERNARD OF CLAIRVAUX: Father of Western Mysticism, Timeline
XIII. SAINT THOMAS OF AQUINO: Europe�s Greatest Thinker, Timeline
XIV. SAINT CATHERINE OF SIENA: The Seraph-Hearted, Timeline

Continued atcin.org/books/dunney0.html

 

[Sabbath_Keeper]

---

This is addressed to Sabbath Keeper also;
Again I submit references to the History of the one true Church since it was blown over initially the first time.
You also need to research the historic fact of the period you refer to regarding the Butchering of people by “the Catholic Church”. This is a long time statement used by anti-Catholics that has been refuted and corrected through out history. Asidde from that, no one ever said there would be no sinners or evil attacking the CC but Jesus Himself
warned there would be such occurances just as He Himself had Judas among His apostles. This is not “the Church” that was evil or that sinned, but some men within her. That is also Biblical. Catholic Church is the Church Founded by Christ through the Apostles and Historically proven as such.
The Church Fathers.

“See that ye all follow the bishop, even as Christ Jesus does the Father, and the presbytery as ye would the apostles. Do ye also reverence the deacons, as those that carry out[through their office] the appointment of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper Eucharist, which is[administered] either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude[of the people] also be; by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude[of the people] also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church.”
Ignatius of Antioch,Epistle to the Smyrneans, 8:2(A.D. 110),in ANF,I:89

“[A]ll the people wondered that there should be such a difference between the unbelievers and the elect, of whom this most admirable Polycarp was one, having in our own times been an apostolic and prophetic teacher, and bishop of the Catholic Church which is in Smyrna. For every word that went out of his mouth either has been or shall yet be accomplished.”
Martyrdom of Polycarp,16:2(A.D. 155),in ANF,I:42

“[N]or does it consist in this, that he should again falsely imagine, as being above this [fancied being], a Pleroma at one time supposed to contain thirty, and at another time an innumerable tribe of Aeons, as these teachers who are destitute of truly divine wisdom maintain; while the Catholic Church possesses one and the same faith throughout the whole world, as we have already said.”
Irenaeus,Against Heresies,1:10,3(A.D. 180),in ANF,I:331-332

“For the blessed apostle Paul himself,following the rule of his predecessor John, writes only by name to seven Churches in the following order–to the Corinthians afirst…there is a second to the Corinthians and to the Thessalonians, yet one Church is recognized as being spread over the entire world…Howbeit to Philemon one, to Titus one, and to Timothy two were put in writing…to be in honour however with the Catholic Church for the ordering of ecclesiastical discipline…one to the Laodicenes, another to the Alexandrians, both forged in Paul’s name to suit the heresy of Marcion, and several others, which cannot be received into the Catholic Church; for it is not fitting that gall be mixed with honey. The Epistle of Jude no doubt, and the couple bearing the name of John, are accepted by the Catholic Church…But of Arsinous,called also Valentinus,or of Militiades we receive nothing at all.”
The fragment of Muratori (A.D. 177),in NE,124

“Was anything withheld from the knowledge of Peter, who is called the rock on which the church should be built,’ who also obtained the keys of the kingdom of heaven,’ with the power of loosing and binding in heaven and on earth?’…Where was Marcion then, that shipmaster of Pontus, the zealous student of Stoicism? Where was Valentinus then, the disciple of Platonism? For it is evident that those menlived not so long ago,–in the reign of Antoninus for the most part,–and that they at first were believers in the doctrine of the Catholic Church, in the church of Rome under the episcopate of the blessed Eleutherus,until on account of their ever restless curiosity,with which they even infected the brethren, they were more than once expelled.”
Tertullian,On the Prescription Against Heretics,22,30(A.D.200),in ANF,III:253,257
continued at cin.org/users/jgallegos/catholic.htm

I. SAINT PETER: First Vicar of Christ, Timeline
II. SAINT JUSTIN MARTYR: Preeminent Apologist, Timeline
III. SAINT ANTHONY: Founder of Monasticism, Timeline
IV. SAINT JEROME: God�s Battler, Timeline
V. SAINT PATRICK: Light of the North, Timeline
VI. SAINT BENEDICT: The Ideal Monk, Timeline
VII. SAINT COLUMBAN: Vagrant of Heaven, Timeline
VIII. SAINT BONIFACE: Tamer of Tribes, Timeline
IX. SAINT ANSGAR: Apostle of the Vikings, Timeline
X. SAINT BERNARD OF MENTHON: Apostle of the Alps, Timeline
XI. SAINT EDWARD THE CONFESSOR: Sans Peur et Sans Reproche, Timeline
XII. SAINT BERNARD OF CLAIRVAUX: Father of Western Mysticism, Timeline
XIII. SAINT THOMAS OF AQUINO: Europe�s Greatest Thinker, Timeline
XIV. SAINT CATHERINE OF SIENA: The Seraph-Hearted, Timeline

Continued atcin.org/books/dunney0.html

rehashed ad infinitum, could you please respond to post #114, I do not wish to get into accusatory fight over who did what, when, where or how. As to your documented evidence I refer again to what I posted in Post #114. So, take it from there please. And next time please do not attribute any comments made by others to me just because we may have the same theological or denominational affiliation.

 

[twb1621]

rehashed ad infinitum, could you please respond to post #114, I do not wish to get into accusatory fight over who did what, when, where or how. As to your documented evidence I refer again to what I posted in Post #114. So, take it from there please. And next time please do not attribute any comments made by others to me just because we may have the same theological or denominational affiliation.

The response contained responses to issues raised by both you and p101 either individually or jointly so you need only refer to what applies to your issues. I will go back and review the post you refer to and resond once I have done that also.