I hold the same view about using the term “protestant” here. When speaking of doctrine and practice, use of the term protestant is folly.
Which communion are you thinking of, because I suspect there are some that fit the poster’s description.
- Status
Which communion are you thinking of, because I suspect there are some that fit the poster’s description.
A
AugustTherese
Guest
No one made that claim. Why do you assume it?AugustTherese:
My point is to claim that St Augustine was speaking of only the western see is ludicrousJonNC:
So…what’s your point?
I misunderstood then. You are not using this quote to imply that only those in communion with the Bishop of Rome are Catholic.
Good.
A
AugustTherese
Guest
Yes, yes I am. Even those 23 Eastern Catholic Rites.
Oh, so you are using St Augustine in a ludicrous way.JonNC:
Yes, yes I am. Even those 23 Eastern Catholic Rites.
A
AugustTherese
Guest
Considering Saint Augustine was a Catholic Bishop in full communion with the Bishop of Rome, yeah not really.
Did you think he was Russian Orthodox or Anglican?
And of course, St Augustine knew that the Schism was coming in 600 years, and intended to let everyone know whose side he would take.JonNC:
Considering Saint Augustine was a Catholic Bishop in full communion with the Bishop of Rome, yeah not really.
Did you think he was Russian Orthodox or Anglican?
Please.
A
AugustTherese
Guest
“We believe in the holy Church, that is, the Catholic Church; for heretics and schismatics call their own congregations churches. But heretics violate the faith itself by a false opinion about God; schismatics, however, withdraw from fraternal love by hostile separations, although they believe the same things we do. Consequently, neither heretics nor schismatics belong to the Catholic Church; not heretics, because the Church loves God, and not schismatics, because the Church loves neighbor” -Saint Augustine ( Faith and Creed 10:21 [A.D. 393]).
And whose to say St Augustine today would not view you as the schismatic? Again, written in 393 with no knowledge of the Schism in the Church, the blame for which sits equally with Rome and the East.JonNC:
“We believe in the holy Church, that is, the Catholic Church; for heretics and schismatics call their own congregations churches. But heretics violate the faith itself by a false opinion about God; schismatics, however, withdraw from fraternal love by hostile separations, although they believe the same things we do. Consequently, neither heretics nor schismatics belong to the Catholic Church; not heretics, because the Church loves God, and not schismatics, because the Church loves neighbor” -Saint Augustine ( Faith and Creed 10:21 [A.D. 393]).
To argue that St Augustine ‘s words defend and define Catholic as only and exclusively in communion with the Bishop of Rome is ludicrous.
Last edited:
A
AugustTherese
Guest
“Rome has spoken; the case is closed.” - Saint Augustine (Sermon 131:10)
Here is what your Anglican friend J.N.D Kelly has to say:
“According to him [St. Augustine ], the Church is the realm of Christ, His mystical body and His bride, the mother of Christians [Ep 34:3; Serm 22:9]. There is no salvation apart from it; schismatics can have the faith and sacraments…but cannot put them to a profitable use since the Holy Spirit is only bestowed in the Church [De bapt 4:24; 7:87; Serm ad Caes 6]…It goes without saying that Augustine identifies the Church with the universal Catholic Church of his day, with its hierarchy and sacraments, and with its centre at Rome …By the middle of the fifth century the Roman church had established, de jure as well as de facto , a position of primacy in the West, and the papal claims to supremacy over all bishops of Christendom had been formulated in precise terms …The student tracing the history of the times, particularly of the Arian, Donatist, Pelagian and Christological controversies, cannot fail to be impressed by the skill and persistence with which the Holy See [of Rome] was continually advancing and consolidating its claims. Since its occupant was accepted as the successor of St. Peter, and prince of the apostles, it was easy to draw the inference that the unique authority which Rome in fact enjoyed, and which the popes saw concentrated in their persons and their office, was no more than the fulfilment of the divine plan .” ( Kelly , page 412, 413, 417)
P
PickyPicky
Guest
Anyone interested in what (some, at any rate) Anglicans think of papal primacy can judge from the documents of the Anglican-Roman Catholic International Commission, especially those on Authority in the Church. If I can attempt a crude sketch, the Anglicans on the Commission accepted the need for universal primacy in a re-united Church, accepted that the Bishop of Rome would be the appropriate holder of such primacy, but had the concerns one would expect about the powers claimed by Vatican I.
https://iarccum.org/org/?o=6
https://iarccum.org/org/?o=6
Last edited:
J
Jezra
Guest
In light of the Pennsylvania scandal, I think non-Catholic denominations will be shoring up their walls and distancing themselves, as far as possible, from papal primacy.
S
SnowRose
Guest
From what I know of us Lutherans-in-communion-w-the-Anglicans/Episcopalians it’s rather similar.
The concept that the pope could speak on behalf of all Christians without an ecumenical agreement, just out of his own denomination’s view, is simply not acceptable. And ofc Vatican I is seen as divisive, to put it mildly.
Beyond that the first among equal kind of papacy works just fine.
The concept that the pope could speak on behalf of all Christians without an ecumenical agreement, just out of his own denomination’s view, is simply not acceptable. And ofc Vatican I is seen as divisive, to put it mildly.
Beyond that the first among equal kind of papacy works just fine.
I think, instead, we should reach out in Christian love to all of those affected, including priests and bishops who were not involved but whose reputations are tarnished as a result
Nothing here to disagree with.JonNC:
“Rome has spoken; the case is closed.” - Saint Augustine (Sermon 131:10)
Here is what your Anglican friend J.N.D Kelly has to say:
“According to him [St. Augustine ], the Church is the realm of Christ, His mystical body and His bride, the mother of Christians [Ep 34:3; Serm 22:9]. There is no salvation apart from it; schismatics can have the faith and sacraments…but cannot put them to a profitable use since the Holy Spirit is only bestowed in the Church [De bapt 4:24; 7:87; Serm ad Caes 6]…It goes without saying that Augustine identifies the Church with the universal Catholic Church of his day, with its hierarchy and sacraments, and with its centre at Rome …By the middle of the fifth century the Roman church had established, de jure as well as de facto , a position of primacy in the West, and the papal claims to supremacy over all bishops of Christendom had been formulated in precise terms …The student tracing the history of the times, particularly of the Arian, Donatist, Pelagian and Christological controversies, cannot fail to be impressed by the skill and persistence with which the Holy See [of Rome] was continually advancing and consolidating its claims. Since its occupant was accepted as the successor of St. Peter, and prince of the apostles, it was easy to draw the inference that the unique authority which Rome in fact enjoyed, and which the popes saw concentrated in their persons and their office, was no more than the fulfilment of the divine plan .” ( Kelly , page 412, 413, 417)
A
AugustTherese
Guest
Wonderful! So, swimming the Tiber should be relatively easy for you. Come home already!AugustTherese:
Nothing here to disagree with.JonNC:
“Rome has spoken; the case is closed.” - Saint Augustine (Sermon 131:10)
Here is what your Anglican friend J.N.D Kelly has to say:
“According to him [St. Augustine ], the Church is the realm of Christ, His mystical body and His bride, the mother of Christians [Ep 34:3; Serm 22:9]. There is no salvation apart from it; schismatics can have the faith and sacraments…but cannot put them to a profitable use since the Holy Spirit is only bestowed in the Church [De bapt 4:24; 7:87; Serm ad Caes 6]…It goes without saying that Augustine identifies the Church with the universal Catholic Church of his day, with its hierarchy and sacraments, and with its centre at Rome …By the middle of the fifth century the Roman church had established, de jure as well as de facto , a position of primacy in the West, and the papal claims to supremacy over all bishops of Christendom had been formulated in precise terms …The student tracing the history of the times, particularly of the Arian, Donatist, Pelagian and Christological controversies, cannot fail to be impressed by the skill and persistence with which the Holy See [of Rome] was continually advancing and consolidating its claims. Since its occupant was accepted as the successor of St. Peter, and prince of the apostles, it was easy to draw the inference that the unique authority which Rome in fact enjoyed, and which the popes saw concentrated in their persons and their office, was no more than the fulfilment of the divine plan .” ( Kelly , page 412, 413, 417)
Yep, as soon as the issue of papal supremacy and infallibility ex cathedra is solved, two “developments” St Augustine had no knowledge or idea of.
A
AugustTherese
Guest
“Among these [apostles] Peter alone almost everywhere deserved to represent the whole Church. Because of that representation of the Church, which only he bore, he deserved to hear ‘I will give to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven’” - Saint Augustine ( Sermons 295:2 [A.D. 411]).
He was the bishop of Antioch.JonNC:
“Among these [apostles] Peter alone almost everywhere deserved to represent the whole Church. Because of that representation of the Church, which only he bore, he deserved to hear ‘I will give to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven’” - Saint Augustine ( Sermons 295:2 [A.D. 411]).
No mention here of universal ordinary and immediate jurisdiction. No mention of supremacy. No mention of infallibility ex cathedra.
You keep trying to spin St. Augustine into a post Trent, post Vatican I apologist.
A
AugustTherese
Guest
He was Bishop of Hippo.
“Peter alone deserved to represent the whole Church”. You are seemingly wanting to deny what that statement means because the words ‘jurisdiction’ and ‘universal’ are not used. That would be synonymous to a JW arguing against the Trinity because that precise word does not appear in Scripture.
Our Blessed Lord gives Peter alone the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven and you claim that to mean nothing? No jurisdiction, no infallibility, no nothing? What were they then, toy keys? Was Peter to believe that he was going to give these keys to the Orthodox and Anglicans that didn’t even exist?
- Status