"Pope" Clement of Rome

[TristanCross]

1Clem 32:1
If any man will consider them one by one in sincerity, he shall
understand the magnificence of the gifts that are given by Him.

1Clem 32:2
For of Jacob are all the priests and levites who minister unto the
altar of God; of him is the Lord Jesus as concerning the flesh; of
him are kings and rulers and governors in the line of Judah; yea and
the rest of his tribes are held in no small honor, seeing that God
promised saying, Thy seed shall be as the stars of heaven.

1Clem 32:3
They all therefore were glorified and magnified, not through
themselves or their own works or the righteous doing which they
wrought, but through His will.

1Clem 32:4
And so we, having been called through His will in Christ Jesus, are
not justified through ourselves or through our own wisdom or
understanding or piety or works which we wrought in holiness of
heart, but through faith, whereby the Almighty God justified all men
that have been from the beginning; to whom be the glory for ever and
ever. Amen.

Sounds like he’s contradicting Catholic teaching…no? And since he was “pope”, doesn’t that mean this is infallible? lol.

 

[Eucharisted]

Infallibility is only when a Pope speaks to the entire Church in light of his office on matters of faith and morals. Outside of infallibility, the Pope speaks as a simple Christian, maybe even as a theologian if he’s a theologian.

Faith is defined differently by Catholics and Protestants. Pope Benedict XVI, a theologian, clarified what faith is in one of his addresses. To quote:

The relationship between Paul and the Risen One became so deep as to induce him to maintain that Christ was no longer solely his life but also his very living, to the point that to be able to reach him death became a gain (cf. Phil 1: 21). This is not to say he despised life, but that he realized that for him at this point there was no other purpose in life and thus he had no other desire than to reach Christ as in an athletics competition to remain with him for ever. The Risen Christ had become the beginning and the end of his existence, the cause and the goal of his race. It was only his concern for the development in faith of those he had evangelized and his anxiety for all of the Churches he founded (cf. 2 Cor 11: 28) that induced him to slow down in his race towards his one Lord, to wait for his disciples so they might run with him towards the goal. Although from a perspective of moral integrity he had nothing to reproach himself in his former observance of the Law, once Christ had reached him he preferred not to make judgments on himself (cf. 1 Cor 4: 3-4). Instead he limited himself to resolving to press on, to make his own the One who had made him his own (cf. Phil 3: 12).

It is precisely because of this personal experience of relationship with Jesus Christ that Paul henceforth places at the centre of his Gospel an irreducible opposition between the two alternative paths to justice: one built on the works of the Law, the other founded on the grace of faith in Christ. The alternative between justice by means of works of the Law and that by faith in Christ thus became one of the dominant themes that run through his Letters: “We ourselves, who are Jews by birth and not Gentile sinners, yet who know that a man is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Christ Jesus in order to be justified by faith in Christ, and not by works of the law; because by works of the law no one will be justified” (Gal 2: 15-16). And to the Christians of Rome he reasserts that “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, they are now justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus” (Rm 3: 23-24). And he adds “we hold that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the law” (ibid., v. 28). At this point Luther translated: “justified by faith alone”. I shall return to this point at the end of the Catechesis. First, we must explain what is this “Law” from which we are freed and what are those “works of the Law” that do not justify. The opinion that was to recur systematically in history already existed in the community at Corinth. This opinion consisted in thinking that it was a question of moral law and that the Christian freedom thus consisted in the liberation from ethics. Thus in Corinth the term “πάντα μοι έξεστιν” (I can do what I like) was widespread. It is obvious that this interpretation is wrong: Christian freedom is not libertinism; the liberation of which St Paul spoke is not liberation from good works.

So what does the Law from which we are liberated and which does not save mean? For St Paul, as for all his contemporaries, the word “Law” meant the Torah in its totality, that is, the five books of Moses. The Torah, in the Pharisaic interpretation, that which Paul had studied and made his own, was a complex set of conduct codes that ranged from the ethical nucleus to observances of rites and worship and that essentially determined the identity of the just person. In particular, these included circumcision, observances concerning pure food and ritual purity in general, the rules regarding the observance of the Sabbath, etc. codes of conduct that also appear frequently in the debates between Jesus and his contemporaries. All of these observances that express a social, cultural and religious identity had become uniquely important in the time of Hellenistic culture, starting from the third century B.C. This culture which had become the universal culture of that time and was a seemingly rational culture; a polytheistic culture, seemingly tolerant constituted a strong pressure for cultural uniformity and thus threatened the identity of Israel, which was politically constrained to enter into this common identity of the Hellenistic culture. This resulted in the loss of its own identity, hence also the loss of the precious heritage of the faith of the Fathers, of the faith in the one God and in the promises of God.

Against this cultural pressure, which not only threatened the Israelite identity but also the faith in the one God and in his promises, it was necessary to create a wall of distinction, a shield of defence to protect the precious heritage of the faith; this wall consisted precisely in the Judaic observances and prescriptions. Paul, who had learned these observances in their role of defending God’s gift, of the inheritance of faith in one God alone, saw this identity threatened by the freedom of the Christians this is why he persecuted them. At the moment of his encounter with the Risen One he understood that with Christ’s Resurrection the situation had changed radically. With Christ, the God of Israel, the one true God, became the God of all peoples. The wall as he says in his Letter to the Ephesians between Israel and the Gentiles, was no longer necessary: it is Christ who protects us from polytheism and all of its deviations; it is Christ who unites us with and in the one God; it is Christ who guarantees our true identity within the diversity of cultures. The wall is no longer necessary; our common identity within the diversity of cultures is Christ, and it is he who makes us just. Being just simply means being with Christ and in Christ. And this suffices. Further observances are no longer necessary. For this reason Luther’s phrase: “faith alone” is true, if it is not opposed to faith in charity, in love. Faith is looking at Christ, entrusting oneself to Christ, being united to Christ, conformed to Christ, to his life. And the form, the life of Christ, is love; hence to believe is to conform to Christ and to enter into his love. So it is that in the Letter to the Galatians in which he primarily developed his teaching on justification St Paul speaks of faith that works through love (cf. Gal 5: 14).

Source: vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/audiences/2008/documents/hf_ben-xvi_aud_20081119_en.html

 

[ThuriferAcolyte]

1Clem 32:1
If any man will consider them one by one in sincerity, he shall
understand the magnificence of the gifts that are given by Him.

1Clem 32:2
For of Jacob are all the priests and levites who minister unto the
altar of God; of him is the Lord Jesus as concerning the flesh; of
him are kings and rulers and governors in the line of Judah; yea and
the rest of his tribes are held in no small honor, seeing that God
promised saying, Thy seed shall be as the stars of heaven.

1Clem 32:3
They all therefore were glorified and magnified, not through
themselves or their own works or the righteous doing which they
wrought, but through His will.

1Clem 32:4
And so we, having been called through His will in Christ Jesus, are
not justified through ourselves or through our own wisdom or
understanding or piety or works which we wrought in holiness of
heart, but through faith, whereby the Almighty God justified all men
that have been from the beginning; to whom be the glory for ever and
ever. Amen.

Sounds like he’s contradicting Catholic teaching…no? And since he was “pope”, doesn’t that mean this is infallible? lol.

How is he contradicting Catholic teaching? And no, we have never taught that everything a Pope says is infallible:

catholic.com/library/Papal_Infallibility.asp
newadvent.org/cathen/07790a.htm
cuf.org/faithfacts/details_view.asp?ffID=149

LOL

 

[PaulDupre]

Sounds like he’s contradicting Catholic teaching…no? And since he was “pope”, doesn’t that mean this is infallible? lol.

What Catholic teaching is Clement contradicting here? I don’t see it.

 

[Cluny]

<<Sounds like he’s contradicting Catholic teaching…no? And since he was “pope”, doesn’t that mean this is infallible? lol.>>

Papal Infallibility as defined by Vatican I is limited to issues of faith and morals, and even then so rigidly defined that there’s no generally agreed upon list of WHICH Papal statements are in fact infallible.

You understand that Papal infalliblity never meant the Pope was impeccable, that is, incapable of sin.

And not even the most hardshell ultramontane ever held that the Pope was infallible in merely pastoral or prudential judgements, much less non-doctrinal opinions.

 

[1ke]

Sounds like he’s contradicting Catholic teaching…no?

Uh, no. What teaching is he contradicting? Pope St. Clement was indeed quite Catholic.

And, moreover, I suggest that you stop cherry picking verses of Clement’s letters. You cannot quote chapter 32 without also quoting 33 and 34 which continue this line of discussion-- where he discusses the necessity of good works. Unless, of course, you are attempting to be intellectually dishonest.

And since he was “pope”, doesn’t that mean this is infallible? lol.

This statement demonstrates your lack of understanding of infallibility.

 

[Irish_Polock]

Infallibility is only when a Pope speaks to the entire Church in light of his office on matters of faith and morals. Outside of infallibility, the Pope speaks as a simple Christian, maybe even as a theologian if he’s a theologian.

Faith is defined differently by Catholics and Protestants. Pope Benedict XVI, a theologian, clarified what faith is in one of his addresses. To quote:

I agree.

 

[PaulDupre]

This guy has some warped misunderstanding of Catholicism, probably from his cult leader or from some anti-Catholic website (where they don’t understand Catholicism either).

He obviously doesn’t kow what infallibility is.

Poor guy…

 

[Tantum_ergo]

From what I understand, Tristran is only 16 and is genuinely exploring the faith. That being so, and considering his age, the role of “devil’s advocate” so to speak is probably quite natural. It doesn’t mean particularly that he’s anti-Catholic or indeed that he isn’t searching for a reasonable explanation and of understanding it when given. I often found with my little darlings at that age that when they appeared to be flip and even almost hostile about the faith, they truly did not see it as either --to them, they were simply making note of ‘inconsistencies’ and were totally serious; in fact, they used to get quite annoyed and would claim self-righteously that any ‘offense’ I took at their perfectly sane and sweet remarks showed my own bias or hostility. Thankfully, they grew out of this to an extent. . .or if they didn’t, must have because we have far better conversations now!

 

[NoWings]

This guy has some warped misunderstanding of Catholicism, probably from his cult leader or from some anti-Catholic website (where they don’t understand Catholicism either).

He obviously doesn’t kow what infallibility is.

Poor guy…

Your lack of charity is shameful and reflects upon all other Catholic posters on this website and your Church. You managed to get he’s a cultist or reads anti-Catholic resources from one misunderstanding over a CF quote?

 

[TristanCross]

From what I understand, Tristran is only 16 and is genuinely exploring the faith. That being so, and considering his age, the role of “devil’s advocate” so to speak is probably quite natural. It doesn’t mean particularly that he’s anti-Catholic or indeed that he isn’t searching for a reasonable explanation and of understanding it when given. I often found with my little darlings at that age that when they appeared to be flip and even almost hostile about the faith, they truly did not see it as either --to them, they were simply making note of ‘inconsistencies’ and were totally serious; in fact, they used to get quite annoyed and would claim self-righteously that any ‘offense’ I took at their perfectly sane and sweet remarks showed my own bias or hostility. Thankfully, they grew out of this to an extent. . .or if they didn’t, must have because we have far better conversations now!

lol. Thanks

Yeah, just trying to learn. No need to flip guys.

I was asking because Clement is saying that we are justified by faith and not works of any kind. Also, I was reading Polycarp, and he sounded like a Calvinist.

 

[PaulDupre]

Your lack of charity is shameful and reflects upon all other Catholic posters on this website and your Church. You managed to get he’s a cultist or reads anti-Catholic resources from one misunderstanding over a CF quote?

You think that my perceived lack of charity reflects on ALL Catholics on these fora and on the CHURCH ITSELF? Wow, no wonder you’re an agnostic. Your perceptions are completely unreasonable and quite immature. So every time a religious person behaves in a manner you judge to be imperfect, it is an indictment of all religions? What are you, 15 years old?

Grow up, man.

 

[PaulDupre]

lol. Thanks

Yeah, just trying to learn. No need to flip guys.

I was asking because Clement is saying that we are justified by faith and not works of any kind.

First of all, Catholics do not believe we are justified by works. Secondly, Clement was not saying we are justified by faith alone. Read the entire essay. He says that we are justified by GRACE through faith in Jesus Christ, which is exactly what the Catholic Church has always taught and the Catechism teaches today.

Read about it here.

 

[ThuriferAcolyte]

lol. Thanks

Yeah, just trying to learn. No need to flip guys.

I was asking because Clement is saying that we are justified by faith and not works of any kind. Also, I was reading Polycarp, and he sounded like a Calvinist.

Please read more about Catholic teaching before saying that something contradicts it. Catholics do not believe that we are justified by “works of any kind”, let alone just works.

So what are the contradictions in the OP again?

 

[CHESTERTONRULES]

lol. Thanks

Yeah, just trying to learn. No need to flip guys.

I was asking because Clement is saying that we are justified by faith and not works of any kind. Also, I was reading Polycarp, and he sounded like a Calvinist.

I think if you will keep reading you will understand that Calvin was not a Clementist.

Chapter 33. But Let Us Not Give Up the Practice of Good Works and Love. God Himself is an Example to Us of Good Works.
What shall we do, then, brethren? Shall we become slothful in well-doing, and cease from the practice of love? God forbid that any such course should be followed by us! But rather let us hasten with all energy and readiness of mind to perform every good work. For the Creator and Lord of all Himself rejoices in His works. For by His infinitely great power He established the heavens, and by His incomprehensible wisdom He adorned them. He also divided the earth from the water which surrounds it, and fixed it upon the immovable foundation of His own will. The animals also which are upon it He commanded by His own word into existence. So likewise, when He had formed the sea, and the living creatures which are in it, He enclosed them [within their proper bounds] by His own power. Above all, with His holy and undefiled hands He formed man, the most excellent [of His creatures], and truly great through the understanding given him— the express likeness of His own image. For thus says God: Let us make man in our image, and after our likeness. So God made man; male and female He created them. Genesis 1:26-27 Having thus finished all these things, He approved them, and blessed them, and said, Increase and multiply. Genesis 1:28 We see, then, how all righteous men have been adorned with good works, and how the Lord Himself, adorning Himself with His works, rejoiced. Having therefore such an example, let us without delay accede to His will, and let us work the work of righteousness with our whole strength.

Chapter 34. Great is the Reward of Good Works with God. Joined Together in Harmony, Let Us Implore that Reward from Him.
The good servant receives the bread of his labour with confidence; the lazy and slothful cannot look his employer in the face. It is requisite, therefore, that we be prompt in the practice of well-doing; for of Him are all things. And thus He forewarns us: Behold, the Lord [comes], and His reward is before His face, to render to every man according to his work. He exhorts us, therefore, with our whole heart to attend to this, that we be not lazy or slothful in any good work. Let our boasting and our confidence be in Him. Let us submit ourselves to His will. Let us consider the whole multitude of His angels, how they stand ever ready to minister to His will. For the Scripture says, Ten thousand times ten thousand stood around Him, and thousands of thousands ministered unto Him, Daniel 7:10 and cried, Holy, holy, holy, [is] the Lord of Sabaoth; the whole creation is full of His glory. Isaiah 6:3 And let us therefore, conscientiously gathering together in harmony, cry to Him earnestly, as with one mouth, that we may be made partakers of His great and glorious promises. For [the Scripture] says, Eye has not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which He has prepared for them that wait for Him. 1 Corinthians 2:9

Chapter 35. Immense is This Reward. How Shall We Obtain It?
How blessed and wonderful, beloved, are the gifts of God! Life in immortality, splendour in righteousness, truth in perfect confidence, faith in assurance, self-control in holiness! And all these fall under the cognizance of our understandings [now]; what then shall those things be which are prepared for such as wait for Him? The Creator and Father of all worlds, the Most Holy, alone knows their amount and their beauty. Let us therefore earnestly strive to be found in the number of those that wait for Him, in order that we may share in His promised gifts. But how, beloved, shall this be done? If our understanding be fixed by faith towards God; if we earnestly seek the things which are pleasing and acceptable to Him; if we do the things which are in harmony with His blameless will; and if we follow the way of truth, casting away from us all unrighteousness and iniquity, along with all covetousness, strife, evil practices, deceit, whispering, and evil-speaking, all hatred of God, pride and haughtiness, vain glory and ambition. For they that do such things are hateful to God; and not only they that do them, but also those that take pleasure in them that do them. Romans 1:32

 

[pnewton]

I have two questions:

Again, what is the contradiction you think you see?

What’s with the scare quotes?

 

[NoWings]

You think that my perceived lack of charity reflects on ALL Catholics on these fora and on the CHURCH ITSELF? Wow, no wonder you’re an agnostic. Your perceptions are completely unreasonable and quite immature. So every time a religious person behaves in a manner you judge to be imperfect, it is an indictment of all religions? What are you, 15 years old?

Grow up, man.

Yes. You’re a Catholic. You and every person on this forum that identifies as Catholic and are posting on a website that styles itself “Catholic Answers” are going to be viewed as more knowledgable about Catholicism than people that are not Catholics.

It’s the same thing with the whole abusive priest situation. Yes, ultimately it was the fault of the priest themselves, but the public views this as a stain on the Church. Same thing… just on a smaller scale.

If you think that you can just insult people and accuse them of being cultists or readers of anti-Catholic materials off the cuff without waiting for the person to expound on their original post without someone linking your view of someone’s view on your Church to your Church since you are a member of said Church, then I would ask the same of you.

How old are you?

EDIT

Ah, I just read the other reply. Congratulations. You just insulted a 16 year old who’s searching for faith and asking questions on topics that he doesn’t understand.

I’m the one that’s immature?

 

[PaulDupre]

Yes. You’re a Catholic. You and every person on this forum that identifies as Catholic and are posting on a website that styles itself “Catholic Answers” are going to be viewed as more knowledgable about Catholicism than people that are not Catholics.

It’s the same thing with the whole abusive priest situation. Yes, ultimately it was the fault of the priest themselves, but the public views this as a stain on the Church. Same thing… just on a smaller scale.

If you think that you can just insult people and accuse them of being cultists or readers of anti-Catholic materials off the cuff without waiting for the person to expound on their original post without someone linking your view of someone’s view on your Church to your Church since you are a member of said Church, then I would ask the same of you.

How old are you?

EDIT

Ah, I just read the other reply. Congratulations. You just insulted a 16 year old who’s searching for faith and asking questions on topics that he doesn’t understand.

I’m the one that’s immature?

I wondered how long it would be before you brought up the abuse scandal. It was inevitable that you would do so.

 

[ThuriferAcolyte]

I wondered how long it would be before you brought up the abuse scandal. It was inevitable that you would do so.

Very typical. Either that or the Inquisition.

 

[TristanCross]

First of all, Catholics do not believe we are justified by works. Secondly, Clement was not saying we are justified by faith alone. Read the entire essay. He says that we are justified by GRACE through faith in Jesus Christ, which is exactly what the Catholic Church has always taught and the Catechism teaches today.

Read about it here.

…Wait, what? Catholics have always told me that we are justified by grace through works and faith…Just look at this (It’s a Catholic website): home.flash.net/~truth/Justification.html

So, when Clement contradicts, you claim you believe justification by grace through faith, but when no threats are presented, you claim it’s by grace through faith and works?

This is a huge contradiction between Catholicism and Clement, and more importantly, Scripture. Scripture tells us that works aren’t of grace.

Romans 11:6
And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then it is no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.

Works can not be added to grace. But Catholics do this. Why should I ignore the Scripture? If you add works to grace at all, it is not grace anymore.

Correct me if I’m wrong. And I would appreciate respect.