S
shoewindow3000
Guest
The same reason why Protestants don’t listen to the Pope today…they don’t accept his authority. From the heretics’ point of view, Polycarp would have more authority on the issue.Riight! Someone discipled by the Apostle John (and ordained a Bishop of a city other than Rome) is more authoritative than the Bishop of Rome (was he even called “Pope” at that time?). How could I have missed that? Who discipled Anicetus (Bishop of Rome when these things occurred)? Why was Polycarp able to succeed in converting heretics in Rome, when Anicetus couldn’t (apparently, the heretics did very well in Rome until Polycarp showed up)?
Think about this:
If Matthew suddenly came back from the dead and said that the Catholic Church was the True Church, would you listen to him? I assume so. It would be because of his testimony that you would accept the authority of the Pope.
Polycarp could do something that the Pope could not-Polycarp could convey a sense of authority that the heretics needed to hear, because he ** personally knew** the Apostles (unlike the Pope). that was the only thing that would convince them.
Nothing that the Pope said to the heretics would have convinced them, because they didn’t accept him to begin with.
Here is something new to consider:Protestants think that the Catholic Church’s teachings contradict the Bible. Well, if that is the case, then why did the Catholic Church decide to canonize a New Testament that would contradict what they teach? Does that make very much sense?
That would be sort of like an Evangelical minister recommending his followers to read the Catholic Catechism!