B
Bengoshi
Guest
Per se means “by itself.” Again, the child would not be legally his, that’s why he didn’t want it. He didn’t fulfil his customary obligation to his brother’s wife.
- Status
B
Bengoshi
Guest
Yes, the HS does inspire some human writings, but that still does not make it equal to the canonical writings, nor make it inerrant and infallible, otherwise they would have been part of the canon.
L
luckyfredsdad
Guest
G
guanophore
Guest
I was baptized into the Latin Rite as an infant. I had a similar horrible experience of formation as did Tweety and her husband. I left the Church as a teen, shortly after I was confirmed, and joined a Southern Baptist church. It is a long story of many denoniminations. Suffice to say that I entered seminary to train for the ministry through a Methodist congregation. After studying Greek, I studied the Early Church writings and Historical Theology. I realized that the Church founded by Christ is Catholic, and all others are offshoots, containing only partial truth. When I returned to the Catholic Church, I was so disgusted by the liturgical abuses in the Latin Rite that I went to the Easter Rite Byzantine Church. the Byzantine tradition which I joined is Ruthenian This is one of the 22 Catholic Rites in union with the Bishop of Rome. The Liturgy is in Greek,a nd it has not changed much in 1000 years. I do not have to tolerate the gross irreverence I experience in many Latin parishes today.
I suppose you can blame the church that individuals have failed to do this, but that is like blaming Christ for Judas’ refusal to follow Him. How is it Jesus’ fault?
Are you saying we are not in agreement that Protestants reject the role given by Christ to the successor of Peter, as taught by the Catholic Church? It seems to me that this is one of the main precursors to the Protestant Reformation. Especially in England, where King Henry the 8th clearly decided that the Roman Pontiff had no jurisdiction over him.
. Sacred Writings that did not make it into the canon are not necessarily “mere human work”. There are plenty of HS inspired writings that are not in scripture.
The NT canon is not the only residence of written work inspired by God. God has never confined Himself to a canon.
There were many criteria for documents to be included in the canon of the NT. Being inspired is only one of them. The fact that many inspired documents did not get included only means that the NT was not intended to be a complete compendium of inspired works.
S
steve_b
Guest
prove that statement. Source properly referenced
What letter from Leo?
What letter from Cyril?
]. The Orthodox in this country say that S.Simon Zelotes was martyred here. Whilst Lingard, my favourite Roman historian, claims that Aristobulous was first bishop in Britain**.**
:doh2:
- 1st you say Joseph of Arimathea brought Christianity to Britain, then you say don’t get hung up on that. Why, because you know it can’t be remotely proven?
- then you say Aristobulus brought Christianity to Britain. Are you speaking of Aristobulus who Paul greets in his letter to the Church of Rome? If THAT’s true, that is proof positive the Church of Rome sent him to Britain to spread Christianity
I wonder why S. Bede never mentioned Aristobulus in his history of the Church in England ccel.org/ccel/bede/history.v.i.iv.html instead he DID mention Lucius the king of Britain asking the pope if he could be received as a Christian. Now why would the king do that if Christianity was already in Britain by Aristobulus, and therefore bishops were there already?.
You have a dilema in your argument. Your argument so far denying Christianity came to Britain via Rome isn’t working. Your argument is actually proving Rome Christianised Britain
your other arguments which followed are highly flawed as well
[snip]
K
KEVIN_WILCOX
Guest
The argument is based on definition of Catholic. Catholic from 1 A.D. or Catholic from 513 A.D. (when everyone seemed determined to excommunicate everyone else. “You’ve excommunicated me, I’ll excommunicate you”. East and West were divided.
The theology under the influence of St Paul (around Rome) was legalistic, judicial. In Britain there was developing a theology of ‘God the Creator’, Celtic theology, a lot more earthy.
As is usually the case victors replace the beliefs of those who are defeated or the beliefs are transferred elsewhere. Judicial Roman Catholicism became the new established ‘religion’ in Britain.
Protestants: please stop using the label “Bible-believers” or is the request: “Protestants stop interpreting Scripture in a way I find disagreeable.”
The theology under the influence of St Paul (around Rome) was legalistic, judicial. In Britain there was developing a theology of ‘God the Creator’, Celtic theology, a lot more earthy.
As is usually the case victors replace the beliefs of those who are defeated or the beliefs are transferred elsewhere. Judicial Roman Catholicism became the new established ‘religion’ in Britain.
Protestants: please stop using the label “Bible-believers” or is the request: “Protestants stop interpreting Scripture in a way I find disagreeable.”
S
steve_b
Guest
please Explain
W:
please Explain
W:
Since the scriptures were written in the Church, by the Church, for the Church, one can’t interpret scripture in a way that opposes the Church who has been here from the beginning, and gave us the scriptures.
K
KEVIN_WILCOX
Guest
Steve b
My opening preposition. How do you define the Catholic Church? From what period do you date it? When did it begin to refer to itself as ‘the Catholic Church’ as opposed to the ‘Orthodox Church’? This is where the argument is hinged.
Historical Britain - there were 2 Churches in existence. Witnessed by artwork of the period.
The Orthodox claims they are the original missionaries to Britain.
The prejudice of the matter appears attitudinal. From what do you build your bias?
Historical record shows people replacing belief.
My opening preposition. How do you define the Catholic Church? From what period do you date it? When did it begin to refer to itself as ‘the Catholic Church’ as opposed to the ‘Orthodox Church’? This is where the argument is hinged.
Historical Britain - there were 2 Churches in existence. Witnessed by artwork of the period.
The Orthodox claims they are the original missionaries to Britain.
The prejudice of the matter appears attitudinal. From what do you build your bias?
Historical record shows people replacing belief.
S
steve_b
Guest
What did Ignatius of Antioch say? Where the bishop is there is the Catholic Church.
What does the creed say?
I believe in the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.
W:
And when did the [O]rthodox do this?
W:
explain
Was your response a response to this post?
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=5763943&postcount=961
L
luckyfredsdad
Guest
B
Bengoshi
Guest
The quotes are not in order which makes this difficult to understand. Some of the things you quoted did not come from me but from you. I agree with you that Protestants generally reject the primacy of Peter and his alleged papal succession.
K
KEVIN_WILCOX
Guest
What does the creed say?
I believe in the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.
There are at least 2 ways of interpreting this: ‘Roman’ Catholic or ‘universal’ (catholic, i.e. Christianity). And in the Creed there is no ‘the’ prior to ‘one holy catholic and apostolic church’. And capital letters are (also) additional.
I know it’s the time when Roman Catholics start clapping their hands and celebrating but there is more to this than you might think.
explain
Was your response a response to this post?
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=5763943&postcount=961
I believe in the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.
There are at least 2 ways of interpreting this: ‘Roman’ Catholic or ‘universal’ (catholic, i.e. Christianity). And in the Creed there is no ‘the’ prior to ‘one holy catholic and apostolic church’. And capital letters are (also) additional.
I know it’s the time when Roman Catholics start clapping their hands and celebrating but there is more to this than you might think.
explain
Was your response a response to this post?
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=5763943&postcount=961
L
luckyfredsdad
Guest
**This is the Faith of the Apostles; this is the Faith of the Fathers; this is the Faith of the orthodox; this is the Faith that sustained the world…we uphold the ancient institutions of the Catholic Church; whosever adds or removes something from the Catholic Church we anathematize.
min., 7th,Ecumenical Synod. [787AD.]
They are speaking of The Catholic Faith, the Faith of The Apostles and Fathers and the Faith of the first thousand years and there is mentioned neither hide nor hair of the Papacy.**
min., 7th,Ecumenical Synod. [787AD.]
They are speaking of The Catholic Faith, the Faith of The Apostles and Fathers and the Faith of the first thousand years and there is mentioned neither hide nor hair of the Papacy.**
S
Stephen3970
Guest
equally as irritating is the term “Full Gospel” used by the Word of Faith “name it and claim it” folks.
S
Stephen3970
Guest
What does the creed say?
I believe in the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.
There are at least 2 ways of interpreting this: ‘Roman’ Catholic or ‘universal’ (catholic, i.e. Christianity). And in the Creed there is no ‘the’ prior to ‘one holy catholic and apostolic church’. And capital letters are (also) additional.
I know it’s the time when Roman Catholics start clapping their hands and celebrating but there is more to this than you might think.
explain
Was your response a response to this post?
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=5763943&postcount=961/QUOTE
Unless you are Lutheran in which case it says One Holy Christian and Apostolic Church
R
Roman_Catholic_1
Guest
Never heard someone use the term before. Then again I have never heard of the Word of Faith movement either.
Should I consider myself lucky in that regard?
God bless
P
paperwight
Guest
Well, if they really do, and it is not a misunderstanding on your part, it’s never been mentioned before.
However, it is acknowledged that various saints of the Celtic church came over from Ireland, and spread the Gospel before Augustine was sent by the Pope.
There was conflict between them which was resolved at Whitby, an English village then.
So in that sense there were two churches for a time, one Celtic and one Roman, each with their own rituals and calendar.
The Orthodox? No.
L
luckyfredsdad
Guest
**
Tertullian AD155, taught, “The extremeties of Spain, the various parts of Gaul, the regions of Britain…have received the religion of Christ!” [Ter,Def,Fidei]
Eusebius, the Historian, S.Athanasius, and S.Dorotheus of Tyre plus S.John Chrysostom, all told of Christianity being in Britain at an early date. The Archbishop of Tyre wrote, ,"Aristobulous, whom Paul saluted, writing to the Romans,[Ch,16vs10.]
Syn De Apostol. Syn 9.] was first Bishop of Britain! S.Dorotheus also claimed S,Simon Zelotes, Our Lord’s Brother was martyred here!
Albanicus,[Gildas,] the Historian, wrote,"Christ the true Son afforded His Light , the knowledge of His precepts, to our Island, in the last year, as we know,Of Tiberius Caesar. [De Exidio Brittannica.]
Our Bishops were present at the Council of Nice,[at least one,] according to the RC ]’ Catholic Messenger.’ [Father Eastell.]
There were plenty more utterances . Bede said of the British Clergy," They diligently followed whatever pure and devout customs they learned in Prophets, Gospels and writings of the Apostles."**
]I was taught that the Church arrived in Britain in the early days of the Faith.
Tertullian AD155, taught, “The extremeties of Spain, the various parts of Gaul, the regions of Britain…have received the religion of Christ!” [Ter,Def,Fidei]
Eusebius, the Historian, S.Athanasius, and S.Dorotheus of Tyre plus S.John Chrysostom, all told of Christianity being in Britain at an early date. The Archbishop of Tyre wrote, ,"Aristobulous, whom Paul saluted, writing to the Romans,[Ch,16vs10.]
Syn De Apostol. Syn 9.] was first Bishop of Britain! S.Dorotheus also claimed S,Simon Zelotes, Our Lord’s Brother was martyred here!
Albanicus,[Gildas,] the Historian, wrote,"Christ the true Son afforded His Light , the knowledge of His precepts, to our Island, in the last year, as we know,Of Tiberius Caesar. [De Exidio Brittannica.]
Our Bishops were present at the Council of Nice,[at least one,] according to the RC ]’ Catholic Messenger.’ [Father Eastell.]
There were plenty more utterances . Bede said of the British Clergy," They diligently followed whatever pure and devout customs they learned in Prophets, Gospels and writings of the Apostles."**
G
guanophore
Guest
It is amazing that such a careful student of history could make such a blatantly false statement. Even if one does not agree with the notion of the Papacy, it clearly has historical testimony since the second century.
Your own posts have demonstrated this, bringing quotes from the ecumencal councils legislating against interference from foreign bishops. If the Bishop of Rome had not been throwing his weight around, then this would not have been necessary!
Z
Zundrah
Guest
- Status