Responding to a Protestant Claim about the Eucharist

[benhur]

benhur,

there is a ton of ink spilled on this. If this doesn’t answer your question just let me know, and I’ll recapture some of that ink.

catholic.com/qa/did-st-peter-view-his-authority-as-equal-to-other-church-leaders

Bishops might move around. We see that today as well. Bishops might be in one diocese for x number of years then moved to another diocese. But they have authority only in their specific area when moved. They don’t have authority in another bishop’s area nor in their previous diocese when a new bishop is appointed for that diocese…

Peter is a bit different of course. He is over the entire Church worldwide. That is how Jesus established Peter’s office

If we’re still talking about Ignatius, there is a range of dates given for his letters. Either way, Ignatius writing to Rome, on his way to Rome to be thrown to the lions, probably left out the name of the bishop for his safety.

we know who the popes were in that range of dates

• St. Clement I (88-97)
• St. Evaristus (97-105)
• St. Alexander I (105-115)

spurious writings are identified as spurious.

[Ignatius of Antioch (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07644a.htm) [SAINT]

• Epistle to the Ephesians
• Epistle to the Magnesians
• Epistle to the Trallians
• Epistle to the Romans
• Epistle to the Philadelphians
• Epistle to the Smyrnæans
• Epistle to Polycarp
• The Martyrdom of Ignatius
• The Spurious Epistles

benhur,

The Didache (c. 100) , is written to the Nations

Re:
Chapter 15. Bishops and Deacons; Christian Reproof

Therefore, appoint for yourselves bishops and deacons worthy of the Lord, men meek, and not lovers of money, 1 Timothy 3:4 and truthful and proven; for they also render to you the service of prophets and teachers. Despise them not therefore, for they are your honoured ones, together with the prophets and teachers. And reprove one another, not in anger, but in peace, as you have it in the Gospel; Matthew 18:15-17 but to every one that acts amiss against another, let no one speak, nor let him hear anything from you until he repents. But your prayers and alms and all your deeds so do, as you have it in the Gospel of our Lord.

I don’t see it saying what you have it saying.

Hi steve .ok i see what you are saying, that bishops is plural due to the the letter being for all churches.

Just disagree to see it that way. The Didache is like a catechism, to be read by a community, a congregation, though it is universal and can be read by all congregations.

Still, the understanding is for an individual church. So an individual church appoints itself bishops and deacons. An individual church, " On the Lord’s day, come together “, and “Receive everyone who comes in the name of the Lord”, and " Listen to anyone who comes to teach you”.

He does not write, “appoint yourselves a bishop and deacons”.

Paul and even 1 Clement suggest that a church appoint itself “bishops and deacons”. “A” church , not “the” church.

I will not deny that Ignatius espouses a singular bishop just as I will not deny these other writers of a plurality of bishops, for one church.

Blessings

 

[steve_b]

Hi steve .ok i see what you are saying, that bishops is plural due to the the letter being for all churches.

Just disagree to see it that way. The Didache is like a catechism, to be read by a community, a congregation, though it is universal and can be read by all congregations.

Could you explain?
bh:

Still, the understanding is for an individual church. So an individual church appoints itself bishops and deacons. An individual church, " On the Lord’s day, come together “, and “Receive everyone who comes in the name of the Lord”, and " Listen to anyone who comes to teach you”.

bh:

Paul and even 1 Clement suggest that a church appoint itself “bishops and deacons”. “A” church , not “the” church.

I will not deny that Ignatius espouses a singular bishop just as I will not deny these other writers of a plurality of bishops, for one church.

Blessings

If I’m understanding you correctly,

Re: bishops, priests, and deacons.

Just to clarify, not saying you’re suggesting this, bu neither Clement or any ECF is saying a bunch of Catholics for example can get together and appoint one of us as bishop or priest etc. For validity, those offices require an already validly ordained bishop in apostolic succession, to start the process.

RE: Church(es) vs The Church, and bishop(s) priest(s) and deacon(s)

let’s not diminish

From the beginning, we’re referring to Catholic bishops, priests and deacons in the Catholic Church. That’s the Church of the creed, that’s the Church Jesus established.

While there are individual Catholic Church(es) spread over the known world, they make up One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church. This is Not a disparate group of entities called “Church(es)” believing every which way one can believe and aren’t together as one faith everywhere.

For evidence

Irenaeus writes, (emphasis mine)

"the Catholic Church possesses one and the same faith throughout the whole world**,** as we have already said.”
from: [Irenaeus writing Against Heresies, Bk 1 http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103110.htm”]Chapter 10 ]

benhur,

that is one way that makes the Church, Catholic. “One and same faith throughout the world.”

the 2nd point that makes the Church Catholic, Ignatius points to the Church of Rome is the Church that holds the presidency.

if one doesn’t hold to this union to the pope (successor to Peter) then, Irenaeus down the page, says one doesn’t hold to the apostolic faith / tradition

Evidence:

“to the Church which has obtained mercy, through the majesty of the Most High Father, and Jesus Christ, His only-begotten Son; the Church which is beloved and enlightened by the will of Him that wills all things which are according to the love of Jesus Christ our God, which also presides in the place of the region of the Romans, worthy of God, worthy of honor, worthy of the highest happiness, worthy of praise, worthy of obtaining her every desire, worthy of being deemed holy, and which presides over love, is named from Christ, and from the Father, which I also salute in the name of Jesus Christ, the Son of the Father: ***to those who are united, *both according to the flesh and spirit” [Ignatius, http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0107.htm”]Epistle to the Romans , Greeting ]

to follow up with that

Irenaeus writes

"therefore, in every Church, who may wish to see the truth, to contemplate clearly the tradition of the apostles manifested throughout the whole world; and we are in a position to reckon up those who were by the apostles instituted bishops in the Churches, and [to demonstrate] the succession of these men to our own times; those who neither taught nor knew of anything like what these [heretics] rave about. For if the apostles had known hidden mysteries, which they were in the habit of imparting to the perfect apart and privily from the rest, they would have delivered them especially to those to whom they were also committing the Churches themselves.

(my comment) Gnostics who Irenaeus is writing against, think they have their own truth. They don’t. They ignore apostolic tradition therefore they ignore truth and the apostolic faith passed on to them. Ergo this massive work of Irenaeus “Against Heresies”

1. Since, however, it would be very tedious, in such a volume as this, to reckon up the successions of all the Churches, we do put to confusion all those who, in whatever manner, whether by an evil self-pleasing, by vainglory, or by blindness and perverse opinion, assemble in unauthorized meetings; [we do this, I say,] by indicating that tradition derived from the apostles, of the very great, the very ancient, and universally known Church founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul; as also [by pointing out] the faith preached to men, which comes down to our time by means of the successions of the bishops. For it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its preeminent authority, that is, the faithful everywhere, inasmuch as the who exist everywhere

from: Bk 3 Chapter 3 , v 1-2

Benhur,

those who don’t follow this direction, a tradition that came from Peter and Paul, are the heretics Irenaeus writes against. Also Keep in mind, Irenaeus is a Catholic bishop and is only one man away (in time) from the apostle John

 

[Cathoholic]

Good post number 317 (here) steve b.

I am taking the liberty of re-posting a quote from you due to the light ink and my “old eyes”.

From steve b . . .

(my comment) Gnostics who Irenaeus is writing against, think they have their own truth. They don’t. They ignore apostolic tradition therefore they ignore truth and the apostolic faith passed on to them. Ergo this massive work of Irenaeus “Against Heresies”

 

[steve_b]

Good post number 317 (here) steve b.

I am taking the liberty of re-posting a quote from you due to the light ink and my “old eyes”.

From steve b . . .

:tiphat: good to talk with you again. Thanks for the heads up. I’ll avoid that light color in the future.

 

[Duane1966]

Hi D,

Well yes but when does he think this ? All I am saying is that it seems Jerome says at the beginning they were interchangeable, and then changed due to carnal church(divisions I am of Paul you are of Apollos). So of course , later on, bishops are above a presbyter in one function.

Blessings

The following is taken from an article found here: calledtocommunion.com/2012/06/some-thoughts-concerning-michael-hortons-three-recent-articles-on-protestants-becoming-catholic/

For a bishop must be blameless, [being]
as it were God’s steward. Therefore the presbyter was the same as the bishop, until by the [instigation] of the devil, studies in religion * began to be made, and it [began to be] said among the peoples: I am of Paul, I am of Apollo, and I of Cephas (1 Cor. 1:12), churches were governed by a common council of presbyters. But when everyone began to consider those whom he had baptized as his own, not Christ’s, it was decreed in the whole world that one chosen among the presbyters should be placed above the rest, to whom all the care of the church belonged, and so all the seeds of schism be removed.*

Many things can be said here, but it is important to notice that for St. Jerome, this was not a post-apostolic arrangement. In his view, this took place during the time of the Apostles, in response to the schisms reported by St. Paul in his first letter to the Corinthians. So for St. Jerome this is an Apostolic arrangement, that was decreed by the Apostles and binding on the whole Church in the whole world. It therefore has Apostolic authority, not merely the authority of “custom.”

In addition, it is important also to note that even to this day, all bishops are presbyters. Ordination to the episcopacy does not mean that one ceases to be a presbyter. So it is quite possible that the Apostles ordained bishops (who were also presbyters), and there were initially a plurality of such bishops even in the same local churches. Then for the sake of order the Apostles decreed that there was to be only one governing bishop in each church, and these bishops subsequently ordained men to the order of [mere] presbyter. See Tim Troutman’s article titled “Holy Orders and the Sacrificial Priesthood.”

I should add too that to understand St. Jerome’s position accurately, it is important to consider other relevant claims he makes. For example, elsewhere he writes:

In fact as if to tell us that the traditions handed down by the apostles were taken by them from the old testament, bishops, presbyters, and deacons occupy in the church the same positions as those which were occupied by Aaron, his sons, and the Levites in the temple. (Letter 146)

**
St. Jerome sees this three-fold structure as divinely ordained and “handed down by the Apostles.”**