Several Early Church Fathers do not agree with Roman Catholic teachings regarding Mary.

[SIA]

You can’t reject something that has not been defined.

However, they may have had an incomplete understanding of the doctrines.

It’s amusing that you would make such an argument given that many protestant beliefs are flatly rejected by a large majority of the early fathers.

Hmmm. That doesn’t say anything for Bernard who spoke directly to the NEW feast being introduced at its time of inception. Look, attempting to declare something true today which was completely unbeknownst before doesn’t prove for an instant that it was always true but just discovered to be. This is one of the oldest and most overused tricks of Roman Catholicism that many are now well aware of. You might as well declare that you can invent truth on the spot.

 

[SIA]

All you do is refer a quote to a name. You do not cite the specific reference as to where these may be found. When you do, then we can respond appropriately. Otherwise, your quotes are meaningless without their proper reference/citation.

Why don’t you just refute what they said? Is it not true that Bernard opposed the new feast introduced at the time (The Immaculate Conception)? If that’s not true, then why don’t you say so?

 

[SIA]

What about Peter Lombard? He couldn’t have made it any more clear that the Immculate Conception is Impossible. Can you show anything from Lombard to the contrary??

 

[swariffin]

They were not. Instead of trying to derail plain evidence that many of the ECF’s didn’t jive with the RCC’s Marian dogmas, you should attempt to refute the 12 examples I gave. It should be easy, right?

Please provide the proper references, as what writings, what chapter of the writings of those early fathers you quoted. Or, you are just like Pope Benedict who quoted someone, but deemed as saying it yourself. You are safe in the Catholic environment. In Pope Benedict case, involving Islam, you will have to hide.

 

[SIA]

Please provide the proper references, as what writings, what chapter of the writings of those early fathers you quoted. Or, you are just like Pope Benedict who quoted someone, but deemed as saying it yourself. You are safe in the Catholic environment. In Pope Benedict case, involving Islam, you will have to hide.

I wouldn’t be so sure.

And, why reveal the sources when by doing so, it will completely turn the direction of this thread to a debate upon the sources being deemed as anti-Catholic,

 

[coolduude]

Why don’t you just refute what they said?

And why can’t you provide proper citations? I mean, how hard can it be?

Your response is classic fundamentalist:

You start off trying to pin Catholics, or stun them in ths case.
Then, when you get asked a tough question, you dodge it with more questions.
You start off with a strong case, then dissolve from there.

So here’s my challenge to you, SIA:
Provide correct citations.

If you do that, proper rebuttals can be set in motion, but right now they are stalled because no one can figure this out.

Think of it as a late Christmas present.

 

[SIA]

And why can’t you provide proper citations? I mean, how hard can it be?

Your response is classic fundamentalist:

You start off trying to pin Catholics, or stun them in ths case.
Then, when you get asked a tough question, you dodge it with more questions.
You start off with a strong case, then dissolve from there.

So here’s my challenge to you, SIA:
Provide correct citations.

If you do that, proper rebuttals can be set in motion, but right now they are stalled because no one can figure this out.

Think of it as a late Christmas present.

Which ones are not correct?

 

[coolduude]

Which ones are not correct?

Not correct, I didn’t call you a liar.

Maybe a better word here would be “proper”.

By correct, I meant cite correctly.

 

[CHESTERTONRULES]

Which ones are not correct?

Difficult to know without citations, don’t you think?

The point is moot given that many doctrines of the Church were not held unanimously before they were declared, like the canon of the new testament.

Self proclaimed popes like you don’t need to bother with such details, apparently.

Shoot from the hip, then move on, right?

After all, your interpretation is all that matters.

 

[SIA]

Difficult to know without citations, don’t you think?

The point is moot given that many doctrines of the Church were not held unanimously before they were declared, like the canon of the new testament.

Self proclaimed popes like you don’t need to bother with such details, apparently.

Shoot from the hip, then move on, right?

After all, your interpretation is all that matters.

Your rhetoric doesn’t help here at all. I’ll ask again, which ones are not correct? Can you say that all twelve quotes are lies and fabrications on my part? Can you prove that all twelve actually do agree with the marian dogmas? This should be very simple for you.

 

[CHESTERTONRULES]

Your rhetoric doesn’t help here at all. I’ll ask again, which ones are not correct? Can you say that all twelve quotes are lies and fabrications on my part? Can you prove that all twelve actually do agree with the marian dogmas? This should be very simple for you.

Two points:

1. I’ve provided clear evidence that the quotes you provided do not represent the views of some of those quoted. You ignored the more clear quotes that I provided because they proved that you were attempting to hide the truth.
2. Unanimity among early Christians is irrelevant to the truth. Not even the New Testament Canon was held unanimously, yet you believe it to be true.

Your post has no substance.

 

[SIA]

Two points:

1. I’ve provided clear evidence that the quotes you provided do not represent the views of some of those quoted. You ignored the more clear quotes that I provided because they proved that you were attempting to hide the truth.
2. Unanimity among early Christians is irrelevant to the truth. Not even the New Testament Canon was held unanimously, yet you believe it to be true.

Not true at all. The NT was the result of the workings of the Holy Spirit. This is why I believe it to be true. If Catholic doctrines were developed amongst much opposition from the ECFs, it seriously muddies the waters of proof that the Early Church is indeed the Roman Catholic church of today. Truthfully, I think that this is the least of your problems.
Your post has no substance.

 

[CHESTERTONRULES]

Not true at all. The NT was the result of the workings of the Holy Spirit. This is why I believe it to be true. If Catholic doctrines were developed amongst much opposition from the ECFs, it seriously muddies the waters of proof that the Early Church is indeed the Roman Catholic church of today. Truthfully, I think that this is the least of your problems.
Your post has no substance.

All Church doctrine is a result of the working of the Holy Spirit, including the New Testament canon.

The point is that this canon was not a unanimous consensus of the early fathers.

You deny the truth that Jesus is leading the Church.

You think he is leading you but not the Church.

 

[SIA]

All Church doctrine is a result of the working of the Holy Spirit, including the New Testament canon.

The point is that this canon was not a unanimous consensus of the early fathers.

You deny the truth that Jesus is leading the Church.

You think he is leading you but not the Church.

He is leading his Church. I don’t believe however that his Church is exclusively the Roman Catholic church. That’s the difference.

 

[CHESTERTONRULES]

He is leading his Church. I don’t believe however that his Church is exclusively the Roman Catholic church. That’s the difference.

The fullness of truth is found in the Catholic Church, but his spirt is alive in all who follow him.

You believe that your understanding is more full than the teachings of his Church.

What is your authority?

 

[swariffin]

I wouldn’t be so sure.

And, why reveal the sources when by doing so, it will completely turn the direction of this thread to a debate upon the sources being deemed as anti-Catholic,

To read the context of the sentence you are quoting, my dear friend. You cannot take a sentence out of context to conclude anything. You are not a moslem, aren’t you?

 

[SIA]

To read the context of the sentence you are quoting, my dear friend. You cannot take a sentence out of context to conclude anything. You are not a moslem, aren’t you?

To declare something IMPOSSIBLE is hardly taking anything out of context. try again.

 

[SIA]

The fullness of truth is found in the Catholic Church, but his spirt is alive in all who follow him.

You believe that your understanding is more full than the teachings of his Church.

What is your authority?

What is my authority?? Why should I believe that the Holy Spirit can discernt only to the RCC? This sounds like Mormonism.

 

[CHESTERTONRULES]

What is my authority?? Why should I believe that the Holy Spirit can discernt only to the RCC? This sounds like Mormonism.

Yet again you ignore the question.

Why should you or I believe that you have an infallible interpretation of scripture?

 

[peary]

Why don’t you just refute what they said? Is it not true that Bernard opposed the new feast introduced at the time (The Immaculate Conception)? If that’s not true, then why don’t you say so?

Because YOU brought the argument up in discussion. It is YOUR responsibility to refute our Church’s doctrines using writings of the early Church Fathers, and citing them in at least half an intellectual way. It is not our responsibility to ‘refute’ anything. If I had to choose between Church teaching and your misunderstanding of doctrine, of course I would uphold Church teaching. I certainly wouldn’t swing over to your side because of such an incredibly weak argument on your part.