"The Church" scripture and ECF define it!

[Mannyfit75]

What I have is Christ! and the innerrant Scripture.
All else is the work of man.

How do you know about Jesus? Surely you learn it from some source. The Bible, or someone told you about Jesus.

The Catholic Church is founded by Jesus Christ. He built it upon Peter, as its Prime Minister, and this authority was past down through the Apostles’ successors, who are the bishops.

Jesus GAVE them the authority, and Jesus gave us an authoritative Church, who gave us the Bible. Jesus is the source of the Church.

The Church is also the Mystical Body of Christ, and is also the Bride of Christ.

Jesus said to Saul, “Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?”

Who is Paul persecuting? The Church. So Jesus is the source of our faith, he founded this Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.

 

[myfavoritmartin]

I will not respond to anything directed at me unless it has to do with this thread. Period. If you guys want to carry on about me go ahead.

Psalm 75
1 We give thanks to you, O God,
we give thanks, for your Name is near;
men tell of your wonderful deeds.
2 You say, "I choose the appointed time;
it is I who judge uprightly.
3 When the earth and all its people quake,
it is I who hold its pillars firm.
Selah

Peace and Blessing,
a servant of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.
Simon

 

[myfavoritmartin]

Chosen carefully? It’s known history that Sts. Peter and Paul laid the foundations of the Church in Rome. This does not negate Peter’s role of primacy…

The argument you can make is in Antioch not Rome, We know Peter alone was succeeded there.

Eusebius
Ignatius, the second to be appointed to the bishopric of Antioch in succession to Peter.

 

[Eden]

I will not respond to anything directed at me unless it has to do with this thread. Period. If you guys want to carry on about me go ahead.

O.K. Then can you please explain how St. Ignatius’ Epistle to the Trallians, and specifically the quote cited by Eric Svendsen as being anti-Church hierarchy and anti-visible Church can be translated as such when the quote in question was from a chapter entitled “Honor the deacons, etc”? And the same chapter reads, only a few sentences prior, “In like manner, let all reverence the deacons as an appointment of Jesus Christ, and the bishop as Jesus Christ, who is the Son of the Father, and the presbyters as the sanhedrin of God, and assembly of the apostles. Apart from these, there is no Church.”

Are you willing to admit that Svendsen’s quote that you provided, which was supposed to be anti-visible Church, anti-hierarchy and essentially anti-Catholic, is actually none of the above? Further, are you willing to admit that St. Ignatius states that apart from the hierarchy ordained by Jesus Christ, there is no Church?

 

[Mannyfit75]

I will not respond to anything directed at me unless it has to do with this thread. Period. If you guys want to carry on about me go ahead.

Psalm 75
1 We give thanks to you, O God,
we give thanks, for your Name is near;
men tell of your wonderful deeds.
2 You say, "I choose the appointed time;
it is I who judge uprightly.
3 When the earth and all its people quake,
it is I who hold its pillars firm.
Selah

Peace and Blessing,
a servant of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.
Simon

Mannyfit75 gives you specific scriptural references as to the teaching authority of the Church (the Catholic Church): you do not address his citations and what they plainly mean.

I gave those citation and they are directed at you, martin.

 

[Eden]

The argument you can make is in Antioch not Rome, We know Peter alone was succeeded there.

Eusebius
Ignatius, the second to be appointed to the bishopric of Antioch in succession to Peter.

While that’s interesting, it does not negate the primacy of Peter, the primacy of the Bishop of Rome or negate the validity of the papacy. The foundations of the Church were laid at Rome, not Antioch. The Bishop of Rome has primacy through Peter, not the Bishop of Antioch.

Also Eusebius:

The Little Labyrinth

Victor . . . was the thirteenth bishop of Rome from Peter (The Little Labyrinth [A.D. 211], in Eusebius, Church History 5:28:3).

 

[Mannyfit75]

The argument you can make is in Antioch not Rome, We know Peter alone was succeeded there.

Eusebius
Ignatius, the second to be appointed to the bishopric of Antioch in succession to Peter.

Peter was in Rome. If you read his Epistles, Babylon is the code name for Rome.

“By Silvanus, our faithful brother as I consider him, I have written to you briefly, exhorting and testifying that this is the true grace of God in which you stand. She who is in BABYLON, elect together with you, greets you; and so does Mark my son. Greet one another with a kiss of love. Peace to you all who are in Christ Jesus. Amen.”

(1 PETER 5:12-14 NKJV)

Historian John Norman Davidson Kelly states, “It seems certain that Peter spent his closing years in Rome. Although the NT appears silent about such a stay, it is supported by 1 Peter 5:13, where ‘BABYLON’ is a code-name for ROME, and by the strong case for linking the Gospel of Mark, who as Peter’s companion (1 Pet 5:13) is said to have derived its substance from him, with Rome. To early writers like Clement of Rome (c. 95), Ignatius of Antioch (c. 107), and Irenaeus (c. 180) it was common knowledge that he worked and died in Rome.”

 

[Mannyfit75]

martin,

If you wish to discuss the issue concerning Peter’s being in Rome read this article. It’s a debate between Protestant and a Catholic concerning Peter being in Rome.

bringyou.to/apologetics/num13.htm

 

[The_Catholic]

I will not respond to anything directed at me unless it has to do with this thread. Period. If you guys want to carry on about me go ahead.

LOL, We love you bro. God bless you.

 

[myfavoritmartin]

Also Eusebius:

The Little Labyrinth

Victor . . . was the thirteenth bishop of Rome from Peter (The Little Labyrinth [A.D. 211], in Eusebius, Church History 5:28:3).

Me thinks your quote is not accurate if I recall Eusibius uses the term apostle(s)… and “peter and paul”

As such…

Eusebius
Xystus, Bishop of Rome for a decade, was succeeded by the seventh from the apostles

and such…
221Chapter VI.—Catalogue of the Bishops of Rome.

1. “The blessed apostles having founded and established the church, entrusted the office of the episcopate to Linus.

A link to that comment saying “from Peter” would be great… I cant find the "little labrynth its not at ccel.

 

[myfavoritmartin]

Peter was in Rome. If you read his Epistles, Babylon is the code name for Rome.

“By Silvanus, our faithful brother as I consider him, I have written to you briefly, exhorting and testifying that this is the true grace of God in which you stand. She who is in BABYLON, elect together with you, greets you; and so does Mark my son. Greet one another with a kiss of love. Peace to you all who are in Christ Jesus. Amen.”

(1 PETER 5:12-14 NKJV)

Historian John Norman Davidson Kelly states, “It seems certain that Peter spent his closing years in Rome. Although the NT appears silent about such a stay, it is supported by 1 Peter 5:13, where ‘BABYLON’ is a code-name for ROME, and by the strong case for linking the Gospel of Mark, who as Peter’s companion (1 Pet 5:13) is said to have derived its substance from him, with Rome. To early writers like Clement of Rome (c. 95), Ignatius of Antioch (c. 107), and Irenaeus (c. 180) it was common knowledge that he worked and died in Rome.”

Manny, the best of Church historians don’t know if he was or wasn’t…
That isn’t the point I am saying, that you’ll not find ECF’s pre 200 save 1 (ireneaus 189ish) and thats questionable that attach peter alone to the bishop of rome and they also don’t recognize the “claim” that Rome has had universal authority since Matt 16.
My point is the “institution” that has claimed to have been since Christ, when evaluated closely the historic proof is simply not there.

 

[myfavoritmartin]

myfavoritmartin;1803540:

I will not respond to anything directed at me unless it has to do with this thread. Period. If you guys want to carry on about me go ahead.

LOL, We love you bro. God bless you.

Love you too, my brother…
Afterall its all for HIM… right!
He is worthy to be sought!
Simon

 

[Mannyfit75]

Manny, the best of Church historians don’t know if he was or wasn’t…
That isn’t the point I am saying, that you’ll not find ECF’s pre 200 save 1 (ireneaus 189ish) and thats questionable that attach peter alone to the bishop of rome and they also don’t recognize the “claim” that Rome has had universal authority since Matt 16.
My point is the “institution” that has claimed to have been since Christ, when evaluated closely the historic proof is simply not there.

Did you read my post on Vatican document,“Lumen Gentium?”

It states a quote by St. Clement of Rome in 97 A.D concerning the Catholic Church.

I’ll repost it to you just in case you didn’t read it.

More of the context of the whole of Scripture is this: at once after the
ascension, the Apostles began their mission of teaching In Acts 1:15-26 a
replacement for one of the Twelve is chosen, Matthias. Acts 2:42 reports
that the people “devoted themselves to the teaching of the Apostles” and in
Acts 5:13: “No one of the rest dared to join himself to them [the Apostles]
but the people magnified them.” So all did understand from the start that
it was the Apostles, and they alone who had the commission from Christ to
teach. St. Paul constantly teaches with authority. Pope St. Clement I, in
an Epistle to Corinth c. 95 AD, intervened with authority. He said: “Our
Apostles knew through our Lord Jesus Christ that there would be strife over
the name of Bishop. As a result, having received full foreknowledge, they
appointed those we have mentioned, and meanwhile added a provision that if
these would fall asleep [die] other approved men should receive their
ministry.”

St. Irenaeus Bishop of Lyons, who had listened to St. Polycarp telling of the preaching of St. John the Apostle, wrote that since it was long to go through the succession of Bishops in all the churches, he would speak of Rome, “founded by the two most glorious Apostles, Peter and Paul, which
holds the tradition and faith announced by the Apostles, coming down by the succession of Bishops even to us…It is necessary that every church…agree with this church because of its more important principality…in which the tradition coming from the Apostles has always been kept…”

 

[Mannyfit75]

Manny, the best of Church historians don’t know if he was or wasn’t…
That isn’t the point I am saying, that you’ll not find ECF’s pre 200 save 1 (ireneaus 189ish) and thats questionable that attach peter alone to the bishop of rome and they also don’t recognize the “claim” that Rome has had universal authority since Matt 16.
My point is the “institution” that has claimed to have been since Christ, when evaluated closely the historic proof is simply not there.

Peter was martyred in Rome and many ECF knew that Peter was in Rome. I pointed out to you the verse this verse, “By Silvanus, our faithful brother as I consider him, I have written to you briefly, exhorting and testifying that this is the true grace of God in which you stand. She who is in BABYLON, elect together with you, greets you; and so does Mark my son. Greet one another with a kiss of love. Peace to you all who are in Christ Jesus. Amen.” (1 PETER 5:12-14)

 

[Mannyfit75]

“Through envy and jealousy, the greatest and most righteous pillars [of the Church] have been persecuted and put to death. Let us set before our eyes the illustrious apostles. Peter, through unrighteous envy, endured not one or two, but numerous labours and when he had at length suffered martyrdom, departed to the place of glory due to him.” Clement of Rome, The First Epistle of Clement, 5 (c. A.D. 96).

“I do not, as Peter and Paul, issue commandments unto you.” Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to the Romans, 4 (c. A.D. 110).

‘You have thus by such an admonition bound together the plantings of Peter and Paul at Rome and Corinth." Dionysius of Corinth, Epistle to Pope Soter, fragment in Eusebius’ Church History, II:25 (c. A.D. 178).

“Matthew also issued a written Gospel among the Hebrews in their own dialect, while Peter and Paul were preaching at Rome, and laying the foundations of the Church.” Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 3:1:1 (c. A.D. 180).

“As Peter had preached the Word publicly at Rome, and declared the Gospel by the Spirit, many who were present requested that Mark, who had followed him for a long time and remembered his sayings, should write them out.” Clement of Alexandria, fragment in Eusebius Church History, VI:14,6 (A.D.** 190)**

“It is, therefore, recorded that Paul was beheaded in Rome itself, and that Peter likewise was crucified under Nero. This account of Peter and Paul is substantiated by the fact that their names are preserved in the cemeteries of that place even to the present day. It is confirmed likewise by Caius, a member of the Church, who arose under Zephyrinus, bishop of Rome. He, in a published disputation with Proclus, the leader of the Phrygian heresy, speaks as follows concerning the places where the sacred corpses of the aforesaid apostles are laid: ‘But I can show the trophies of the apostles. For if you will go to the Vatican or to the Ostian way, you will find the trophies of those who laid the foundations of this church.’” Gaius, fragment in Eusebius’ Church History, 2:25 (A.D. 198).

“[W]hat utterance also the Romans give, so very near (to the apostles), to whom Peter and Paul conjointly bequeathed the gospel even sealed with their own blood.” Tertullian, Against Marcion, 4:5 (inter A.D. 207-212).

 

[Mannyfit75]

The archeological proof of the existence of St. Peters tomb under St. Peters basilica in Rome.

"Nero...publicly announcing himself as the first among God's chief enemies, he was led on to the slaughter of the apostles. It is, therefore, recorded that Paul was beheaded in Rome itself, and that Peter likewise was crucified under Nero. This account of Peter and Paul is substantiated by the fact that their names are preserved in the cemeteries of that place even to the present day. It is confirmed likewise by Caius, a member of the Church, who arose under Zephyrinus, bishop of Rome [about 200 AD.]. He, in a published disputation with Proclus, the leader of the Phrygian heresy, speaks as follows concerning the places where the sacred corpses of the aforesaid apostles are laid: "But I can show the trophies of the apostles. For if you will go to the Vatican or to the Ostian way, you will find the trophies of those who laid the foundations of this church." And that they both suffered martyrdom at the same time is stated by Dionysius, bishop of Corinth, in his epistle to the Romans, in the following words: "You have thus by such an admonition bound together the planting of Peter and of Paul at Rome and Corinth." [Eusebius, [A.D. 303] (Church History 2:25:5-8)]

catholicapologetics.net/apolo_74 Source of the Information. Read it.

scripturecatholic.com Read this even though you disagree with its views.

 

[myfavoritmartin]

Peter was martyred in Rome and many ECF knew that Peter was in Rome. I pointed out to you the verse this verse, “By Silvanus, our faithful brother as I consider him, I have written to you briefly, exhorting and testifying that this is the true grace of God in which you stand. She who is in BABYLON, elect together with you, greets you; and so does Mark my son. Greet one another with a kiss of love. Peace to you all who are in Christ Jesus. Amen.” (1 PETER 5:12-14)

I told you I am not arguing this, stop and read… I said all the ECF’s recognize Peter and Paul, never just PETER at least until 189 ad PLEASE befare you put 2000 letter posts up respond to what I say about the thread. Not what you want to tell,sheesh.

 

[Mannyfit75]

I told you I am not arguing this, stop and read… I said all the ECF’s recognize Peter and Paul, never just PETER at least until 189 ad PLEASE befare you put 2000 letter posts up respond to what I say about the thread. Not what you want to tell,sheesh.

Relax for crying out loud. Where is your charity?

 

[myfavoritmartin]

"Through envy and jealousy, the greatest and most righteous pillars [of the Church] have been persecuted and put to death. Let us set before our eyes the illustrious apostles.

“I do not, as Peter **and **Paul, issue commandments unto you.” Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to the Romans, 4 (c. A.D. 110).

‘You have thus by such an admonition bound together the plantings of Peter** and** Paul at Rome and Corinth." Dionysius of Corinth, Epistle to Pope Soter, fragment in Eusebius’ Church History, II:25 (c. A.D. 178).

“Matthew also issued a written Gospel among the Hebrews in their own dialect, while Peter and Paul were preaching at Rome, and laying the foundations of the Church.” Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 3:1:1 (c. A.D. 180).

“[W]hat utterance also the Romans give, so very near (to the apostles), to whom Peter **and **Paul conjointly bequeathed the gospel even sealed with their own blood.” Tertullian, Against Marcion, 4:5 (inter A.D. 207-212).

I highlighted the facts Emmanual, the 2 posts I deleted had nothingto do with Universal authority or succesion directly from Peter as opposed to(PETER AND PAUL).
Like I said You’ll find nothing pre-189 that says the bishopric was handed from Peter to …pick your first pope.

 

[myfavoritmartin]

Relax for crying out loud. Where is your charity?

Sorry, you guys yell at me for not responding, then I get 800 words to respond too, feel my pain?
Blessings Emmanuel!
Simon