You jogged my memory here:
I am inspired by both C.S. Lewis and St John Henry Newman. For myself, I resonated with C.S. Lewis ecumenical view of everyone having the choice (door) to choose what they believe in, after a deep period of consideration (gathering room). However, coming from a similar background of faith as he is, I would consider him to no longer be a part of the Anglican church in present time. I am generally of the opinion that he might go towards the traditional anglican church or the orthodox church, there’s of course the slim possibility of him going into the ordinariate church. With the change in times of the anglican church to suit the world, it is tough to hold on to the anglo-catholic faith.
Well the religious leaders of the one, true religion of God at the time also thought they were deep in history and its traditions, and didn’t think they needed any saving much less reform, putting such things on the cross.
Why is this so damaging? It is but one of 1000s of quotes by one of 1000s of persons. The quote is not unknown. I would expect pretty much any non-Catholic and Catholic for that matter to have come accross it by doing some elementary history searches.
His argument was solid.steve-b:
Is “preeminent authority” the best translation of “potiorem principalitatem”?
Is any of the original Greek of St. Irenaeus’ work still extant or only Latin translations?
On what basis do you say this? You didn’t answer my question regarding either the Latin or whether the original Greek text exists.
So you say! From your paradigm and bias. How do you not get that?
It gets back to the term separated brethrensteve-b:
And yet, with regard to Romanian Orthodox,
Are you saying the Pope dares to call schismatics his “brother and sister?”
That’s rich, considering your post I was responding to (that appears to have been deleted) seemed to imply that schismatic Orthodox were of Satan.
No he wasn’t but by the time you “Actaully look into his very well known works” then you may post something meaningful with or at least “a little substance”. Till now you were only repeating what you have been taught. And I am sure yourself will condemn this. So try once more
Oh yeah, another biblical term…not
Lewis & Newman were both Anglican Protestant.steve-b:
And I like C.S.Lewis , who I think came to faith , choosing Protestantism over Catholicism, who had history teach him that,
“the unhistorical, without knowing it, are usually enslaved to a fairly recent past”.
You probably see it as a protestant problem where I see more as a Catholic problem. The more I study history, the more I understand the reformers, and the more I understand Orthodox opposition to Catholic papacy. The popes of our “recent past” give a very narrow image of what they were in the past. It seems some medieval popes didn’t study or understand the earliest popes either.
Historical acuity is in eyes of the beholder.
Seek and you will find, but may the grace of God aid what we seek.
What melts wax hardens clay.
One thief continued to mock Jesus, the other came to love Him. Both thought they had the correct Historical acuity.
Lives of the Popes : Michael J Walsh : 9781876142759
I didn’t say that.steve-b:
That’s rich, considering your post I was responding to (that appears to have been deleted) seemed to imply that schismatic Orthodox were of Satan.
Irenaeus is a Catholic bishop. He’s one man in time, from (Bp Polycarp) , who was a direct disciple of John. Irenaeus gave his sources when making his points. He names, 12 bishops in succession from Peter in Rome down to his day.steve-b:
On what basis do you say this? You didn’t answer my question regarding either the Latin or whether the original Greek text exists.
In my opinion some Catholics here on this thread use scripture and tradition to show what I feel they are saying, that there is a three tiered status of Christians or their churches,communities, even a type of ranking as I posted.( first stringers, second stringers, third stringers using the sporting terminology).
Technicalities again. But of course you didnt say that. You said scripture says that.
That saying in your other way, to be Catholic, might fit Newman’s beliefs.
What are you, Steve, saying? Nothing of what you quote (with proper references) reflects your own opinion? And this was not the first time in this thread you quoted scripture to make that implication.
You’ve been quite clear in your properly referenced quotes, that you believe Satan is the cause of division, and that the Orthodox are divided. What other conclusion am I supposed to reach?
You’ve said this already, many times, but that doesn’t change the fact that immediately prior to listing the bishops of Rome, St. Irenaeus states he doesn’t have the time (or presumably ink and scrolls) to write out all the bishops of all the churches, but says rather that since everyone knows of Rome, a listing of these will as an example to demonstrate his point regarding the entire church.
There are so many religions out there, that it may be difficult for a person to believe that her religion of choice is not the best choice for her. I notice that other subjects have universal agreement. For example, everyone agrees that there exist polynomials of degree 5 which are not solvable by radicals.