S
steve-b
Guest
I’m trying,
But
There is so much misspelling, and sentence construction errors, in your posts, it’s hard to even read let alone understand what you post. And you don’t quote your references properly.
- Status
But
There is so much misspelling, and sentence construction errors, in your posts, it’s hard to even read let alone understand what you post. And you don’t quote your references properly.
H
historyfan81
Guest
sorry mate good at reading not writting
el ingles no es mi lengua nativa
el ingles no es mi lengua nativa
S
steve-b
Guest
Y también explica algunos de los errores que ha cometido.
H
historyfan81
Guest
si por eso prefiero los debates hablando , porque leer aparte de mi mala ortografia , tambien causa mucha interpretacion en el leedor
S
steve-b
Guest
"Si supiera de un foro en español, lo recomendaría.
H
historyfan81
Guest
eh no muchos catolicos en latinoamerica son… extremistas hable esto con los catolicos de mi pais
tuve miedo de pegado por estos
tuve miedo de pegado por estos
M
mcq72
Guest
Which bishop? Do you think Rome is size of Philadelphia or the other churches where one bishop would suffice? Or as homogeneous in language and culture and origin as other cities?
He does not acknowledge anyone in Rome, bishop or otherwise if i recall. He had never been there nor been met by any party from Rome as was the case for his other letter recipients.
Furthermore, still hold that a monarchal episcopacy was not in place yet in Rome at this time. That is not to say Clement or others were not head of a church council, made up of presbyters/ bishops within Rome’s “church”.
And he makes no mention of a head bishop anywhere . He makes zero mention that all bishops are to heed the bishop of Rome as head.
Well apparently not too much for Ignatius feared the church might intercede for him and save him from execution. And Syria was any safer for bishops, or of other Roman cities?
Perhaps, but havent read that. It would mean it may have taken a decade from his arrest to execution. Seems a bit long for justice to be carried out…maybe up to a few years or even 5, but 10 or more ? Everistus or Alexander would seem like better possibilities.( based on 107 ad execution).
Not sure but is Ignatius the one who tells a church to appoint themselves a bishop ( lost their bishop?) ?
Last edited:
M
mcq72
Guest
Last edited:
S
steve-b
Guest
steve-b:
mcq72:
this is how Ignatius teaches. See Ignatius ch’s 6-8
Because these letters of his were written when he was under arrest and headed for Rome to be thrown to the lions, I think it safe to say, he doesn’t name names in these letters for their safety.
Besides, We know later, who the bishops are by name in all those locations
mcq72:
For space issues I will answer that in the next post
Last edited:
S
steve-b
Guest
continued
Jesus, said this about Peter after the apostles were in an argument over authority. And notice who got them in that argument. It was Satan.
Lk 22:
24 A dispute also arose among them, which of them was to be regarded as the greatest. 25 And he said to them, “The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and those in authority over them are called benefactors. 26 But not so with you; rather let the greatest among you become as the youngest, and the leader ἡγούμενος as one who serves. 27 For which is the greater, one who sits at table, or one who serves? Is it not the one who sits at table? But I am among you as one who serves. 28 “You are those who have continued with me in my trials; 29 as my Father appointed a kingdom for me, so do I appoint for you 30 that you may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel. 31 “Simon, Simon, behold, Satan demanded to have you,[[d] that he might sift you[[e] like wheat, 32 but I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail; and when you have turned again, strengthen your brethren.”
IOW
Jesus singles Peter out again in front of the others, saying Peter is the leader, the one who will rule. . (settling their argument over who is greatest among THEM) then that described in the Greek
Lk 22:26 ἡγούμενος
Peter is
Peter is to lead, feed, rule, command, have authority over the churches, govern, and control in counsels… make stable his brothers, strengthen them, and confirm them…and be the chief spokesman. And it goes without saying, Jesus expects the apostles to follow Peter’s lead. (look at the definition above for [ ἡγούμενος ]. That ends the apostle’s argument and every body elses…
And let’s not forget John 17:18-23 there is to be zero division in Our Lord’s plan
All that should also answer the required communion with 1 bishop.
Gee, Sounds like Jesus describes and defends the papacy and His One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church
AND
Peter’s office continues when he dies. And Peter’s last see was Rome. So that is where Peter’s succession continues from.
He really didn’t have to. Jesus already did that.
Jesus, said this about Peter after the apostles were in an argument over authority. And notice who got them in that argument. It was Satan.
Lk 22:
24 A dispute also arose among them, which of them was to be regarded as the greatest. 25 And he said to them, “The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and those in authority over them are called benefactors. 26 But not so with you; rather let the greatest among you become as the youngest, and the leader ἡγούμενος as one who serves. 27 For which is the greater, one who sits at table, or one who serves? Is it not the one who sits at table? But I am among you as one who serves. 28 “You are those who have continued with me in my trials; 29 as my Father appointed a kingdom for me, so do I appoint for you 30 that you may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel. 31 “Simon, Simon, behold, Satan demanded to have you,[[d] that he might sift you[[e] like wheat, 32 but I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail; and when you have turned again, strengthen your brethren.”
IOW
Jesus singles Peter out again in front of the others, saying Peter is the leader, the one who will rule. . (settling their argument over who is greatest among THEM) then that described in the Greek
Lk 22:26 ἡγούμενος
Peter is
- to lead …
a) to go before
b) to be a leader - to rule, command
- to have authority over
- a prince, of regal power, governor, viceroy, chief, leading as respects influence, controlling in counsel, overseers or leaders of the churches
- used of any kind of leader, chief, commander
- the leader in speech, chief, spokesmana)to rule, govern
- of rulers
- to furnish pasture for food
- to nourish
- to cherish one’s body, to serve the body
- to supply the requisites for the soul’s need
Peter is to lead, feed, rule, command, have authority over the churches, govern, and control in counsels… make stable his brothers, strengthen them, and confirm them…and be the chief spokesman. And it goes without saying, Jesus expects the apostles to follow Peter’s lead. (look at the definition above for [ ἡγούμενος ]. That ends the apostle’s argument and every body elses…
And let’s not forget John 17:18-23 there is to be zero division in Our Lord’s plan
All that should also answer the required communion with 1 bishop.
Gee, Sounds like Jesus describes and defends the papacy and His One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church
AND
Peter’s office continues when he dies. And Peter’s last see was Rome. So that is where Peter’s succession continues from.
Last edited:
L
Lenten_ashes
Guest
Spanish class many years back:
Instructor: Learn enough Spanish to form a sentence, then share it with the class on Thursday.
Me after forgetting my assignment and winging it when called upon: “Chilli con queso es bueno”.
Oh, the laughs this provided for the class the rest of the semester.
Instructor: Learn enough Spanish to form a sentence, then share it with the class on Thursday.
Me after forgetting my assignment and winging it when called upon: “Chilli con queso es bueno”.
Oh, the laughs this provided for the class the rest of the semester.
S
steve-b
Guest
To your points,
As I’ve been saying, dates are best estimates. If I get a date wrong, or a pope, based on a date, we have an accurae list of seccessors to Peter, and We know who followed who, in direct succession from Peter.
So
Here is a list with dates, of popes that would potentially be there during the time of Ignatius being arrested and sent to Rome… Depending on source one uses, the dates probably vary, but the succession of bishops from Peter, is there.
- St. Peter (32-67)
- St. Linus (67-76)
- St. Anacletus (Cletus) (76-88)
- St. Clement I (88-97)
- St. Evaristus (97-105)
- St. Alexander I (105-115)
- St. Sixtus I (115-125) Also called Xystus I
etc
Last edited:
M
mcq72
Guest
Jesus appointed twelve apostles. Apostles appointed others. Ignatius mentions some of these appointments, but no mention of appointment of head bishop.
Last edited:
M
mcq72
Guest
Oh really? So where Peter last resides, those bishop appointees stand in line for papacy, nullifying chances of any bishop ordained by Peter elsewhere (Antioch, Corinth etc).? Ok, i understand.
As to lists of Roman bishops, that is what they are. There are lists of successive bishops of other cities also. Iranaeus says so. It is another step to insist the bishop of Rome is chief over other bishops. Iranaeus cites a place of honor for Rome, due to blood of Paul and Peter there, even to be unified behind them ( and church)… but i would not say it is claim for technical supreme juridiction over all bishops…one of honor and unity yes.
Ignatius, though specific for citing church offices many times says zero here. In fact when he vacates his office after arrest, cites his church is now only under God as their bishop.
M
mcq72
Guest
Jesus does not single out explicitly here. Jesus does not say Peter will be the greatest.
The reference to Satan is future
…but yes agree the attack, sifting, was strategic, as if to take down a semi announced leader of apostles
Still strongly believe the words Jesus uses to describe what a true servant is was for all the apostles to apply to their own ministry.
Last edited:
S
steve-b
Guest
Popes also ordain bishops. That doesn’t make each of those ordinations popes.steve-b:
Oh really? So where Peter last resides, those bishop appointees stand in line for papacy, nullifying chances of any bishop ordained by Peter elsewhere (Antioch, Corinth etc).? Ok, i understand.
As to lists of Roman bishops, that is what they are. There are lists of successive bishops of other cities also. Iranaeus says so. It is another step to insist the bishop of Rome is chief over other bishops. Iranaeus cites a place of honor for Rome, due to blood of Paul and Peter there, even to be unified behind them ( and church)… but i would not say it is claim for technical supreme juridiction over all bishops…one of honor and unity yes.
Irenaeus makes a specitic point and explains why he makes that point.
HERE
Note: Irenaeus mentions names here, Clement being one of them, and what he and others he mentioned did, which Ignatius didn’t mention in any of HIS letters. Both bishops, Ignatius and Irenaeus, had different themes they stressed.
Do you know how a valid bishop is validly ordained
Last edited:
S
steve-b
Guest
Jesus said one of THEM will be the greatest. Ergo He validated the point the apostles were arguing over. Who is the only one Jesus mentions in this dialogue He’s having with His apostles? He switches tense. He changes from you plural to you singular. Peter is the one Jesus prays for. Peter is the one to strengthen THEM, the apostles. Jesus from the beginning selected Peter to be the leader.steve-b:
Jesus does not single out explicitly here. Jesus does not say Peter will be the greatest.
Satan (present tense) got them into the argument over who is the greatest
AND
Satan entered Judas while he was still at table. . Satan has been tagging along all the way through Jesus public life. Jesus saw Him, no one else could.
True.
But Jesus also established one of them (PETER) as the leader
Last edited:
S
steve-b
Guest
We know from 2000 yrs of history going back to Peter, that we have to date, 266 successors to Peter down to our day.steve-b:
Jesus appointed twelve apostles. Apostles appointed others. Ignatius mentions some of these appointments, but no mention of appointment of head bishop.
M
mcq72
Guest
Did he ?
Someone yes, but again only cites qualifications, not who specifically.
Yes, but does that mean he is the greatest, or to be seated at the Kings right hand?
M
mcq72
Guest
What is the word, anachronistically ?
Just saying Ignatius and Iranaeus do not cite head bishop, and both had perfect contextual opportunity for such a thing in their writings.
- Status