White's Papacy argument

[MarcoPolo]

Hi polo:thumbsup:

 

[PhilVaz]

fav << We already know from Holy Scripture though that people wrote letters to people outside their jurisdiction, most consider Corinth to be in the Roman Patriarchate. >>

All righty, I give up. Who was the first pope? Are you a Gregory the Great (c. AD 590) man, or a Leo the Great (c. AD 440 - 461), or maybe it was "Emperor Constantine" ?

“According to him [St. Augustine], the Church is the realm of Christ, His mystical body and His bride, the mother of Christians [Ep 34:3; Serm 22:9]. There is no salvation apart from it; schismatics can have the faith and sacraments…but cannot put them to a profitable use since the Holy Spirit is only bestowed in the Church [De bapt 4:24; 7:87; Serm ad Caes 6]…It goes without saying that Augustine identifies the Church with the universal Catholic Church of his day, with its hierarchy and sacraments, and with its centre at Rome…By the middle of the fifth century the Roman church had established, de jure as well as de facto, a position of primacy in the West, and the papal claims to supremacy over all bishops of Christendom had been formulated in precise terms…The student tracing the history of the times, particularly of the Arian, Donatist, Pelagian and Christological controversies, cannot fail to be impressed by the skill and persistence with which the Holy See [of Rome] was continually advancing and consolidating its claims. Since its occupant was accepted as the successor of St. Peter, and prince of the apostles, it was easy to draw the inference that the unique authority which Rome in fact enjoyed, and which the popes saw concentrated in their persons and their office, was no more than the fulfilment of the divine plan.” (JND Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines, page 412, 413, 417)

Phil P

 

[myfavoritmartin]

All righty, I give up. Who was the first pope? Are you a Gregory the Great (c. AD 590) man, or a Leo the Great (c. AD 440 - 461), or maybe it was

Well i’d have to agree with Dr.Schaff and Dr. Shelley, that Leo was the first to give a theological basis for his claim.

 

[catholic1seeks]

Fav:

Good enough? See, I would argue this as the faith of billions are in the fold, that being the case one would think it would be fairly clear.

God has already protected this faith “of billions” since the gates of hell have not prevailed and will not prevail against His Church.

What can we say about everything non-Catholic? Partial truth. That faith is “in the fold”. We can only trust that the fullness of truth resides in Christ’s Church, an authority that God created to protect the faith “of billions” from becoming “in the fold”.

*“The truth will set you free.” *

 

[myfavoritmartin]

Okay I give up are you trying to convince me that Kelly was Catholic? or fighting to prove people believed in the papacy in Augustines time? 4th-5th century stuff is not real convincing in my opinion, Augustine held the Roman church and its bishop in high regard, but he had a non-papal view of church government.
Even Catholic theologians like Robert Eno will agree with this.

 

[Mannyfit75]

Okay I give up are you trying to convince me that Kelly was Catholic? or fighting to prove people believed in the papacy in Augustines time? 4th-5th century stuff is not real convincing in my opinion, Augustine held the Roman church and its bishop in high regard, but he had a non-papal view of church government. Even Catholic theologians like Robert Eno will agree with this.

On the contrary, martin, Augustine did view the Church had authority. “But I would not believe in the Gospel, had not the authority of the Catholic Church already moved me.” (St. Augustine, Contra epistolam Manichaei 5, 6: PL 42, 176.)

 

[myfavoritmartin]

On the contrary, martin, Augustine did view the Church had authority. “But I would not believe in the Gospel, had not the authority of the Catholic Church already moved me.” (St. Augustine, Contra epistolam Manichaei 5, 6: PL 42, 176.)

Your arguing with Robert Eno in this case not me…Authority in council NOT papacy…

Elsewhere I have argued in detail Augustine’s views of authority in the Church and that, in my opinion, the council [not the Pope] was the primary instrument for settling controversies…I believe that Augustine had great respect for the Roman church whose antiquity and apostolic origins made it outshine by far other churches in the West. But as with Cyprian, the African collegial and conciliar tradition was to be preferred most of the time." (The Rise of the Papacy [Wilmington, Delaware: Michael Glazier, 1990], p. 79)

 

[Pax]

Your arguing with Robert Eno in this case not me…Authority in council NOT papacy…

Elsewhere I have argued in detail Augustine’s views of authority in the Church and that, in my opinion, the council [not the Pope] was the primary instrument for settling controversies…I believe that Augustine had great respect for the Roman church whose antiquity and apostolic origins made it outshine by far other churches in the West. But as with Cyprian, the African collegial and conciliar tradition was to be preferred most of the time." (The Rise of the Papacy [Wilmington, Delaware: Michael Glazier, 1990], p. 79)

Do you believe that these are mutually exclusive? It seems that Peter spoke authoritatively at the Council of Jerusalem and that both his words and the determination of the Council were authoritative. Moreover, IMHO, there is no more scriptural proof or tradition for the authority of a council exclusive of leadership than there is for the papacy itself. This seems clear especially since the pattern resembles that of the Jewish Sanhedrin which the NT Church hierarchy clearly replaces.

 

[myfavoritmartin]

Do you believe that these are mutually exclusive? It seems that Peter spoke authoritatively at the Council of Jerusalem and that both his words and the determination of the Council were authoritative. Moreover, IMHO, there is no more scriptural proof or tradition for the authority of a council exclusive of leadership than there is for the papacy itself. This seems clear especially since the pattern resembles that of the Jewish Sanhedrin which the NT Church hierarchy clearly replaces.

I believe using Augustine as evidence for a papacy skips a handful of CENTURIES.
You think the papacy is comparable to the NT church? How so?

 

[Pax]

The presentation on this is a bit lengthy and would take perhaps four posts to put up on the forum. If you want, I suppose I can do it, but it might be preferable to send it to you via an email file. Just give me an email address by PM and I’ll send it to you.

The connection between the OT Sanhedrin and the NT Church hierarchy is not my original work. It was prepared by a poster named StevenG prior to the great forum crash. If that link was still available I would post it up, but alas it is gone.

If you want the info just give me a PM with an email address.

 

[myfavoritmartin]

The presentation on this is a bit lengthy and would take perhaps four posts to put up on the forum. If you want, I suppose I can do it, but it might be preferable to send it to you via an email file. Just give me an email address by PM and I’ll send it to you.

The connection between the OT Sanhedrin and the NT Church hierarchy is not my original work. It was prepared by a poster named StevenG prior to the great forum crash. If that link was still available I would post it up, but alas it is gone.

If you want the info just give me a PM with an email address.

Appreciate and look forward to it PAX…

 

[Therese_Martin]

Note:

This thread is closed. Thanks to all who participated in the discussion.