Posted on 02/28/2008 6:25:40 AM PST by Manfred the Wonder Dawg
ROMAN CATHOLICISM: A DIFFERENT GOSPEL
In their lust for unity the Emergent Church and post-evangelical “Protestants” are right now embracing the Roman Catholic Church as another Christian denomination. But the issue is simple: If, as taught the Church of Rome, no one can enter the Kingdom of God without “the new birth in baptism” then we are now in hopeless contradiction with the Gospel contained in Holy Scripture.
But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. (Galatians 1:8)
Speaking The Truth In Love
Let me make this as clear as I possibly can for the Roman Catholics who may read this work in Christ from Apprising Ministries. I personally am former member of the Church of Rome and care very deeply about those, such as the majority of my own family line, who are trapped in this apostate man-made system of religion known as Roman Catholicism. I also fully realize that what I say may sound “unloving” and possibly even “harsh.” However, there is just nothing that I can do about that. By not telling the Truth we aren’t doing anyone a service.
(Excerpt) Read more at apprising.org ...
Great catch, William.
The 5 Solas have been Biblical truth from the beginning, mercifully reaffirmed by the grace of God through the Reformation.
Sola Scriptura
Soli Deo Gloria
Solo Christo
Sola Gratia
Sola Fide
Besides, it is ludicrous to make the distinction you make, as if to say doctrine is not important. The church (I include all Christians here) is quite divided today, and not only can it not provide sound and consistent teaching to its own, that doctrinal division is the root cause to its relative ineffectiveness in spreading the Gospel to a sinful world!
In any event, as no one believed as you do for 1500 years after Christ's founding of the Church at Pentecost, it is up to you to demonstrate that the bifurcation of Spirit and Doctrine is not just a construct of the YOPIOS method.
Well said.
Then, as I asked wmfights to do, provide a timeline documenting their adherence by even one body of believers (not merely a few cranky individuals scattered around the Christian Era), that itself has existed from the beginning.
Canon 333 Sec. 3: "There is neither appeal nor recourse against a decision or decree of the Roman Pontiff." Canon 752: "A religious respect of intellect and will, even if not the assent of faith, is to be paid to the teaching which the Supreme Pontiff or the college of bishops enunciate on faith or morals when they exercise the authentic magisterium..."
I understand, everything in moderation!
In order to escape the truth of the doctrine of the papacy, according to which the bishop of Rome is the successor of Peter, some Fundamentalists have tried to deny that Peter ever went to Rome.
But the historical evidence reveals that this assertion is untenable. In his first epistle, Peter tells his readers that he is writing from "Babylon" (1 Pet. 5:13), which was a first-century code word for the city of pagan Rome. Further, the Fathers are unanimous in declaring that he went to Rome and was martyred there under the pagan emperor Nero.
This being the case, the historical evidence is unambiguous in declaring that Peter went to Rome, revealing the Fundamentalist claim to the contrary for what it is: an attempt to deny one of the tenets in the doctrine of the papacy, even if truth must be sacrificed to do so.
Ignatius of Antioch
"Not as Peter and Paul did, do I command you [Romans]. They were apostles, and I am a convict" (Letter to the Romans 4:3 [A.D. 110]).
Dionysius of Corinth
"You [Pope Soter] have also, by your very admonition, brought together the planting that was made by Peter and Paul at Rome and at Corinth; for both of them alike planted in our Corinth and taught us; and both alike, teaching similarly in Italy, suffered martyrdom at the same time" (Letter to Pope Soter [A.D. 170], in Eusebius, History of the Church 2:25:8).
Irenaeus
"Matthew also issued among the Hebrews a written Gospel in their own language, while Peter and Paul were evangelizing in Rome and laying the foundation of the Church" (Against Heresies, 3, 1:1 [A.D. 189]).
"But since it would be too long to enumerate in such a volume as this the succession of all the churches, we shall confound all those who, in whatever manner, whether through self-satisfaction or vainglory, or through blindness and wicked opinion, assemble other than where it is proper, by pointing out here the succession of the bishops of the greatest and most ancient church known to all, founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul, that church which has the tradition and the faith which comes down to us after having been announced to men by the apostles. With that church [of Rome], because of its superior origin, all the churches must agree, that is, all the faithful in the whole world, and it is in her that the faithful everywhere have maintained the apostolic tradition" (ibid., 3, 3, 2).
"The blessed apostles [Peter and Paul], having founded and built up the church [of Rome], they handed over the office of the episcopate to Linus. Paul makes mention of this Linus in the letter to Timothy [2 Tim. 4:21]. To him succeeded Anacletus, and after him, in the third place from the apostles, Clement was chosen for the episcopate. He had seen the blessed apostles and was acquainted with them. It might be said that he still heard the echoes of the preaching of the apostles and had their traditions before his eyes. And not only he, for there were many still remaining who had been instructed by the apostles. In the time of Clement, no small dissension having arisen among the brethren in Corinth, the church in Rome sent a very strong letter to the Corinthians, exhorting them to peace and renewing their faith. ... To this Clement, Evaristus succeeded . . . and now, in the twelfth place after the apostles, the lot of the episcopate [of Rome] has fallen to Eleutherius. In this order, and by the teaching of the apostles handed down in the Church, the preaching of the truth has come down to us" (ibid., 3, 3, 3).
Gaius
"It is recorded that Paul was beheaded in Rome itself, and Peter, likewise, was crucified, during the reign [of the Emperor Nero]. The account is confirmed by the names of Peter and Paul over the cemeteries there, which remain to the present time. And it is confirmed also by a stalwart man of the Church, Gaius by name, who lived in the time of Zephyrinus, bishop of Rome. This Gaius, in a written disputation with Proclus, the leader of the sect of Cataphrygians, says this of the places in which the remains of the aforementioned apostles were deposited: ‘I can point out the trophies of the apostles. For if you are willing to go to the Vatican or to the Ostian Way, you will find the trophies of those who founded this Church’" (Disputation with Proclus [A.D. 198] in Eusebius, Church History 2:25:5).
Clement of Alexandria
"The circumstances which occasioned . . . [the writing] of Mark were these: When Peter preached the Word publicly at Rome and declared the gospel by the Spirit, many who were present requested that Mark, who had been a long time his follower and who remembered his sayings, should write down what had been proclaimed" (Sketches [A.D. 200], in a fragment from Eusebius, History of the Church, 6, 14:1).
Tertullian
"But if you are near Italy, you have Rome, where authority is at hand for us too. What a happy church that is, on which the apostles poured out their whole doctrine with their blood; where Peter had a passion like that of the Lord, where Paul was crowned with the death of John [the Baptist, by being beheaded]" (Demurrer Against the Heretics 36 [A.D. 200]).
"[T]his is the way in which the apostolic churches transmit their lists: like the church of the Smyrneans, which records that Polycarp was placed there by John, like the church of the Romans, where Clement was ordained by Peter" (ibid., 32:2).
"Let us see what milk the Corinthians drained from Paul; against what standard the Galatians were measured for correction; what the Philippians, Thessalonians, and Ephesians read; what even the nearby Romans sound forth, to whom both Peter and Paul bequeathed the gospel and even sealed it with their blood" (Against Marcion 4, 5:1 [A.D. 210]).
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).
The Poem Against the Marcionites
"In this chair in which he himself had sat, Peter in mighty Rome commanded Linus, the first elected, to sit down. After him, Cletus too accepted the flock of the fold. As his successor, Anacletus was elected by lot. Clement follows him, well-known to apostolic men. After him Evaristus ruled the flock without crime. Alexander, sixth in succession, commends the fold to Sixtus. After his illustrious times were completed, he passed it on to Telesphorus. He was excellent, a faithful martyr . . . " (Poem Against the Marcionites 276–284 [A.D. 267]).
Eusebius of Caesarea
"[In the second] year of the two hundredth and fifth Olympiad [A.D. 42]: The apostle Peter, after he has established the church in Antioch, is sent to Rome, where he remains as a bishop of that city, preaching the gospel for twenty-five years" (The Chronicle [A.D. 303]).
Peter of Alexandria
"Peter, the first chosen of the apostles, having been apprehended often and thrown into prison and treated with ignominy, at last was crucified in Rome" (Penance, canon 9 [A.D. 306]).
Lactantius
"When Nero was already reigning, Peter came to Rome, where, in virtue of the performance of certain miracles which he worked . . . he converted many to righteousness and established a firm and steadfast temple to God. When this fact was reported to Nero . . . he sprang to the task of tearing down the heavenly temple and of destroying righteousness. It was he that first persecuted the servants of God. Peter he fixed to a cross, and Paul he slew" (The Deaths of the Persecutors 2:5 [A.D. 318]).
Cyril of Jerusalem
"[Simon Magus] so deceived the city of Rome that Claudius erected a statue of him. . . .While the error was extending itself, Peter and Paul arrived, a noble pair and the rulers of the Church, and they set the error aright. . . . [T]hey launched the weapon of their like-mindedness in prayer against the Magus, and struck him down to earth. It was marvelous enough, and yet no marvel at all, for Peter was there—he that carries about the keys of heaven. And it was nothing to marvel at, for Paul was there—he that was caught up into the third heaven" (Catechetical Lectures 6:14 [A.D. 350]).
Optatus
"You cannot deny that you are aware that in the city of Rome the episcopal chair was given first to Peter; the chair in which Peter sat, the same who was head—that is why he is also called Cephas [‘Rock’]—of all the apostles; the one chair in which unity is maintained by all" (The Schism of the Donatists 2:2 [A.D. 367]).
Epiphanius of Salamis
"At Rome the first apostles and bishops were Peter and Paul, then Linus, then Cletus, then Clement, the contemporary of Peter and Paul" (Medicine Chest Against All Heresies 27:6 [A.D. 375]).
Pope Damasus I
"Likewise it is decreed: . . . [W]e have considered that it ought to be announced that although all the Catholic churches spread abroad through the world comprise one bridal chamber of Christ, nevertheless, the holy Roman Church has been placed at the forefront not by the conciliar decisions of other churches, but has received the primacy by the evangelic voice of our Lord and Savior, who says: ‘You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it; and I will give to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you shall have bound on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you shall have loosed on earth shall be loosed in heaven’ [Matt. 16:18–19]. The first see, therefore, is that of Peter the apostle, that of the Roman Church, which has neither stain nor blemish nor anything like it.
"In addition to this, there is also the companionship of the vessel of election, the most blessed apostle Paul, who contended and was crowned with a glorious death along with Peter in the city of Rome in the time of Caesar Nero. . . . They equally consecrated the above-mentioned holy Roman Church to Christ the Lord; and by their own presence and by their venerable triumph they set it at the forefront over the others of all the cities of the whole world.
"The first see, therefore, is that of Peter the apostle, that of the Roman Church, which has neither stain nor blemish nor anything like it. The second see, however, is that at Alexandria, consecrated in behalf of blessed Peter by Mark, his disciple and an evangelist, who was sent to Egypt by the apostle Peter, where he preached the word of truth and finished his glorious martyrdom. The third honorable see, indeed, is that at Antioch, which belonged to the most blessed apostle Peter, where first he dwelt before he came to Rome and where the name Christians was first applied, as to a new people" (Decree of Damasus 3 [A.D. 382]).
Jerome
"Simon Peter, the son of John, from the village of Bethsaida in the province of Galilee, brother of Andrew the apostle, and himself chief of the apostles, after having been bishop of the church of Antioch and having preached to the Dispersion . . . pushed on to Rome in the second year of Claudius to overthrow Simon Magus, and held the sacerdotal chair there for twenty-five years until the last, that is the fourteenth, year of Nero. At his hands he received the crown of martyrdom being nailed to the cross with his head towards the ground and his feet raised on high, asserting that he was unworthy to be crucified in the same manner as his Lord" (Lives of Illustrious Men 1 [A.D. 396]).
Augustine
"If all men throughout the world were such as you most vainly accuse them of having been, what has the chair of the Roman church done to you, in which Peter sat, and in which Anastasius sits today?" (Against the Letters of Petilani 2:118 [A.D. 402]).
If you’ve 5 solos, then you’ve got no real solo ... you’ve got a quintet. ;o)
Thank you.
I understand, then, then you may disavow the Protestant label (and that’s your right) but I’d imagine your theology is closer to that of the Reformation than, say, the Catholic or Orthodox Churches you attend.
Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be graffed in. Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear: For if God spared not the natural branches, [take heed] lest he also spare not thee. – Romans 11:18-21
In Acts we read how Peter finally understood after receiving the sheet vision three - count 'em - three times - and was then sent to Cornelius. The rest of the group continued to hang onto the righteousness of the Law and Jewish tradition until Paul confronted them at Jerusalem. Then, Peter stood up and testified that Cornelius – who was outside the Jewish Law – was saved by the power of God alone before Peter laid his hands on him, baptized him or even finished telling him the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning. Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost. Forasmuch then as God gave them the like gift as [he did] unto us, who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ; what was I, that I could withstand God? – Acts 11:15-17
And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men [and] brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe. And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as [he did] unto us; And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith. – Acts 15:1
But God brings us into His family according to His own will:
But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?
For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death. But ye say, Whosoever shall say to [his] father or [his] mother, [It is] a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; And honour not his father or his mother, [he shall be free]. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition.
[Ye] hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying, This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with [their] lips; but their heart is far from me.
But in vain they do worship me, teaching [for] doctrines the commandments of men.
And he called the multitude, and said unto them, Hear, and understand: Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man.
Then came his disciples, and said unto him, Knowest thou that the Pharisees were offended, after they heard this saying?
But he answered and said, Every plant, which my heavenly Father hath not planted, shall be rooted up.
Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.
Then answered Peter and said unto him, Declare unto us this parable.
And Jesus said, Are ye also yet without understanding?
Do not ye yet understand, that whatsoever entereth in at the mouth goeth into the belly, and is cast out into the draught? But those things which proceed out of the mouth come forth from the heart; and they defile the man. For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies: These are [the things] which defile a man: but to eat with unwashen hands defileth not a man. – Matthew 15:1-20
But Martha was cumbered about much serving, and came to him, and said, Lord, dost thou not care that my sister hath left me to serve alone? bid her therefore that she help me.
And Jesus answered and said unto her, Martha, Martha, thou art careful and troubled about many things: But one thing is needful: and Mary hath chosen that good part, which shall not be taken away from her. – Luke 10:38-42
It is always "about" God. Without Christ, we can do nothing.
For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, [was] not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith. For if they which are of the law [be] heirs, faith is made void, and the promise made of none effect: Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, [there is] no transgression. - Romans 4:13-15
Jesus Christ IS the power of God and the wisdom of God. He is the only understanding that matters:
And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. - John 17:3
He is never justified to ignore the words of God either in whole or in part. Nor is he justified in insisting that if God did not create this heaven and earth exactly as he understands Scripture then His word is false and God is an illusion. Nor is he justified in thinking that if his assembly’s understanding of the words of God is found false then God is an illusion.
The root of the word "rational" is "ratio" - the will and mind of God is the standard against which ours is cast. Not the other way around.
Look to the history of the church on earth for evidence of the importance of loving God surpassing above all else, including the doctrines and traditions of the assembly.
Look to the points in history when a particular assembly of believers - whether Jewish, Catholic, Orthodox, Baptist, Methodist, Presbyterian, Pentecostal or whatever - was focused entirely on God. In those times and places, the assembly was spiritually empowered, effective and dynamic.
Conversely, look to the points in history when a particular assembly of believers was focused on wisdom (reason) or signs (miracles) or their own glory or affairs. In those times and places, the assembly was spiritually unplugged, dark, ineffective and stagnant. Why? - because they ignored the one and only Great Commandment!
Nevertheless I have [somewhat] against thee, because thou hast left thy first love.
Remember therefore from whence thou art fallen, and repent, and do the first works; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will remove thy candlestick out of his place, except thou repent. – Revelation 2:1-5
The gates of hell will not prevail against the church, the body of Christ. But to presume that promise applies to the Catholic Church per se is to make the same error the Jews made.
Man cannot prevent God or control Him.
Boast not against the branches.
To God be the glory!
p.s. I must leave now, but will respond to any replies later this evening.
I really don't see the point in playing "lets move the goal posts". You can find examples if you want. The best place to start is Scripture.
You:I really don't see the point in playing "lets move the goal posts". You can find examples if you want. The best place to start is Scripture.
Ah, but it is vital if one wants to affirm or refute the premise of the article heading this thread! "Authority" to proclaim the Gospel, and "authenticity" of that authority's message can be gleaned much more effectively when one can demonstrate a continuous, 2000 year existence for Christian authority in a particular body. To refuse to do so is to "move the goal posts" forward 1500 years. It's hard to imagine how an insistence on establishing continuity to Christ and the Apostles is not germaine to whether or not the Catholic Church preaches "a different Gospel"!
Again, "a different Gospel" as juxtaposed against what???
The words of God are powerful, the words of men are not.
Jesus Christ is the Word of God.
And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world. He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day. – John 12:47-48
Love God. Believe Him. Trust Him.
Maranatha, Jesus!!!
With respect...and the authority to use your Scripture quotes in the fashion you do comes from...whom? You alone, correct? How do you know you apply and interpret these passages accurately and in the proper context?
You still haven’t addressed my question about the need for demonstrable continuity of authority and doctrine and how it relates to proving or disproving the premise of this article.
“For the life of me, I will never understand why so many non-Catholics have to take so many shots at the Catholics.”
It’s a “born again” fervent evangelical thing: “Ah must speak THE TROOOOOOTH!” (especially if it means bashing Cath-oe-lics)
I was raised by two atheists, was “born again” for 25 years and grew tired of the “I’m-a-better-Christian-and-everyone-else-is-going-to-hell” attitude. Catholic-bashers spend spend 75% of their time condemning others and never shut up about their “personal testimonies.”
Catholic-bashing Christians would win many more souls if they did what St. Francis said: “Preach the Gospel at all times and when necessary use words.”
I didn't say doctrine was/were UNimportant.. Actually it was the bible that said it.. That doctrine kills but the spirit gives life.. Doctrine can be useful if taught correctly.. to make subtle things more clear.. but it can also kill the spirit when the message in the word is made simplistic.. oversimplifying deep spiritual message(s)..
Much Like you just did.. assumeing I thought doctrine was unimportant.. Doctrine is not useless but the spirit of/in the word is more important.. Without the spirit of/in the word the doctrine becomes dogma.. and dead.. like secular knowledge..
If you do not Know the Spirit then the spirit in the word cannot light up.. You might as well eat the pages for all the good it will do you.. Which is why some talk spirit but are clueless..
It is LAUGHABLE to say that Catholics aren’t CHRISTIAN!!! We can trace Catholicism DIRECTLY to Jesus and Peter!!! It is sad that people can’t admit that truth.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.