Replies

The "sloppy" work is found in the various and sundry doctrines that the Roman Catholic church changed over the centuries. At one time, justification by faith WAS a tenet of the Christian faith. At one time, the idea of a Pontifex Maximus - one head bishop called Pope would be in authority over all other bishops and all of Christendom must bow in obedience to whatever he decreed - was seen as heresy. At one time, it was Peter's faith in Christ which was recognized as the foundation of the church, the body of Christ, and not the fallible man Peter - much less everyone that might come after him automatically inheriting his Apostolic authority. At one time, there WAS no belief in a pretend place called Purgatory or even Limbo. At one time, NOBODY prayed to dead saints. I could go on and on.

Catholic polemicists sloppily IGNORE the beliefs of early church "fathers" that show what was commonly held as orthodox faith when it doesn't serve their current dogmas and any appeal to the "unanimous consent of the fathers" is sheepishly brushed off as a nice-to-have but no longer a determining factor in newly developed doctrines. Like you do here in only addressing Chrysostom and his view about baptism but ignoring what he said about the Scriptures. Sidestepping and ignoring all the others. No, RCs HAVE TO dispute Scriptural authority because they KNOW their obligatory dogmas are not verifiable from the word of God. They appeal to "Tradition" as equal in authority, but cannot prove such beliefs were either taught by the Apostles or believed by the early Christians. Truth, to RCs, becomes whatever the Pope/Magesterium says is the truth. It's why Tradition and the Magesterium have to be viewed as all equal in authority. Sorry, but Divinely-inspired Scripture - as GOD'S word to us - is our TRUE authority and this basic truth was believed and defended by the Apostles as well as their disciples, whom they trained up in the truth so that they could faithfully teach others.

If Roman Catholicism was A true church, they wouldn't have to disparage the Holy Scriptures. They would eagerly appeal to the word of God to prove what they say is the truth - just like the early church fathers did. They would AGREE with saints like Irenaeus who stated in his book, Against Heresies:

Our faith is steadfast, unfeigned, and the only true one, having clear proof from these Scriptures.

In the first place, we prove from the authoritative Scriptures that all the things which have been mentioned, visible and invisible, have been made by one God. For these men are not more to be depended on than the Scriptures.

If, therefore, even with respect to creation, there are some things [the knowledge of] which belongs only to God, and others which come within the range of our own knowledge, what ground is there for complaint, if, in regard to those things which we investigate in the Scriptures (which are throughout spiritual), we are able by the grace of God to explain some of them, while we must leave others in the hands of God, and that not only in the present world, but also in that which is to come, so that God should for ever teach, and man should for ever learn the things taught him by God?...If, for instance, any one asks, ‘What was God doing before He made the world?’ we reply that the answer to such a question lies with God Himself. For that this world was formed perfect by God, receiving a beginning in time, the Scriptures teach us; but no Scripture reveals to us what God was employed about before this event. The answer therefore to that question remains with God, and it is not proper for us to aim at bringing forward foolish, rash, and blasphemous suppositions [in reply to it]; so, as by one’s imagining that he has discovered the origin of matter, he should in reality set aside God Himself who made all things. But we shall not be wrong if we affirm the same thing also concerning the substance of matter, that God produced it. For we have learned from the Scriptures that God holds the supremacy over all things. But whence or in what way He produced it, neither has Scripture anywhere declared; nor does it become us to conjecture, so as, in accordance with our own opinions, to form endless conjectures concerning God, but we should leave such knowledge in the hands of God Himself.

Since, therefore, the entire Scriptures, the prophets, and the Gospels, can be clearly, unambiguously, and harmoniously understood by all, although all do not believe them; and since they proclaim that one only God, to the exclusion of all others, formed all things by His word, whether visible or invisible, heavenly or earthly, in the water or under the earth, as I have shown from the very words of Scripture; and since the very system of creation to which we belong testifies, by what falls under our notice, that one Being made and governs it—those persons will seem truly foolish who blind their eyes to such a clear demonstration, and will not behold the light of the announcement [made to them]; but they put fetters upon themselves, and every one of them imagines, by means of their obscure interpretations of the parables, that he has found out a God of his own.

Additional views can be read HERE.

So, once again, you are proven wrong in your false declaration that the Reformers were the ones who invented the doctrines of sola Scriptura and sola fide. There is plentiful documentation that these are Biblical doctrines, proven over and over BY direct Scriptures, as well as the beliefs held by the Apostles and those they discipled to carry on the ministry of reconciliation. These WERE the teachings once delivered unto the saints and they will continue to be regardless of the accursed gospel false teachers use to try to deceive.