Peter Was Celibate After Metting Jesus.

[ironmonk]

I'll start responding to you again,

Oh goody...

but will more-or-less ignore any and all arguments that have already been made (as such argumentation should continue in the relevant thread), as well as all cut 'n' pastes.

You've been ignoring all of our arguements anyway. You've been proven wrong time and time again, you do not accept it. The Church is right, end of story.

For what you say to be true, then there would be no God.

I'm not going to waste my time with throwing pearls among swine or throwing stones at dogs that bark along the way.

The only interaction that I would be interested with you would be for you to actually try the Challenge... with the rules given, not your rules... If you want your rules, then you can't do it...

You must use the Catechism, bible, and ECF writings to take the Challenge, anything else proves my point that no man can prove the Catholic Church wrong.

God Bless,

ironmonk

[Jake Huether]

edited...

cool! ;)

[Dave]

heheheh... You got them switched around... 

The former (Discipline) can be changed. The latter (Doctrine) can't be changed.

I know you know... But I wanted to make sure others know. 

That's what I get for typing stuff in too fast!

I went and edited my post. Thanks, man, for bringing it to my attention. :D

[mustbenothing]

(vianney) and tradition is passed down orally which most protestant faiths are missing out on.

(Me) Please demonstrate this, rather than just asserting it

I'm again curious as to whether or not you actually wrote this, Dave.

(Dave) Mark 13:31 - heaven and earth will pass away, but Jesus' Word will not pass away. But Jesus never says anything about His Word being entirely committed to a book. Also, it took 400 years to compile the Bible, and another 1,000 years to invent the printing press. How was the Word of God communicated? Orally, by the bishops of the Church, with the protection of the Holy Spirit.

(Me) Saying that "it took 400 years to compile the Bible" is false. It took 400 years for there to be a definitive council on the canon list, sure. However, the writings of many early fathers and texts like the Muratorian Canon teach us that all the NT letters were collected in the 2nd century, if not earlier (and, of course, the OT books were already collected).

Yes, it took 1,000 years to invent the printing press, but the Bible was still copied time and time again to be provided to all possible.

Yes, of course the Word of God was primarily communicated to the laity by the bishops. However, that does not mean that the Word of God was primarily communited to the bishops by word of mouth!

(Dave) Mark 16:15 - Jesus commands the apostles to preach the Gospel to every creature. But Jesus did not want this preaching to stop after the apostles died, and yet the Bible was not compiled until four centuries later. The word of God was transferred orally.

(Me) I don't see how this is an exegetical argument for your position. Please outline its premises and inferences. It just seems to be a re-statement of the extra-Biblical argument you offered above.

(Dave) Mark 3:14; 16:15 - Jesus commands the apostles to preach (not write) the gospel to the world. Jesus gives no commandment to the apostles to write, and gives them no indication that the oral apostolic word he commanded them to communicate would later die in the fourth century. If Jesus wanted Christianity to be limited to a book (which would be finalized four centuries later), wouldn't He have said a word about it?

(Me) Whether or not Jesus did not command them to write down anything, He certainly quoted from the Scripture many times, and the Holy Spirit later moved them to write down the NT Scripture (2 Peter 1:21).

Additionally, the conclusion that the Scripture is not the post-apostolic man of God's only infallible rule of faith does not follow from the fact that the Gospel is often transmitted by orally preaching! Surely that is a non-sequitur.

(Dave) Luke 10:16 - He who hears you (not "who reads your writings"), hears me. The oral word passes from Jesus to the apostles to their successors by the gracious gifts of the Holy Spirit. This succession has been preserved in the Holy Catholic Church.

(Me) You are right to say that the apostles were His witnesses in a unique, authoritative manner. However, I don't see where you got from this passage that apostolic authority and witness was passed down through apostolic succession. The Bible indicates that the apostles were a foundational phenomenon in the Church (Ephesians 2:20), having once-for-all laid the foundation upon which the saints now build.

(Dave) Luke 24:47 - Jesus explains that repentance and forgiveness of sins must be preached (not written) in Christ's name to all nations. For Protestants to argue that the word of God is now limited to a book (subject to thousands of different interpretations) is to not only ignore Scripture, but introduce a radical theory about how God spreads His word which would have been unbelievable to the people at the time of Jesus.

(Me) Same error as above; you're assuming that if the truth is ever transmitted through fallible, oral preaching, then the truth cannot be fundamentally grounded in the infallible rule of faith that is the Bible.

(Dave) Acts 2:3-4 - the Holy Spirit came to the apostles in the form of "tongues" of fire so that they would "speak" (not just write) the Word.

(Me) Yes, and they stopped that after they had laid the foundation of the Church, as already argued.

(Dave) Acts 15:27 - Judas and Silas, successors to the apostles, were sent to bring God's infallible Word by "word of mouth."

(Me) Honestly, do you understand the Protestant position? Sola Scriptura has never taught that the only communication between people should be in the written Scripture. Rather, it teaches that the sole infallible rule of faith for the post-apostolic man of God is the Scripture!

(Dave) Rom. 10:8 - the Word is near you, on your lips and in your heart, which is the word of faith which is preached (not just written).

(Me) Yes, of course.

(Dave) Rom 10:17 - faith comes by what is "heard" (not just read) which is the Word that is "preached" (not read). This word comes from the oral tradition of the apostles. Those in countries where the Scriptures are not available can still come to faith in Jesus Christ.

(Me) Yes, because we preach the Gospel on the basis of the infallible rule of faith that is the Scripture. Fallible, oral methods of transmitting infallible truths based upon the Scripture do not become infallible rules of faith, or usurp the place of their foundation.

(Dave) 1 Cor. 15:1,11 - faith comes from what is "preached" (not read). For Protestants to argue that oral tradition once existed but exists no longer, they must prove this from Scripture. But no where does Scripture say oral tradition died with the apostles. To the contrary, Scripture says the oral word abides forever.

(Me) Yes, and what is that word? The Gospel! Surely you cannot claim that the Gospel is not taught in the Scripture! Therefore, you must demonstrate that we have an infallible deposit of oral tradition which goes above and beyond that which is now recorded in the Scripture. Tell me, if you received oral tradition straight from Jesus and the Apostles: What is one sentence that Jesus or the Apostles uttered that is not recorded for us in the Scripture? Surely the Pope would have let us know, if he holds some rule of faith other than the Scripture which is a perfect preservation of the words of Christ and the Apostles!

(Dave) Gal. 1:11-12 - the Gospel which is "preached" (not read) to me is not a man's Gospel, but the Revelation of Jesus Christ.

(Me) Yep.

(Dave) Eph. 1:13 - hearing (not reading) the Word of truth is the gospel of our salvation. This is the living word in the Church's living tradition.

(Me) Uh-huh.

(Dave) Col. 1:5 - of this you have "heard" (not read) before in the word of truth, the Gospel which has come to you.

(Me) Yes.

(Dave) 1 Thess. 2:13 - the Word of God is what you have "heard" (not read). The orally communicated word of God lasts forever, and this word is preserved within the Church by the Holy Spirit.

(Me) Yes, and?

(Dave) 2 Tim. 1:13 - oral communications are protected by the Spirit. They abide forever. Oral authority does not die with the apostles.

(Me) Did this pattern of sound words include something that is not recorded in the Scripture? Were, say, the Marian dogmas included in them? If so, why don't we have people teaching the Assumption of Mary in the first few centuries? Or, which seems the altogether more likely case, was this pattern of sound words laid up for us in the infallible Scripture, the pattern of sound words once-for-all delievered to the saints?

(Dave) 2 Tim 4:2,6-7 - Paul, at the end of his life, charges Timothy to preach (not write) the Word. Oral teaching does not die with Paul.

(Me) Nope, it doesn't. Do you understand the Protestant doctrine?

(Dave) Titus 1:3 - God's word is manifested "through preaching" (not writing). This "preaching" is the tradition that comes from apostles.

(Me) The preaching of the Gospel, which is now recorded for us in the Scripture.

(Dave) 1 Peter 1:25 - the Word of the Lord abides forever and that Word is the good news that was "preached" (not read) to you. Because the Word is preached by the apostles and it lasts forever, it must be preserved by the apostles' successors, or this could not be possible. Also, because the oral word abides forever, oral apostolic tradition could not have died in the fourth century and all been committed to Scripture.

(Me) Yes, the Gospel ("this word is the good news that was preached to you") continues. How on Earth does that mean that the Pope received the oral tradition of the Marian dogmas?? The Marian dogmas are not the Gospel!

(Dave) 2 Peter 1:12, 15 - Peter says that he will leave a "means to recall these things in mind." But since this was his last canonical epistle, this "means to recall" must therefore be the apostolic tradition and teaching authority of his office that he left behind.

(Me) That is, unless he wished to forever remind them by leaving the Scripture, a fixed corpus! One can hardly make such a claim about the Roman Catholic view of Tradition. Perhaps it is the unanimous consent of the early fathers, perhaps it is partim-partim, perhaps it is material sufficiency, perhaps it is development of doctrine. The Roman Catholic Church cannot claim to hold a fixed corpus of oral teaching passed down from the apostles, for she cannot even agree on how to define "tradition"!

(Dave) 2 John 1:12; 3 John 13 - John prefers to speak and not to write. Throughout history, the Word of God was always transferred orally and Jesus did not change this. To do so would have been a radical departure from the Judaic tradition.

(Me) Yes, people talk to other people. I don't see how this is relevant.

(Dave) Deut. 31:9-12 - Moses had the law read only every seven years. Was the word of God absent during the seven year interval? Of course not. The Word of God has always been given orally by God's appointed ones, and was never limited to Scripture.

(Me) But his oral teaching was based on the fixed corpus of that which was written.

(Dave) Isaiah 40:8 - the grass withers, the flower fades, but the Word of our God (not necessarily written) will stand forever.

(Me) I'm waiting for a relevant argument. There have only been three in this list so far, unless I've lost count.

(Dave) Isaiah 59:21 - Isaiah prophesies the promise of a living voice to hand on the Word of God to generations by mouth, not by a book. This is either a false prophecy, or it has been fulfilled by the Catholic Church.

(Me) Isaiah 59:20-21

20 "And a Redeemer will come to Zion,

to those in Jacob who turn from transgression," declares the Lord.

21 "And as for me, this is my covenant with them," says the Lord: "My Spirit that is upon you, and my words that I have put in your mouth, shall not depart out of your mouth, or out of the mouth of your offspring, or out of the mouth of your children's offspring," says the Lord, "from this time forth and forevermore."

Isaiah 59 teaches that God will maintain His covenant with His people, lifting them up through a fuller pouring-out of His Spirit, though Israel apostatized. The presence of a teaching authority has been inserted into, not drawn out of, this passage of covenantal sanctification.

(Dave) Joel 1:3 - tell your children of the Word of the Lord, and they tell their children, and their children tell another generation.

(Me) And?

(Dave) Mal. 2:7 - the lips of a priest guard knowledge, and we should seek instruction from his mouth. Protestants want to argue all oral tradition was committed to Scripture? But no where does Scripture say this.

(Me) Yes, the Chruch is to guard the deposit entrusted to her -- the Gospel and the Scripture. I have no idea how this gives the man of God an infallible rule of faith other than the Scripture in the post-apostolic era.

(Dave) The early Christians followed oral tradition:

Matt. 15:3 - Jesus condemns human traditions that void God's word. Some Protestants use this verse to condemn all tradition. But this verse has nothing to do with the tradition we must obey that was handed down to us from the apostles. (Here, the Pharisees, in their human tradition, gave goods to the temple to avoid taking care of their parents, and this voids God's law of honoring one's father and mother.)

(Me) It is interesting that you will later claim that these Pharisees were in the authoritative seat of Moses. If they were in the seat of Moses and could err so greatly, how can we trust the Pope to be infallible, who is also in the seat of Moses (you say)?

I would also note that the Scripture was the standard by which they were declared wrong -- not oral tradition.

(Dave) Mark 7:9 - this is the same as Matt. 15:3 - there is a distinction between human tradition (that we should reject) and apostolic tradition (that we must accept).

(Me) Acts 17:11 indicates that we would be praised for checking apostolic teaching against the Scripture. According to the Roman Catholic Church, we would be condemned for private interpretation.

(Dave) Acts 2:42 - the members obeyed apostolic tradition (doctrine, prayers, and the breaking of bread). Their obedience was not to the Scriptures alone. Tradition (in Gree, "paradosis") means "to hand on" teaching.

(Me) Because they were in the apostolic era. Do you understand the Protestant doctrine?

(Dave) Acts 20:7 - this verse gives us a glimpse of Christian worship on Sunday, but changing the Lord's day from Saturday to Sunday is understood primarily from oral apostolic tradition.

(Me) History often sheds light on the Scripture's teaching, as with Acts 20:7.

(Dave) John 17:20 - Jesus prays for all who believe in Him through the oral word of the apostles. Jesus protects oral apostolic teaching.

(Me) Non-sequitur. He prays that those who convert due to their preaching be secured. He does not pray that the mysterious apostolic tradition they pass on through the Roman Catholic Church would be infallibly preserved and taught.

(Dave) 1 Cor. 11:2 - Paul commends the faithful for maintaining the apostolic tradition that they have received. The oral word is preserved and protected by the Spirit.

(Me) Yes, of course. This was during the apostolic era. I would appreciate a greater ratio of interaction with my actual position.

(Dave) Phil. 4:9 - Paul says that what you have learned and received and heard and seen in me, do. This refers to learning from his preaching and example, which is apostolic tradition.

(Me) Yes, Paul was a great example. And?

(Dave) 2 Thess. 2:15 - Paul commands us to obey oral apostolic tradition. He says stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught, either by word of mouth or letter. This verse proves that for apostolic authority, oral and written communications are on par with each other. Protestants must find a verse that voids this commandment to obey oral tradition elsewhere in the Bible, or they are not abiding by the teachings of Scripture.

(Me) Yes, for apostolic authority, oral and written communications were on par with each other. This is contrary to the badgering of Scripture you performed earlier in this post. However, I still have no idea how it interacts with my position, which I have outlined for you a few dozen times. I'm still waiting to see where the proof is that this tradition was something other than the Gospel and other basics now stored up in the Scripture, or where this oral tradition was to be a surviving rule of faith to be added on top of the Scripture.

(Dave) 2 Thess. 2:15 - in fact, it was this apostolic tradition that allowed the Church to select the Bible canon (apostolicity from tradition). The Bible is an apostolic tradition of the Catholic Church.

(Me) Let's suppose for a moment that there was as robust a conception of oral tradition, apostolic succession, and papal authority as you claim. Now, let's suppose that the canonical list was included in that oral tradition, as you claim here. Why, then, were there any disagreements on the canonical list at all in the early Church? After all, a quick talk with the bishop of Rome should have fixed all of that!

(Dave) Other examples of apostolic tradition include the teachings on the Blessed Trinity, the hypostatic union (Jesus had a divine and human nature in one person), the filioque (that the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son),

(Me) These were argued Scripturally by the early Church.

(Dave) the assumption of Mary,

(Me) Then why did belief in it take so long to appear?

(Dave) and knowing that the Gospel of Matthew was written by Matthew.

(Me) Of course! The question, however, is whether this comes to us through fallible historical sources, or whether it comes from an infallible deposit of oral teaching passed down from generation to generation.

(Dave) 2 Thess. 3:6 - Paul again commands the faithful to live in accord with the tradition that they received from the apostles.

2 Thess. 3:7 - Paul tells them they already know how to imitate the elders. He is referring them to the tradition they have learned by his oral preaching and example.

(Me) Yes, they were to follow the Apostles' tradition of not being idle. I have no idea how that is an infallible oral deposit acting as a rule of faith on top of Scripture and delivered by apostolic succession through Roman Catholic leadership.

(Dave) 1 Tim. 6:20 - guard what has been "entrusted" to you. The word "entrusted" is "paratheke" which means a "deposit." Oral tradition is part of what the Church has always called the Deposit of Faith.

(Me) Actually, "deposit" and "entrusted" are different words, the former being a noun and the second a verb. The question is, however, if the deposit entrusted to Timothy lies in the infallible rule of faith that is the Scripture, as Paul earlier indicated in this letter (2 Tim 3:16-17), or if it is some deposit of oral tradition which goes far above and beyond the Gospel and other basics.

(Dave) 2 Tim. 2:2 - Paul says what you have heard from me entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also. This is "tradition," or the handing on of apostolic teaching.

(Me) Yes, the Word of God comes through fallible humans to other fallible humans by word of mouth. Again, how does this mean that the Scripture is not the sole infallible rule of faith for the post-apostolic man of God?

(Dave) 2 Tim. 3:14 - continue in what you have learned and believed knowing from whom you learned it (by oral tradition).

(Me) The fact that oral teaching (not tradition) is the instrument by which Timothy received the Gospel does not turn it into an infallible rule of faith! Certainly no one thinks that every priest's sermon is infallible!

(Dave) Matt. 2:23 - the prophecy "He shall be a Nazarene" is oral tradition. It is not found in the Old Testament. This demonstrates that the apostles relied upon oral tradition and taught by oral tradition.

(Me) Which was not in the post-apostolic era.

(Dave) Matt 23:2 - Jesus relies on oral tradition of acknowledging Moses' seat of authority (which passed from Moses to Joshua to the Sanhedrin). This is not recorded in the Old Testament.

(Me) This same "seat of Moses" (which was actually a means by which Jesus mocked them) corrupted true teaching and led to the horrid perversion of doctrine present in 1st-century Judaism. Shall we conclude, then, that the same may happen to the Pope?

(Dave) John 19:26; 20:2; 21:20,24 - knowing that the "beloved disciple" is John is inferred from Scripture, but is also largely oral tradition.

(Me) Yes, which in no way means that that oral tradition is an infallible rule of faith!

(Dave) Acts 20:35 - Paul relies on oral tradition of the apostles for this statement ("it is better to give than to receive") of Jesus. It is not recorded in the Gospels.

(Me) Yes, people often hear the words of other people and repeat them.

(Dave) 1 Cor. 7:10 - Paul relies on the oral tradition of the apostles to give the charge of Jesus that a wife should not separate from her husband.

(Me) I have no idea where Paul here appeals to apostolic tradition.

(Dave) 1 Cor. 10:4 - Paul relies on the oral tradition of the rock following Moses. It is not recorded in the Old Testament. See Exodus 17:1-17 and Num. 20:2-13.

(Me) Exodus 17:6

Behold, I will stand before you there on the rock at Horeb, and you shall strike the rock, and water shall come out of it, and the people will drink." And Moses did so, in the sight of the elders of Israel.

I'd be interested in seeing documentation of such an oral tradition. Even if it was, though, I still don't really see how it is relevant. I never said that all there is to know is stored up in the Scripture. I said that the only infallible rule of faith needed by the post-apostolic man of God is the Scripture.

(Dave) Eph 5:14 - Paul relies on oral tradition to quote an early Christian hymn - "awake O sleeper rise from the dead and Christ shall give you light."

(Me) Yes, traditions exist. How does that make them infallible rules of faith for the post-apostolic man of God?

(Dave) Heb. 11:37 - the author of Hebrews relies on oral tradition of the martyrs being sawed in two. This is not recorded in the Old Testament.

(Me) Yes, of course.

(Dave) Jude 9 - Jude relies on the oral tradition of the Archangel Michael's dispute with satan over Moses' body. This is not found in the Old Testament.

(Me) Yep.

(Dave) Jude 14-15 - Jude relies on the oral tradition of Enoch's prophecy which is not recorded in the Old Testament.

(Me) Correct.

[mustbenothing]

(Previous) I'll start responding to you again, but will more-or-less ignore any and all arguments that have already been made (as such argumentation should continue in the relevant thread), as well as all cut 'n' pastes.

(Dave) More cop-outs.

(Me) I have no idea how. Would you rather me cut 'n' paste forty-five pages of Protestant drivel, and expect you to answer it point-by-point?

(Previous) But 1 Cor 9:5 does say that apostles (whom you consider to be the forerunners of bishops) had the right to take along a believing wife. The modern Catholic Church denies such a right to bishops. I have no idea whether or not to assume that Peter actually did take with him a believing wife (which seems to be implied), or if he just had the right to do so. Whatever the case, as I said before, I don't consider it too important of a question.

(Dave) First of all, we are the CATHOLIC CHURCH! We are NOT the Catholic Church! Please have enough respect for us to call the Church by its proper name.

(Me) I've already discussed this nomenclature with dUSt. I originally said "Rome," because Roman Catholic apologists use it. However, dUSt found it offensive, so I asked if "Catholic Church" would be acceptable. He OKed it.

(Dave) In addition, in the Church's early centuries, there were many bishops and even popes who were married. But no, the Church doesn't deny bishops the right to marry; they freely choose not to marry once they choose to become priests. Besides, it's a Church DISCIPLINE that priests can't be married, not a DOCTRINE. The former can be changed, but the latter can't.

(Me) No, the Roman Catholic Church does not allow bishops to marry, nor does she allow married people to become bishops except in extreme cases. Therefore, she has taken away the right to carry along a believing wife. I haven't made any judgment on whether or not this is a wrong thing to do, but I have said that I don't see how Paul could defend his apostolicity on such grounds (meaning that the right to marry is basic to being an apostle) if modern-day bishops are supposed to be the successors of the Apostles, yet they lack such a right.

(Dave) But anyway, St. Paul was celibate and a bishop, and yet you don't seem to have any objections to that!

(Me) No, but that does not mean that he lacked the right to do so.

(Previous) I don't see how this is relevant. I'm interpreting the verse as suggesting that a fundamental right of an apostle was to take along a believing wife if he so desired.

(Dave) So what makes you think that your interpretation is correct? Why couldn't you possibly be wrong?

(Me) I could certainly be wrong. However, nothing that ironmonk posted took a position on whether I was right or wrong at all.

(ironmonk) You must use the Catechism, bible, and ECF writings to take the Challenge, anything else proves my point that no man can prove the Catholic Church wrong.

(Me) Already done. I quoted Clement of Rome, the Bible, and the Catechism. That meets your standards, even though they are unjustified standards.

[ironmonk]

(ironmonk) You must use the Catechism, bible, and ECF writings to take the Challenge, anything else proves my point that no man can prove the Catholic Church wrong.

(Me) Already done. I quoted Clement of Rome, the Bible, and the Catechism. That meets your standards, even though they are unjustified standards.

You have not used the Catechism.

All these, therefore, were highly honoured, and made great, not for their own sake, or for their own works, or for the righteousness which they wrought, but through the operation of His will. And we, too, being called by His will in Christ Jesus, are not justified by ourselves, nor by our own wisdom, or understanding, or godliness, or works which we have wrought in holiness of heart; but by that faith through which, from the beginning, Almighty God has justified all men; to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen. –Clement of Rome

Now, let's look at it in context.... Grace my friend... Grace. When looking at the entire context along with the other sections around that one little quote, Grace is the answer... NOT BY FAITH ALONE.

THE FIRST EPISTLE OF CLEMENT TO THE CORINTHIAN

CHAP. XXX.--LET US DO THOSE THINGS THAT PLEASE GOD, AND FLEE FROM THOSE HE HATES, THAT WE MAY BE BLESSED.

Seeing, therefore, that we are the portion of the Holy One,(2) let us do all those things which pertain to holiness, avoiding all evil-speaking, all abominable and impure embraces, together with all drunkenness, seeking after change,(3) all abominable lusts, detestable adultery, and execrable pride. "For God," [saith the Scripture], "resisteth the proud, but giveth grace to the humble."(4) Let us cleave, then, to those to whom grace has been given by God. Let us clothe ourselves with concord and humility, ever exercising self-control, standing far off from all whispering and evil-speaking, being justified by our works, and not our words. For [the Scripture] saith, "He that speaketh much, shall also hear much in answer. And does he that is ready in speech deem himself righteous? Blessed(5) is he that is born of woman, who liveth but a short time: be not given to much speaking."(6) Let our praise be in God, and not of ourselves; for God hateth those that commend themselves. Let testimony to our good(7) deeds be borne by others, as it was in the case of our righteous forefathers. Boldness, and arrogance, and audacity belong to(8) those that are accursed of God; but moderation, humility, and meekness to such as are blessed by Him.

CHAP. XXXI.--LET US SEE BY WHAT MEANS WE MAY OBTAIN THE DIVINE BLESSING.

Let us cleave then to His blessing, and consider what are the means(9) of possessing it. Let us think(10) over the things which have taken place from the beginning. For what reason was our father Abraham blessed? Was it not because he wrought righteousness and truth through faith? Isaac,(11) with perfect confidence, as if knowing what was to happen,(12) cheerfully yielded himself as a sacrifice.(13) Jacob, through reason(14) of his brother, went forth with humility from his own land, and came to Laban and served him; and there was given to him the sceptre of the twelve tribes of Israel.

CHAP. XXXII.--WE ARE JUSTIFIED NOT BY OUR OWN WORKS, BUT BY FAITH.

Whosoever will candidly consider each particular, will recognise the greatness of the gifts which were given by him.(15) For from him(16) have sprung the priests and all the Levites who minister at the altar of God. From him also [was descended] our Lord Jesus Christ according to the flesh.(17) From him [arose] kings, princes, and rulers of the race of Judah. Nor are his other tribes in small glory,(18) inasmuch as God had promised, "Thy seed shall be as the stars of heaven."(19) All these, therefore, were highly honoured, and made great, not for their own sake, or for their own works, or for the righteousness which they wrought, but through the operation of His will. And we, too, being called by His will(20) in Christ Jesus, are not Justified by ourselves, nor by our own wisdom, or understanding, or godliness, or works which we have wrought in holiness of heart; but by that faith through which, from the beginning, Almighty God has justified all men; to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen.

CHAP. XXXIII.--BUT LET US NOT GIVE UP THE PRACTICE OF GOOD WORKS AND LOVE. GOD HIMSELF IS AN EXAMPLE TO US OF GOOD WORKS.

What shall we do,(21) then, brethren? Shall we become slothful in well-doing, and cease from the practice of love? God forbid that any such course should be followed by us! But rather let us hasten with all energy and readiness of mind to perform every good work. For the Creator and Lord of all Himself rejoices in His works. For by His infinitely great power He established the heavens, and by His incomprehensible wisdom He adorned them. He also divided the earth from the water which surrounds it, and fixed it upon the immovable foundation of His own will. The animals also which are upon it He commanded by His own word(1) into existence. So likewise, when He had formed(2) the sea, and the living creatures which are in it, He enclosed them [within their proper bounds] by His own power. Above all? with His holy and undefiled hands He formed man, the most excellent [of His creatures], and truly great through the understanding given him--the express likeness of His own image. For thus says God: "Let us make man in our image, and after our likeness. So God made man; male and female He created theme,"(4) Having thus finished all these things, He approved them, and blessed them, and said, "Increase and multiply."(5) We see,(6) then, how all righteous men have been adorned with good works, and how the Lord Himself, adorning Himself with His works, rejoiced. Having therefore such an example, let us without delay accede to His will, and let us work the work of righteousness with our whole strength.

CHAP. XXXIV.--GREAT IS THE REWARD OF GOOD WORKS WITH GOD. JOINED TOGETHER IN HARMONY, LET US IMPLORE THAT REWARD FROM HIM.

The good servant(7) receives the bread of his labour with confidence; the lazy and slothful cannot look his employer in the face. It is requisite, therefore, that we be prompt in the practice of well-doing; for of Him are all things. And thus He forewarns us: "Behold, the Lord [cometh], and His reward is before His face, to render to every man according to his work."(8) He exhorts us, therefore,(9) with our whole heart to attend to this,(10) that we be not lazy or slothful in any good work. Let our boasting and our confidence be in Him. Let us submit ourselves to His will. Let us consider the whole multitude of His angels, how they stand ever ready to minister to His will. For the Scripture saith, "Ten thousand times ten thousand stood around Him, and thousands of thousands ministered unto Him,(11) and cried, Holy, holy, holy, [is] the Lord of Sabaoth; the whole creation(12) is full of His glory."(13) And let us therefore, conscientiously gathering together in harmony, cry to Him earnestly, as with one mouth, that we may be made partakers of His great and glorious promises. For [the Scripture] saith, "Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which He hath prepared for them that wait for(14) Him."(15)

CHAP. XXXV.--IMMENSE IS THIS REWARD. HOW SHALL WE OBTAIN IT?

How blessed and wonderful, beloved, are the gifts of God! Life in immortality, splendour in righteousness, truth in perfect confidence,(16) faith in assurance, self-control in holiness! And all these fall under the cognizance of our understandings [now]; what then shall those things be which are prepared for such as wait for Him? The Creator and Father of all worlds,(17) the Most Holy,(18) alone knows their amount and their beauty. Let us therefore earnestly strive to be found in the number of those that wait for Him, in order that we may share in His promised gifts. But how, beloved, shall this be done? If our understanding be fixed by faith towards God; if we earnestly seek the things(19) which are pleasing and acceptable to Him; if we do the things which are in harmony with His blameless will; and if we follow the way of truth, casting away from us all unrighteousness and inquity,(20) along with all covetousness,(21) strife, evil practices, deceit, whispering, and evil-speaking, all hatred of God, pride and haughtiness, vain glory and ambition.(22) For they that do such things are hateful to God; and not only they that do them, but also those that take pleasure in them that do them.(23) For the Scripture saith, "But to the sinner God said, Wherefore dost thou declare my statutes, and take my covenant into thy mouth, seeing thou hatest instruction, and castest my words behind thee? When thou sawest a thief, thou consentedst with(24) him, and didst make thy portion with adulterers. Thy month has abounded with wickedness, and thy tongue contrived(1) deceit. Thou sittest, and speakest against thy brother; thou slanderest(2) thine own mother's son. These things thou hast done, and I kept silence; thou thoughtest, wicked one, that I should be like to thyself. But I will reprove thee, and set thyself before thee. Consider now these things, ye that forget God, lest He tear you in pieces, like a lion, and there be none to deliver.(3) The sacrifice of praise will glorify me, and a way is there by which I will show him the salvation of God."(4)

CHAP. XXXVI.--ALL BLESSINGS ARE GIVEN TO US THROUGH CHRIST.

This is the way, beloved, in which we find our Saviour,(5) even Jesus Christ, the High Priest of all our offerings, the defender and helper of our infirmity. By Him we look up to the heights of heaven. By Him we behold, as in a glass, His immaculate and most excellent visage. By Him are the eyes of our hearts opened. By Him our foolish and darkened understanding blossoms(6) up anew towards His marvellous light. By Him the Lord has willed that we should taste of immortal knowledge,(7) "who, being the brightness of His majesty, is by so much greater than the angels, as He hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they."(8) For it is thus written, "Who maketh His angels spirits, and His ministers a flame of fire."(9) But concerning His Son(10) the Lord spoke thus: "Thou art my Son, to-day have I begotten Thee. Ask of me, and I will give Thee the heathen for Thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for Thy possession."(11) And again He saith to Him, "Sit Thou at my right hand, until I make Thine enemies Thy footstool."(12) But who are His enemies? All the wicked, and those who set themselves to oppose the will of God.(13)

CHAP. XXXVII.--CHRIST IS OUR LEADER, AND WE HIS SOLDIERS.

Let us then, men and brethren, with all energy act the part of soldiers, in accordance with His holy commandments. Let us consider those who serve under our generals, with what order, obedience,(14) and submissiveness they perform the things which are commanded them. All are not prefects, nor commanders of a thousand, nor of a hundred, nor of fifty, nor the like, but each one in his own rank performs the things commanded by the king and the generals. The great cannot subsist without the small, nor the small without the great. There is a kind of mixture in all things, and thence arises mutual advantage.(15) Let us take our body for an example.(16) The head is nothing without the feet, and the feet are nothing without the head; yea, the very smallest members of our body are necessary and useful to the whole body. But all work(17) harmoniously together, and are under one common rule(18) for the preservation of the whole body.

CHAP. XXXVIII.--LET THE MEMBERS OF THE CHURCH SUBMIT THEMSELVES, AND NO ONE EXALT HIMSELF ABOVE ANOTHER.

Let our whole body, then, be preserved in Christ Jesus;(19) and let every one be subject to his neighbour, according to the special gift(20) bestowed upon him. Let the strong not despise(21) the weak, and let the weak show respect unto the strong. Let the rich man provide for the wants of the poor; and let the poor man bless God, because He hath given him one by whom his need may be supplied. Let the wise man display his wisdom, not by [mere] words, but through good deeds. Let the humble not bear testimony to himself, but leave witness to be borne to him by another.(22) Let him that is pure in the flesh not grow proud(23) of it, and boast, knowing that it was another who bestowed on him the gift of continence. Let us consider, then, brethren, of what matter we were made,--who and what manner of beings we came into the world, as it were out of a sepulchre, and from utter darkness.(24) He who made us and fashioned us, having prepared His bountiful gifts for us before we were born, introduced us into His world. Since, therefore, we receive all these things from Him, we ought for everything to give Him thanks; to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen.

CHAP. XXXIX.--THERE IS NO REASON FOR SELF-CONCEIT.

Foolish and inconsiderate(1) men, who have neither wisdom(2) nor instruction, mock and deride us, being eager to exalt themselves in their own conceits. For what can a mortal man do, or what strength is there in one made out of the dust? For it is written, "There was no shape before mine eyes, only I heard a sound,(3) and a voice [saying], What then? Shall a man be pure before the Lord? Or shall such an one be [counted] blameless in his deeds, seeing He does not confide in His servants, and has charged(4) even His angels with perversity? The heaven is not clean in His sight: how much less they that dwell in houses of clay, of which also we ourselves were made! He smote them as a moth; and from morning even until evening they endure not. Because they could furnish no assistance to themselves, they perished. He breathed upon them, and they died, because they had no wisdom. But call now, if any one will answer thee, or if thou wilt look to any of the holy angels; for wrath destroys the foolish man, and envy killeth him that is in error. I have seen the foolish taking root, but their habitation was presently consumed. Let their sons be far from safety; let them be despised(5) before the gates of those less than themselves, and there shall be none to deliver. For what was prepared for them, the righteous shall eat; and they shall not be delivered from evil."(6)

CHAP.XL.--LET US PRESERVE IN THE CHURCH THE ORDER APPOINTED BY GOD.

These things therefore being manifest to us, and since we look into the depths of the divine knowledge, it behoves us to do all things in [their proper] order, which the Lord has commanded us to perform at stated times.(7) He has enjoined offerings [to be presented] and service to be performed [to Him], and that not thoughtlessly or irregularly, but at the appointed times and hours. Where and by whom He desires these things to be done, He Himself has fixed by His own supreme will, in order that all things, being piously done according to His good pleasure, may be acceptable unto Him.(8) Those, therefore, who present their offerings at the appointed times, are accepted and blessed; for inasmuch as they follow the laws of the Lord, they sin not. For his own peculiar services are assigned to the high priest, and their own proper place is prescribed to the priests, and their own special ministrations devolve on the Levites. The layman is bound by the laws that pertain to laymen.

CHAP. XLI.--CONTINUATION OF THE SAME SUBJECT.

Let every one of you, brethren, give thanks(9) to God in his own order, living in all good conscience, with becoming gravity, and not going beyond the rule of the ministry prescribed to him. Not in every place, brethren, are the daily sacrifices offered, or the peace-offerings, or the sin-offerings and the trespass-offerings, but in Jerusalem only. And even there they are not offered in any place, but only at the altar before the temple, that which is offered being first carefully examined by the high priest and the ministers already mentioned. Those, therefore, who do anything beyond that which is agreeable to His will, are punished with death. Ye see,(10) brethren, that the greater the knowledge that has been vouchsafed to us, the greater also is the danger to which we are exposed.

CHAP. XLII.--THE ORDER OF MINISTERS IN THE CHURCH.

The apostles have preached the gospel to us from(11) the Lord Jesus Christ; Jesus(12) Christ [has done so] from God. Christ therefore was sent forth by God,(13) and the apostles by Christ. Both these appointments,(14) then, were made in an orderly way, according to the will of God. Having therefore received their orders, and being fully assured by the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ, and established(15) in the word of God, with full assurance of the Holy Ghost, they went forth proclaiming that the kingdom of God was at hand. And thus preaching through countries and cities, they appointed the first fruits [of their labours], having first proved them by the Spirit,(16) to be bishops and deacons of those who should afterwards believe. Nor was this any new thing, since inDouche many ages before it was written concerning bishops and deacons. For thus saith the Scripture in a certain place, "I will appoint their bishops(1) in righteousness, and their deacons(2) in faith."(3)

Do you realize what a buffet Christian you are? You take one line of Clement to attempt to make it mean Sola Fide... yet ignore SO many other quotes that proves that you are not in the Church built by Christ.

Authority... Succession... Sacrifice of the Mass...

"Owing to the sudden and repeated calamities and misfortunes which have befallen us, we must acknowledge that we have been somewhat tardy in turning our attention to the matters in dispute among you, beloved; and especially that abominable and unholy sedition, alien and foreign to the elect of God, which a few rash and self-willed persons have inflamed to such madness that your venerable and illustrious name, worthy to be loved by all men, has been greatly defamed. . . . Accept our counsel and you will have nothing to regret. . . . If anyone disobey the things which have been said by him [God] through us [i.e., that you must reinstate your leaders], let them know that they will involve themselves in transgression and in no small danger. . . . You will afford us joy and gladness if being obedient to the things which we have written through the Holy Spirit, you will root out the wicked passion of jealousy" (Letter to the Corinthians 1, 58–59, 63 [A.D. 80]).

"Through countryside and city [the apostles] preached, and they appointed their earliest converts, testing them by the Spirit, to be the bishops and deacons of future believers. Nor was this a novelty, for bishops and deacons had been written about a long time earlier. . . . Our apostles knew through our Lord Jesus Christ that there would be strife for the office of bishop. For this reason, therefore, having received perfect foreknowledge, they appointed those who have already been mentioned and afterwards added the further provision that, if they should die, other approved men should succeed to their ministry" (Letter to the Corinthians 42:4–5, 44:1–3 [A.D. 80]).

"Then the reverence of the law is chanted, and the grace of the prophets is known, and the faith of the Gospels is established, and the tradition of the apostles is preserved, and the grace of the Church exults" (Letter to the Corinthians 11 [A.D. 80]).

"Our sin will not be small if we eject from the episcopate those who blamelessly and holily have offered its sacrifices. Blessed are those presbyters who have already finished their course, and who have obtained a fruitful and perfect release" (Letter to the Corinthians 44:4–5 [A.D. 80]).

God Bless, Love in Christ & Mary

ironmonk

[ironmonk]

Another note about using St. Clement's quote to mean "sola fide"...

If someone said that I am named Max...

Does that mean my name is not Brackett? (my full name is Max Brackett)

Saying a positive does not negate other qualities that are required to reach a goal.

"We can make it to the olympics if we work hard" - Does that mean that as long as we work hard we will get there... no, we must do other things also...

Likewise, Clement saying that Faith justifies us, does not mean that faith alone justifies us...

2 Corin 11:15

So it is not strange that his ministers also masquerade as ministers of righteousness. Their end will correspond to their deeds.

St. Matt 10:22

You will be hated by all because of my name, but whoever endures to the end will be saved.

St. John 3:19

9 And this is the verdict, that the light came into the world, but people preferred darkness to light, because their works were evil.

20 For everyone who does wicked things hates the light and does not come toward the light, so that his works might not be exposed.

21 But whoever lives the truth comes to the light, so that his works may be clearly seen as done in God.

St. James 2:20 Do you want proof, you ignoramus, that faith without works is useless?

God Bless,

ironmonk

[Dave]

I'm again curious as to whether or not you actually wrote this, Dave.

(Dave) Mark 13:31 - heaven and earth will pass away, but Jesus' Word will not pass away. But Jesus never says anything about His Word being entirely committed to a book. Also, it took 400 years to compile the Bible, and another 1,000 years to invent the printing press. How was the Word of God communicated? Orally, by the bishops of the Church, with the protection of the Holy Spirit.

(Me) Saying that "it took 400 years to compile the Bible" is false. It took 400 years for there to be a definitive council on the canon list, sure. However, the writings of many early fathers and texts like the Muratorian Canon teach us that all the NT letters were collected in the 2nd century, if not earlier (and, of course, the OT books were already collected).

Yes, it took 1,000 years to invent the printing press, but the Bible was still copied time and time again to be provided to all possible.

Yes, of course the Word of God was primarily communicated to the laity by the bishops. However, that does not mean that the Word of God was primarily communited to the bishops by word of mouth!

What does it matter whether or not I wrote this? It's really none of your business.

And you're just incorrect about the Bible being copied. It was expensive as all get-out! In addition, most of the population was illiterate.

And regarding your statement "However, that does not mean that the Word of God was primarily communited to the bishops by word of mouth!" . . . And?

(Dave) Mark 16:15 - Jesus commands the apostles to preach the Gospel to every creature. But Jesus did not want this preaching to stop after the apostles died, and yet the Bible was not compiled until four centuries later. The word of God was transferred orally.

(Me) I don't see how this is an exegetical argument for your position. Please outline its premises and inferences. It just seems to be a re-statement of the extra-Biblical argument you offered above.

It's a common sense argument. No need to do exegesis because of that. However, your statement is nothing more than a grasping at straws to avoid conceding that perhaps you may be wrong.

(Dave) Mark 3:14; 16:15 - Jesus commands the apostles to preach (not write) the gospel to the world. Jesus gives no commandment to the apostles to write, and gives them no indication that the oral apostolic word he commanded them to communicate would later die in the fourth century. If Jesus wanted Christianity to be limited to a book (which would be finalized four centuries later), wouldn't He have said a word about it?

(Me) Whether or not Jesus did not command them to write down anything, He certainly quoted from the Scripture many times, and the Holy Spirit later moved them to write down the NT Scripture (2 Peter 1:21).

You are correct on both counts. But how does that indicate that the Bible is the sole authority for Christians or that everything a Christian believes must be spelled out in the Bible?

Additionally, the conclusion that the Scripture is not the post-apostolic man of God's only infallible rule of faith does not follow from the fact that the Gospel is often transmitted by orally preaching! Surely that is a non-sequitur.

That's nonsense. If the apostles and their successors spread the word orally, and if we know that Scripture doesn't contain EVERYTHING in it, as the Gospel of John states, and that the letters of Paul, John, etc. were written to INDIVIDUAL audiences, thus causing the Bible not to be a compendium of Christian doctrine, then my conclusion is perfectly logical.

(Dave) Luke 10:16 - He who hears you (not "who reads your writings"), hears me. The oral word passes from Jesus to the apostles to their successors by the gracious gifts of the Holy Spirit. This succession has been preserved in the Holy Catholic Church.

(Me) You are right to say that the apostles were His witnesses in a unique, authoritative manner. However, I don't see where you got from this passage that apostolic authority and witness was passed down through apostolic succession. The Bible indicates that the apostles were a foundational phenomenon in the Church (Ephesians 2:20), having once-for-all laid the foundation upon which the saints now build.

You seem to have conveniently forgotten about Matthias, who succeeded Judas Iscariot. If you take each Catholic bishop in the world, you'll see that he was ordained by another bishop who was ordained by another bishop who was ordained by another bishop and so forth until you reach one of the 12 Apostles! NOWHERE does the Bible state that the Apostles' role became obsolete.

(Dave) Luke 24:47 - Jesus explains that repentance and forgiveness of sins must be preached (not written) in Christ's name to all nations. For Protestants to argue that the word of God is now limited to a book (subject to thousands of different interpretations) is to not only ignore Scripture, but introduce a radical theory about how God spreads His word which would have been unbelievable to the people at the time of Jesus.

(Me) Same error as above; you're assuming that if the truth is ever transmitted through fallible, oral preaching, then the truth cannot be fundamentally grounded in the infallible rule of faith that is the Bible.

Where do you get the idea that preaching is fallible? Not once does it say that in the Bible. You're reading your own false interpretations into these passages.

(Dave) Acts 2:3-4 - the Holy Spirit came to the apostles in the form of "tongues" of fire so that they would "speak" (not just write) the Word.

(Me) Yes, and they stopped that after they had laid the foundation of the Church, as already argued.

Oh, no, they didn't, as already argued!

(Dave) Acts 15:27 - Judas and Silas, successors to the apostles, were sent to bring God's infallible Word by "word of mouth."

(Me) Honestly, do you understand the Protestant position? Sola Scriptura has never taught that the only communication between people should be in the written Scripture. Rather, it teaches that the sole infallible rule of faith for the post-apostolic man of God is the Scripture!

Either way, it's a false man-made teaching.

(Dave) Rom 10:17 - faith comes by what is "heard" (not just read) which is the Word that is "preached" (not read). This word comes from the oral tradition of the apostles. Those in countries where the Scriptures are not available can still come to faith in Jesus Christ.

(Me) Yes, because we preach the Gospel on the basis of the infallible rule of faith that is the Scripture. Fallible, oral methods of transmitting infallible truths based upon the Scripture do not become infallible rules of faith, or usurp the place of their foundation.

Once again, you miss the point that the Church, with its infallible teachings, came well before the Bible. And you still haven't explained why transmitting the faith orally is fallible.

I'm not going to go through all the rest of these scripture citations. They provide ample proof, but you, in your stubbornness, refuse to see it. I'll pray that your heart may be softened.

But there's one more thing I'd like to add. Your arguments here are killed by other things you've said. You've said that the Catholic Church was The Church until a couple hundred years before the reformation. For you saying that the Apostle role became obsolete proves that you're a contradiction to your own faith!

Edited September 18, 2003 by Dave

[Dave]

John, you missed the point. Bishops aren't allowed to marry, but they freely give up that right once they become priests. No one forced them to become priests.

[Dave]

bump

[ironmonk]

bump