Where does the Pope get his authority?

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Brakelite

Well-Known Member
Feb 6, 2020
9,899
7,170
113
Melbourne
brakelite.wordpress.com
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
Further to the above...

When the Catholic Church lost its civil authority, all political Governments in Europe thought she was finished. Many celebrated that at long last the bondage they were held by papal authority was at an end. These prophecies, among several others, give powerful historic authenticity to the reformers testimony to the identity of Antichrist.



The claims that Gregory VII made in Dictatus Papae are radical and heretical. To cite only four: “all princes shall kiss the feet of the Pope alone”—angels refused human homage (Revelation 19:10). “His name alone [the pope] shall be spoken in the churches”—displaced Jesus. That he can “depose emperors”—only God can depose or set up kings (Daniel 2:21), and that “the Roman Church has never erred. Nor will it err, to all eternity”—Paul’s pastoral letters and the letters to the seven churches in the book of Revelation shows that the church errs. To say otherwise is to arrogate an attribute—infallibility—exclusive to God. Indeed, the universal supremacy in religion and in politics claimed by the Dictatus Papae, no king, priest, prophet, or apostle ever claimed them in the Bible. It belongs to God alone.



Jesus Himself drew a scarlet line “from the blood of [righteous] Abel to the blood of Zechariah” (Luke 11:51, NIV), and predicted in John 16:2 that a “time is coming when anyone who kills you will think they are offering a service to God” (NIV), and warned, “They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. By their fruit you will recognize them” (Matthew 7:15, 16, NIV). And the fruit of the medieval popes—unbridled avarice, venality, power politics, immorality, burning heretics, antisemitism, the Crusades, the Inquisition, magical religion—fits the bill of the “ferocious wolves” predicted by Jesus.



To those Catholics who blindly and resolutely believe their church is the pillar and foundation of truth on the basis of Jesus' promise that the gates of hell would not prevail, forget the long line of so called heretics who were mutilated, obscenely abused, dispossessed of land, family, culture, and home, because in the spirit of Christ they dared to point out the excesses, the sins, the evils and profanities that marked the downward spiral of the Papacy. It was they to whom the promise was given. It was they with whom Christ abode through all the trials and abuses. It was they who were the true pillars and foundations of truth. And it remains so today.



The exercise of force is contrary to the principles of God’s government; He desires only the service of love; and love cannot be commanded; it cannot be won by force or authority. A ‘truth’ that must use violence to secure its existence cannot be truth. Rather the truth that moves the sun and the stars is that which is so sure of its power that it refuses to compel . . . by force. Rather it relies on the slow, hard, and seemingly unrewarding work of witness, a witness which it trusts to prevail even in a fragmented and violent world.



This witness, encapsulated in the “theology of the cross,” and expressed in the self-accusing confession “I am a sinner” and commitment to fight evil in one’s life, is the crux of the Christian moral revolution. Precisely by turning to self the accusing finger that had been pointed at another, confession engendered what the theologian Krister Stendahl called “the introspective conscience of the West,” and thus shattered the “scapegoat mechanism,” the primordial, universal human practice to make oneself appear good by falsely accusing others. It was a radical departure from “the old path that the wicked have trod” (Job 22:15, NIV)—so radical that Paul said it meant death and a new life. “For we know that our old self was crucified with [Christ] (Romans 6:6, NIV). “I no longer live, but Christ lives in me” (Galatians 2:20, NIV).



People kill themselves in many ways, but never by crucifixion. That’s done by another. “Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit” (John 3:6, NIV). Spiritually, the impossibility of crucifying oneself and producing a new life; or, put differently, the ability of God alone to do it is what is expressed in the Protestant credo of sola gratia, by grace alone. It’s precisely the sola, the alone, that raised the ire of the medieval Papacy, because it excluded all the sacramental-liturgical and Platonic-Aristotelian additions to the gospel upon which its power and authority was based. In short, the ire was provoked by politics.



Indeed, politics is the clue to the Counter-Reformation and the modern Papacy. “Whatever the doctrinal differences the structural one remains the most intractable. As before Luther, Rome still plays politics and claims secular and spiritual dominance . . . a church that is a state and a state that is a church,” as has often been noted. This unchristian amalgam, we must recall, was the specific target of Voltaire’s rallying cry Ecrasez l’infame (crush the infamy); and also of the anticlericalism, radical atheism, and dechristianization of the French Revolution, which set the modern world against Christianity, even as it is, in Holland’s words, “still utterly saturated by Christian concepts and assumptions.”



The order of authority derives from God, as the Apostle says [in Romans 13:1-7]. For this reason, the duty of obedience is, for the Christian, a consequence of this derivation of authority from God, and ceases when that ceases. But, as we have already said, authority may fail to derive from God for two reasons: either because of the way in which authority has been obtained, or in consequence of the use which is made of it.

Liberty Magazine
 

Brakelite

Well-Known Member
Feb 6, 2020
9,899
7,170
113
Melbourne
brakelite.wordpress.com
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
Like a leech or a parasite, the Catholic Church is only strong in direct relation to its connectedness to political powers. In medieval times she was closely connected to the kings and queens of Europe, and through them ruled the lives of millions. The Vatican's goal is a global version of that tyranny with which she ruled Europe during the dark ages, but it is only recently that her power is returning through diplomatic and more intimate relations with various governments throughout the world, particularly the United States. You see, in 1798 she lost all contact with civil authority when the Pope was taken into captive exile by Napoleon's general Berthier. The civil authority of Rome began to re-emerge when Mussolini reinstated Vatican authority in 1929 through the Lateran Treaty, and that civil influence has been growing exponentially ever since.
Many believe that the promotion of the NWO is Zionist, or a banking cartel enterprise, but this is incorrect. The NWO has been the ambition of Vatican insiders for centuries, and has advanced this ambition in secret through secret societies and the Jesuits, and only recently has she emerged publicly as a contender for the role of leadership in this goal, as she has gained in influential power in international politics. She has accomplished this by adorning herself with a mask which mimics that of society...a concern for family, poverty, and climate change. To accomplish her goal, she has four main principles by which she means to gain power.
These 4 principles can be found in the following quote from the former Pope Benedict, in his encyclical Caritas in Veritas, par.67. But notice particularly his desire to ensure that these principles are backed up with force. Those four are the concept of 'common good'...sharing of resources (socialism)....subsidiarity (where personal rights are in submission to the majority)....and international cooperation.

A little reminder. When the Vatican speaks of force, it means it. Bloodshed, suffering, and persecution has always been the result.

67. In the face of the unrelenting growth of global interdependence, there is a strongly felt need, even in the midst of a global recession, for a reform of the United Nations Organization, and likewise of economic institutions and international finance, so that the concept of the family of nations can acquire real teeth. One also senses the urgent need to find innovative ways of implementing the principle of the responsibility to protect[146] and of giving poorer nations an effective voice in shared decision-making. This seems necessary in order to arrive at a political, juridical and economic order which can increase and give direction to international cooperation for the development of all peoples in solidarity. To manage the global economy; to revive economies hit by the crisis; to avoid any deterioration of the present crisis and the greater imbalances that would result; to bring about integral and timely disarmament, food security and peace; to guarantee the protection of the environment and to regulate migration: for all this, there is urgent need of a true world political authority, as my predecessor Blessed John XXIII indicated some years ago. Such an authority would need to be regulated by law, to observe consistently the principles of subsidiarity and solidarity, to seek to establish the common good[147], and to make a commitment to securing authentic integral human development inspired by the values of charity in truth. Furthermore, such an authority would need to be universally recognized and to be vested with the effective power to ensure security for all, regard for justice, and respect for rights[148]. Obviously it would have to have the authority to ensure compliance with its decisions from all parties, and also with the coordinated measures adopted in various international forums. Without this, despite the great progress accomplished in various sectors, international law would risk being conditioned by the balance of power among the strongest nations. The integral development of peoples and international cooperation require the establishment of a greater degree of international ordering, marked by subsidiarity, for the management of globalization[149]. They also require the construction of a social order that at last conforms to the moral order, to the interconnection between moral and social spheres, and to the link between politics and the economic and civil spheres, as envisaged by the Charter of the United Nations.


"The [Catholic] Church has the right to require that the Catholic religion shall be the ONLY religion of the State, to the exclusion of all others... Cursed be those who assert liberty of conscience and of worship, and such that maintain that the church may not employ force." ~Pope Pius ix (1846-1878).

KJV Isaiah 47:1-11
1 Come down, and sit in the dust, O virgin daughter of Babylon, sit on the ground: there is no throne, O daughter of the Chaldeans: for thou shalt no more be called tender and delicate.
2 Take the millstones, and grind meal: uncover thy locks, make bare the leg, uncover the thigh, pass over the rivers.
3 Thy nakedness shall be uncovered, yea, thy shame shall be seen: I will take vengeance, and I will not meet thee as a man.
4 As for our redeemer, the LORD of hosts is his name, the Holy One of Israel.
5 Sit thou silent, and get thee into darkness, O daughter of the Chaldeans: for thou shalt no more be called, The lady of kingdoms.
6 I was wroth with my people, I have polluted mine inheritance, and given them into thine hand: thou didst shew them no mercy; upon the ancient hast thou very heavily laid thy yoke.
7 And thou saidst, I shall be a lady for ever: so that thou didst not lay these things to thy heart, neither didst remember the latter end of it.
8 Therefore hear now this, thou that art given to pleasures, that dwellest carelessly, that sayest in thine heart, I am, and none else beside me; I shall not sit as a widow, neither shall I know the loss of children:
9 But these two things shall come to thee in a moment in one day, the loss of children, and widowhood: they shall come upon thee in their perfection for the multitude of thy sorceries, and for the great abundance of thine enchantments.
10 For thou hast trusted in thy wickedness: thou hast said, None seeth me. Thy wisdom and thy knowledge, it hath perverted thee; and thou hast said in thine heart, I am, and none else beside me.
11 Therefore shall evil come upon thee; thou shalt not know from whence it riseth: and mischief shall fall upon thee; thou shalt not be able to put it off: and desolation shall come upon thee suddenly, which
thou shalt not know.
 

Marymog

Well-Known Member
Mar 7, 2017
11,946
1,795
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
1.) "Perpetual virgin" = Man Made Catholic Doctrine

2.) "ascension of Mary" = Man Made Catholic Doctrine

3.) "Rosary // Prayer" = Man Made Catholic Doctrine

4.) "Born again BY water"...... = Man Made Catholic Doctrine

5.) "Peter is the 1st POPE" = Man Made Catholic Doctrine.

6.) "Mary is "co-author of Salvation" = Man Made Catholic Doctrine

7.) "Ash Wednesday" = Man made Catholic nonsense

8.) "Priests supernaturally turn the cookie into the literal body of Christ".. = Man Made Catholic Doctrine

9.) "Water baptizing babies". = Man made Catholic Doctrine

10.) "confirmed into the Catholic Cult" = Man Made Catholic Doctrine

11.) "Purgatory " = Man made Catholic Doctrine

12.) "penance" = Man made Catholic Doctrine

13.) "Exorcists on Vatican Staff" = Man Made Catholic Doctrine

15.) Feast Days of Mary : include :

  • Mother of God - 1st January.
  • Our Lady of Lourdes - 11th February.
  • Annunciation - 25th March.
  • The Visitation - 31st May.
  • The Assumption of Mary - 15th August.
  • Our Lady's Birthday - 8th September.
  • Our Lady of the Rosary - 7th October.
  • Immaculate Conception - 8th December.
  • All Saints (*Days)....
All this is man made Catholic nonsense.
You do know that individual Catholics don't make doctrine for The Church?
 

Marymog

Well-Known Member
Mar 7, 2017
11,946
1,795
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
This thread topic is about Papal authority, you are asking me about biblical church authority, an entirely different fish and one which my church does subscribe to.

We reject the following as tyrannical, despotic, and satanic.


The Pope's "authority" is not merely to the "church" but the claim of the Magisterium of Rome, is that the "Pope" has authority over all states (political entities, whether Kings, Emperors, Presidents, &c, as the ideology teaches that the spiritual should rule over, control, the secular). To this end, the current Canon Law of Rome, clearly states that:

" … Can. 1404 The First See is judged by no one. …" [Roman Catholic Canon Law; BOOK VII PROCESSES; Part I. TRIALS IN GENERAL (Cann. 1400 – 1403); TITLE I. THE COMPETENT FORUM (Cann. 1404 - 1416)] - Code of Canon Law: Table of Contents

" … Can. 1406 §1. If the prescript of ⇒ can. 1404 is violated, the acts and decisions are considered as not to have been placed.

§2. In the cases mentioned in ⇒ can. 1405, the incompetence of other judges is absolute. …" [Roman Catholic Canon Law; BOOK VII PROCESSES; Part I. TRIALS IN GENERAL (Cann. 1400 – 1403); TITLE I. THE COMPETENT FORUM (Cann. 1404 - 1416)] - Code of Canon Law: Table of Contents

" … Can. 1405 §1. It is solely the right of the Roman Pontiff himself to judge in the cases mentioned in ⇒ can. 1401:

1/ those who hold the highest civil office of a state;

2/ cardinals;

3/ legates of the Apostolic See and, in penal cases, bishops;

4/ other cases which he has called to his own judgment.

§2. A judge cannot review an act or instrument confirmed specifically (in forma specifica) by the Roman Pontiff without his prior mandate.

§3. Judgment of the following is reserved to the Roman Rota:

1/ bishops in contentious matters, without prejudice to the prescript of ⇒ can. 1419, §2;

2/ an abbot primate or abbot superior of a monastic congregation and a supreme moderator of religious institutes of pontifical right;

3/ dioceses or other physical or juridic ecclesiastical persons which do not have a superior below the Roman Pontiff. …" [Roman Catholic Canon Law; BOOK VII PROCESSES; Part I. TRIALS IN GENERAL (Cann. 1400 – 1403); TITLE I. THE COMPETENT FORUM (Cann. 1404 - 1416)] - Code of Canon Law: Table of Contents

This is confirmed by the Online Catholic Library, Encyclopedia, and by Augustine:

"...We are informed by the texts of the gospels that in this Church and in its power are two swords; namely, the spiritual and the temporal. For when the Apostles say: "Behold, here are two swords" [Lk 22:38] that is to say, in the Church, since the Apostles were speaking, the Lord did not reply that there were too many, but sufficient. Certainly the one who denies that the temporal sword is in the power of Peter has not listened well to the word of the Lord commanding: "Put up thy sword into thy scabbard" [Mt 26:52]. Both, therefore, are in the power of the Church, that is to say, the spiritual and the material sword, but the former is to be administered for the Church but the latter by the Church; the former in the hands of the priest; the latter by the hands of kings and soldiers, but at the will and sufferance of the priest. ..." [Roman Catholic Online Library, New Advent Online, Church Documents; Unam Sanctam; His Holiness Pope Boniface VIII; November 18, 1302]

-------

"...Then follow some principles and conclusions concerning the spiritual and the secular power:

Under the control of the Church are two swords, that is two powers, the expression referring to the medieval theory of the two swords, the spiritual and the secular. This is substantiated by the customary reference to the swords of the Apostles at the arrest of Christ (Luke 22:38; Matthew 26:52).

Both swords are in the power of the Church; the spiritual is wielded in the Church by the hand of the clergy; the secular is to be employed for the Church by the hand of the civil authority, but under the direction of the spiritual power.


The one sword must be subordinate to the other: the earthly power must submit to the spiritual authority, as this has precedence of the secular on account of its greatness and sublimity; for the spiritual power has the right to establish and guide the secular power, and also to judge it when it does not act rightly. When, however, the earthly power goes astray, it is judged by the spiritual power; a lower spiritual power is judged by a higher, the highest spiritual power is judged by God.

This authority, although granted to man, and exercised by man, is not a human authority, but rather a Divine one, granted to Peter by Divine commission and confirmed in him and his successors. Consequently, whoever opposes this power ordained of God opposes the law of God and seems, like a Manichaean, to accept two principles.

"Now, therefore, we declare, say, determine and pronounce that for every human creature it is necessary for salvation to be subject to the authority of the Roman pontiff" (Porro subesse Romano Pontifici omni humanae creaturae declaramus, dicimus, definimus, et pronuntiamus omnino esse de necessitate salutis).


The Bull is universal in character. … In the registers, on the margin of the text of the record, the last sentence is noted as its real definition: "Declaratio quod subesse Romano Pontifici est omni humanae creaturae de necessitate salutis" (It is here stated that for salvation it is necessary that every human creature be subject to the authority of the Roman pontiff). ..." [Roman Catholic Online Encyclopedia, New Advent Online; section on Unum Sanctum]

-------

"...Its chief concepts are as follows (Hergenröther-Kirsch, 4th ed., II, 593): (1) There is but one true Church, outside of which there is no salvation; but one body of Christ with one head and not two. (2) That head is Christ and His representative, the Roman pope; whoever refuses the pastoral care of Peter belongs not to the flock of Christ. (3) There are two swords (i.e., powers), the spiritual and the temporal; the first borne by the Church, the second for the Church; the first by the hand of the priest, the second by that of the king, but under the direction of the priest (ad nutum et patientiam sacerdotis). (4) Since there must be a co- ordination of members from the lowest to the highest, it follows that the spiritual power is above the temporal and has the right to instruct (or establish--instituere) the latter regarding its highest end and to judge it when it does evil; whoever resists the highest power ordained of God resists God Himself. (5) It is necessary for salvation that all men should be subject to the Roman Pontiff--"Porro subesse Romano Pontifici omni humanæ creaturæ declaramus, dicimus, definimus et pronunciamus omnino esse de necessitate salutis". ..." [Roman Catholic Online Encyclopedia, New Advent Online; Pope Boniface VIII; (BENEDETTO GAETANO)]

Now the quote of Bellarmine, states that "All names which in the scriptures are applied to Christ, by virtue of which it is established that he is over the church, all the same names are applied to the Pope."

Therefore, all names of Christ, as scripture gives to Him, Bellarmine states are also the names as applied to the "Pope". Some of the very names of Christ in scripture are "I AM" (John 8:58), "God" (Hebrews 1:9), "Lord" ("JEHOVAH", Hebrews 1:10), "Everlasting Father" (Isaiah 9:6), etc. Christ is "Head" (1 Corinthians 11:3; Ephesians 4:15, 5:23; Colossians 1:18, 2:10) over the church.
Hey dodgeball....Lets try this for the 3rd, Or is it the 4th time:

If you don't believe your elders, do you get disciplined?
 

Marymog

Well-Known Member
Mar 7, 2017
11,946
1,795
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
So you enjoy our discussions?
As you have to read them. .and in them, i expose why you are doing penance, and i show you your POPE worshipping a Plastic statue.

on and on .....

You enjoy this?

Really?

Maybe you can get back to reality., or just try to be honest.
Let's try this again. Focus on the questions. When you answer my quesitons I will answer yours kiddo:

YOU are telling ME why I don't enjoy talking to you? How about if you just ASK instead of presuming why I don't like talking to you?
 

RedFan

Well-Known Member
May 15, 2022
2,871
1,257
113
70
New Hampshire
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Let's try this again. Focus on the questions. When you answer my quesitons I will answer yours kiddo:

YOU are telling ME why I don't enjoy talking to you? How about if you just ASK instead of presuming why I don't like talking to you?
Well, I enjoy your discussions!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Marymog

Marymog

Well-Known Member
Mar 7, 2017
11,946
1,795
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I think I will need to bow out from further discussion with you on the point, my friend, because we seem to be chasing two different rabbits down the same hole. Your goal is to show Roman primacy in the early church. Accurate or not, it isn't my goal. I limited myself to whether the Letter to the Smyrneans supports this notion. And reading it in the original, it doesn't. Even if Clement, Dionysius and every church father you mention declared Rome's bishop to be the head of the worldwide church a hundred times apiece, my analysis of Ignatius' actual words would still make complete sense. Not "almost." Complete.

You could marshal a thousand pro-Roman early writings that were absolutely unassailable in declaring the Papacy supreme, but THIS ONE would still not qualify as one. The reason has nothing to do with whether the Papacy was in fact viewed as supreme (even by Ignatius!) and everything to do with the words he used. Gotta go to the Greek! Gotta go to the Greek! I can't stress this enough. Gotta go to the Greek!

I rarely take sides in debates on this forum, but I often call out posters for overreaching in support of their thesis -- even when I agree with their thesis. For instance, I am a Trinitarian, but not shy about calling out my fellow Trinitarians when they adduce flawed reasons in support of the Trinity. (Or at least I used to, before the topic got banned.)

You have made some terrific arguments on this forum, @Marymog. And I respect your analyses. We'll just have to disagree on whether the Letter to the Smyrneans supports second century Roman primacy.
Hold on Redfan. You have me confused. I must have missed a post on this or I am confusing the flow of the discussion. I agree with you that the Letter to the Smyrnaeans does not support the notion that Rome had primacy during Ignatius time.

But in post #1,617 your entire defense of you thinking that you are right and I am wrong about Rome having primacy is based on that you "THINK the comma after "presidency" is misleading, and a poor translation" in a letter to the Romans. You also gave your opinion on what YOU think Ignatius "concept" was in that letter in that Rome "was presiding in the Italian peninsula" only, not worldwide. But let's be clear. That is YOUR interpretation of the letter. That is what YOU believe Ignatius "concept" was when writing the letter.

I get it. You want to focus on that one letter. With that said, I once again agree with you. The Letter to the Smyrneans does not support Rome primacy. But other letters do.

Mary
 

RedFan

Well-Known Member
May 15, 2022
2,871
1,257
113
70
New Hampshire
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Hold on Redfan. You have me confused. I must have missed a post on this or I am confusing the flow of the discussion. I agree with you that the Letter to the Smyrnaeans does not support the notion that Rome had primacy during Ignatius time.

But in post #1,617 your entire defense of you thinking that you are right and I am wrong about Rome having primacy is based on that you "THINK the comma after "presidency" is misleading, and a poor translation" in a letter to the Romans. You also gave your opinion on what YOU think Ignatius "concept" was in that letter in that Rome "was presiding in the Italian peninsula" only, not worldwide. But let's be clear. That is YOUR interpretation of the letter. That is what YOU believe Ignatius "concept" was when writing the letter.

I get it. You want to focus on that one letter. With that said, I once again agree with you. The Letter to the Smyrneans does not support Rome primacy. But other letters do.

Mary
I haven't put up an "entire defense" for why I think Rome's primacy is wrong, not yet at least. Thus far I've only focused on one letter purported to support the notion. And I don't think the "defense" is mine to mount. I think it falls to the proponents of Roman primacy to support their thesis.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Athanasius377

Marymog

Well-Known Member
Mar 7, 2017
11,946
1,795
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
The apostles and even Jesus himself warned that there would be a great falling away from truth. That falling away we are told would begin with the demise of the last of the Apostles, and it would result in spiritual divorce, apostasy, a departure from what was originally a right relationship with Christ.
Where does Scripture say that?
 

Marymog

Well-Known Member
Mar 7, 2017
11,946
1,795
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I haven't put up an "entire defense" for why I think Rome's primacy is wrong, not yet at least. Thus far I've only focused on one letter purported to support the notion. And I don't think the "defense" is mine to mount. I think it falls to the proponents of Roman primacy to support their thesis.
No, you (we) have not focused on one letter. Once again, in post #1,617 you said in regard to his letter to the Romans, The concept Iggy was expressing with ἥτις καὶ προκάθηται ἐν τόπῳ χωρίου Ῥωμαίων is that the church at Rome was presiding in the Italian peninsula, not worldwide.

In that post you seem to be saying that "Rome's primacy is wrong". So I am confused about what you are saying.
 

Brakelite

Well-Known Member
Feb 6, 2020
9,899
7,170
113
Melbourne
brakelite.wordpress.com
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
Hey dodgeball....Lets try this for the 3rd, Or is it the 4th time:

If you don't believe your elders, do you get disciplined?
KJV Matthew 18:15-17
15 Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother.
16 But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.
17 And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.

Where in the above scripture does it say anything about obeying elders?

The Bible says we are to obey many things.... TRUTH
KJV Galatians 5:7
7 Ye did run well; who did hinder you that ye should not obey the truth?

GOSPEL
KJV Romans 10:16
16 But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report?

RIGHTEOUSNESS
KJV Romans 6:16
16 Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?

TRUE DOCTRINE
KJV Romans 6:17
17 But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you.

PARENTS
KJV Ephesians 6:1
1 Children, obey your parents in the Lord: for this is right.

YOUR EMPLOYER

KJV Colossians 3:22
22 Servants, obey in all things your masters according to the flesh; not with eyeservice, as menpleasers; but in singleness of heart, fearing God:

SCRIPTURE
KJV 2 Thessalonians 3:14
14 And if any man obey not our word by this epistle, note that man, and have no company with him, that he may be ashamed.

THE COURTS
KJV Titus 3:1
1 Put them in mind to be subject to principalities and powers, to obey magistrates, to be ready to every good work,

JESUS
KJV Hebrews 5:9
9 And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;

ELDERS
KJV Hebrews 13:17
17 Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you.

But I fail to find in any of them any suggestion that if we disobey our riders, they are authorised by God to punish us. Unlike the Papacy, which has embraced with whole heartedness the pagan concept of murdering those who disobey and branding them as rebels and insurrectionists. The above posts exposing what real papal authority truly is should embarrass you.

So in answer to your question, it's moot. Meaningless. There is no answer. It's like asking someone "when did you stop beating your wife?". You are playing Jesuit mind games again. I'm not playing.
 

RedFan

Well-Known Member
May 15, 2022
2,871
1,257
113
70
New Hampshire
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Once again, in post #1,617 you said, The concept Iggy was expressing with ἥτις καὶ προκάθηται ἐν τόπῳ χωρίου Ῥωμαίων is that the church at Rome was presiding in the Italian peninsula, not worldwide.

In that post you seem to be saying that "Rome's primacy is wrong". So I am confused about what you are saying.
No, in that post I am saying that Iggy's letter offers no support for Roman primacy throughout the Mediterranean world. That's all. (Some of the other letters you cite do support it, some don't, but I haven't yet addressed my views on them.)
 

Marymog

Well-Known Member
Mar 7, 2017
11,946
1,795
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
KJV Matthew 18:15-17
15 Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother.
16 But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.
17 And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.

Where in the above scripture does it say anything about obeying elders?

The Bible says we are to obey many things.... TRUTH
KJV Galatians 5:7
7 Ye did run well; who did hinder you that ye should not obey the truth?

GOSPEL
KJV Romans 10:16
16 But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report?

RIGHTEOUSNESS
KJV Romans 6:16
16 Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?

TRUE DOCTRINE
KJV Romans 6:17
17 But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you.

PARENTS
KJV Ephesians 6:1
1 Children, obey your parents in the Lord: for this is right.

YOUR EMPLOYER

KJV Colossians 3:22
22 Servants, obey in all things your masters according to the flesh; not with eyeservice, as menpleasers; but in singleness of heart, fearing God:

SCRIPTURE
KJV 2 Thessalonians 3:14
14 And if any man obey not our word by this epistle, note that man, and have no company with him, that he may be ashamed.

THE COURTS
KJV Titus 3:1
1 Put them in mind to be subject to principalities and powers, to obey magistrates, to be ready to every good work,

JESUS
KJV Hebrews 5:9
9 And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;

ELDERS
KJV Hebrews 13:17
17 Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you.

But I fail to find in any of them any suggestion that if we disobey our riders, they are authorised by God to punish us. Unlike the Papacy, which has embraced with whole heartedness the pagan concept of murdering those who disobey and branding them as rebels and insurrectionists. The above posts exposing what real papal authority truly is should embarrass you.

So in answer to your question, it's moot. Meaningless. There is no answer. It's like asking someone "when did you stop beating your wife?". You are playing Jesuit mind games again. I'm not playing.
Your SDA rules say they can discipline you so the answer is YES Marymog. If I don't believe my elders, I get disciplined!!

End of discussion.......
 

Marymog

Well-Known Member
Mar 7, 2017
11,946
1,795
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
No, in that post I am saying that Iggy's letter offers no support for Roman primacy throughout the Mediterranean world. That's all. (Some of the other letters you cite do support it, some don't, but I haven't yet addressed my views on them.)
Thank you for your opinion. My opinion is that it does support Roman primacy. Doing some brief research on all his letters the one to the Roman church gives much more praise to that church saying in part; "worthy of being deemed holy, and which presides over love,"
 

RedFan

Well-Known Member
May 15, 2022
2,871
1,257
113
70
New Hampshire
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Thank you for your opinion. My opinion is that it does support Roman primacy. Doing some brief research on all his letters the one to the Roman church gives much more praise to that church saying in part; "worthy of being deemed holy, and which presides over love,"
You are now arguing that his letter to the Roman church supports its primacy, not that his letter to the Smyrneans does. If you think his letter to the Smyrneans does, tell me why. I've already told you why I think it doesn't, when read in the original Greek. (Gotta go to the Greek!)

Ignatius' letter to the Roman Church does praise it greatly, but that letter is also the only one of his letters that doesn't mention a local bishop, or exhort obedience to his readers' bishop -- the common theme of his other letters. And it is silent on the issue of Roman hegemony beyond its diocesan borders.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Athanasius377

Brakelite

Well-Known Member
Feb 6, 2020
9,899
7,170
113
Melbourne
brakelite.wordpress.com
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
Where does Scripture say that?
KJV Acts 20:29-30
29 For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock.
30 Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.

KJV 2 Thessalonians 2:1-12
1 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,
2 That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.
3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;
4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.
5 Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?
6 And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time.
7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.
8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:
9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,
10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

KJV John 16:1-3
1 These things have I spoken unto you, that ye should not be offended.
2 They shall put you out of the synagogues: yea, the time cometh, that whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God service.
3 And these things will they do unto you, because they have not known the Father, nor me.

And as a confirmation of the above, the OT prophet, Daniel, also beasts witness.

Daniel 7:7
The dragon beast represents the Roman Empire (168 B. C. - 476 A. D.). This empire came to be known as the Iron monarchy of Rome (Edward Gibbon, The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire , vol. 4, p. 161). The ten horns represent the ten kingdoms into which the Roman Empire was divided when it fell apart. These ten kingdoms, according to Edward Gibbon, were: The Alemanni, the Franks, the Burgundians, the Vandals, the Suevi, the Visigoths, the Saxons, the Ostrogoths, the Lombards and the Heruli (see, M. H. Brown, The Sure Word of Prophecy , pp. 54, 55).
The historian Machiavel, without the slightest reference to this prophecy, gives the following list of the nations which occupied the territory of the Western Empire at the time of the fall of Romulus Augustulus [476 A. D], the last emperor of Rome: The Lombards, the Franks, the Burgundians, the Ostrogoths, the Visigoths, the Vandals, the Heruli, the Sueves, the Huns, and the Saxons: ten in all.
(H. Grattan Guinness, The Divine Program of the World=s History , p. 318)
Already in the fourth century, Jerome had spoken of the fragmentation of the Roman Empire in the following terms:
Moreover the fourth kingdom, which plainly pertains to the Romans, is the iron which breaks in pieces and subdues all things. But its feet and toes are partly of iron and partly of clay, which at this time [note that Jerome was living when this was happening] is most plainly attested. For just as in its beginning nothing was stronger and more unyielding than the Roman Empire, so at the end of its affairs nothing is weaker. (Jerome, Commentary on Daniel , comments on 2:40, column 504).
In the days when Jerome lived, the Roman Empire was falling apart. The barbarian tribes from the north had descended upon the empire with a vengeance and broke it up into the nations which today constitute Western Europe.
Verse 8: We must now take a closer look at the little horn. There are at least eleven identifying characteristics in chapter seven:
1) The little horn arises from the fourth beast (7:8). The fourth beast represents Rome, so the little horn must be a Roman power.
2) The little horn arises among the ten horns. The ten horns are the divisions of Western Europe, so the little horn must arise in Western Europe (7:8). Notice that these first two characteristics restrict the geographical location of the little horn to Western Europe.
3) The little horn rises after the ten horns (7:24). According to historians, the ten horns were complete in the year 476 A. D., so this must mean that the little horn was to arise to power sometime after 476 A. D.
4) The little horn was to pluck up three of the first [ten] horns by the roots (7:8). This means that these three nations would be uprooted from history. Daniel 7:20-21 explains that three of the first horns would fall before the little horn, and Daniel 7:24 tells us that the little horn would subdue three horns. In other words, three of the first ten nations would disappear from history!!
5) The little horn was to speak great words against the Most High (7:21, 25). Revelation 13:5 explains what these words would be, namely, blasphemy. And, what is blasphemy according to the Bible? It is when a merely human power claims to be God on earth and when it thinks it can exercise the prerogatives and functions of God (see, John 10:30-33; Mark 2:7).
6) The little horn was to be a persecuting power against God’s people. This is stated in Daniel 7:21 and repeated in verse 25.
7) The little horn would think it could change God's times, that is to say, God's timetable of prophetic events. (Daniel 2:21). We shall see that the little horn invented false systems of prophetic interpretation to rival historicism.
8) The little horn would even have the audacity to THINK that it could change God's holy law. (7:25).
9) The little horn would be different from the ten horns. It would be an amalgamation of church and state (7:24)
10) This power would govern for a time, times and half a time (7:25). This comes out to 42 months or 1260 days (see, Revelation 13:5-6; 12:6, 13-15). In Bible prophecy, literal days are symbolic of years, so this power was to govern for 1260 years.
11) The little horn had eyes like a man. In Bible Prophecy, eyes are symbolic of wisdom (see, Ephesians 1:18; Revelation 5:6). Even today, an owl is a symbol of wisdom because of its large eyes. In other words, this power was to depend on human wisdom.

The question of course one must ask, is do those criteria actually fit the Papacy, or is there another entity that grew out of Rome that fits?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cassandra

Behold

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2020
20,308
8,123
113
Netanya or Pensacola
Faith
Christian
Country
Israel
Let's try this again. Focus on the questions. When you answer my quesitons I will answer yours kiddo:

I dont need you to answer my questions, as you'll just slant your responses to fit the "Cult of Mary", propaganda.

However, i always enjoy corresponding with a Catholic.

So, in general...I post for the other members, as you are not going to be able to believe anything, unless it has the word "Catholic" stamped on it.

That's your reality.

And so... be that as it may.....

I want to share with YOU a genocide committed by the "Cult of the Virgin", and you can research this.. or anyone can, as its actual - factual history.

In Europe, there was a Christian Denomination, that rejected The Catholic Church.
The were called "Cathers".

The Catholic Church under the leadership and command of Pope Innocent III, had them "wiped out".

"Genocide'... as performed against them by the Catholic Church.

The number killed?

800,000 to 1 Million.

It took from '1209 to '1300, for this genocide against the Christian Cathers... to be completed by the "Cult of the Virgin".. the Catholic Church.

Here is the history, and you can dig deeper if you like, but this will do..

- Although Catharism was decried as heresy by the Catholic Church... in the twelfth century, it was in the early thirteenth century that Pope Innocent III took the church’s rejection of Catharism to its most extreme. ....Now called the Albigensian Crusade (after the city of Albi, which was a target), the Catholic Church crusade against the Cathars was as brutal and bloody as the crusades in the Middle East – in fact, Innocent made this comparison explicit when he targeted them. .......Thousands of men, women, and children were slaughtered or burned as heretics in a bloodbath that officially lasted from 1209-1229, but unofficially continued until Catharism was effectively obliterated by the end of the century.

In perhaps the most brutal episode, the city of Béziers was besieged and sacked for refusing to surrender its Cathar citizens. It’s said that the Papal legate told the crusaders: “Kill them all. God will recognize his own.”... Somewhere between 9,000-20,000 citizens, Catholic and Cathar alike, were killed. ....The persecution of the Cathars was preached, among others, by St. Dominic, whose followers (the Dominican friars) would be frequently called upon to be the church’s inquisitors in heresy trials for centuries to follow... Historians have set the total figure of Cathars killed over time, at approximately one million.-
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Brakelite

Athanasius377

Member
Apr 7, 2023
120
42
28
49
Independence
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
You are now arguing that his letter to the Roman church supports its primacy, not that his letter to the Smyrneans does. If you think his letter to the Smyrneans does, tell me why. I've already told you why I think it doesn't, when read in the original Greek. (Gotta go to the Greek!)

Ignatius' letter to the Roman Church does praise it greatly, but that letter is also the only one of his letters that doesn't mention a local bishop, or exhort obedience to his readers' bishop -- the common theme of his other letters. And it is silent on the issue of Roman hegemony beyond its diocesan borders.
This. I think Redfan is touching on the fact that there isn’t a clear deference to the sole bishop of Rome in the aforementioned letters. Or in 1st Clement as Clement seems to refer to a plurality of bishops and not just a monarchical bishop. I think one can make a coherent case on Peterine primacy in places in scripture. I think best argument is that the office of the papacy is a later development. One development that I don’t see as problematic until later until there is a power vacuum when the either the Roman emperors become successively weaker or when Constantine moves the capital to Byzantium where the Bishop of Rome was clearly a singular office. Even then I don’t see the papacy as a problem until much later. Recall that Rome largely avoided so many of the heresies that affected the Eastern Sees.

Also, and correct me if I’m wrong, there are several recensions of Ignatius’s letters of which the Greek is probably the oldest.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RedFan

RedFan

Well-Known Member
May 15, 2022
2,871
1,257
113
70
New Hampshire
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
This. I think Redfan is touching on the fact that there isn’t a clear deference to the sole bishop of Rome in the aforementioned letters. Or in 1st Clement as Clement seems to refer to a plurality of bishops and not just a monarchical bishop.
I'll go further than that on 1st Clement. I find it equivocal at best. Some have argued that because it responds to a matter on which the Corinthians had apparently consulted Rome, these Corinthians must have recognized Rome’s authority. But read its tenor, and one thing jumps out: this is not the writing of a man who thought he could impose his will in Greece. (Indeed, in chapter 56 he suggests to the dissenting Corinthians that “they should submit themselves, I do not say unto us, but unto the will of God.”)

The letter was written late in the First Century, possibly when some of the original twelve apostles were still alive. They all appointed bishops in various locales. Paul did as well. Those bishops were largely of like mind on matters, and didn't see any need for, nor did many occasions arise for, kowtowing to the Roman bishop. They all had, and passed on to their successors, the same power to bind and loose. Peter's successor wasn't even on their radar.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Athanasius377