The Papacy absolutely BTFO

20 Counterarguments Against An Original Papacy:

1 The Book of Acts shows a twelve-fold collegium acting in consensus.

2 The Apostle Paul is called and ordained independently from this original apostolic collegium, denies that his authority derives from there, and claims to have a parallel vocation and authority to that of Peter (see especially Gal. 2:8).

3 The Jerusalem Council in Acts 15 shows a conciliar model of church authority with James holding the position of council president.

4 Paul selected successors directly and ordained them to ministerial positions without subordinating himself or them to any higher ecclesiastical authority (see his relationship with Timothy).

5 Bishops and elders are the same office in the New Testament, and they are local church officers (Acts 20:17; Titus 1:5, 7; 1 Peter 5:2).

6 Paul left a group of bishops in charge of the church at Ephesus (Acts 20:17, 28).

7 With the exception of the letters of Ignatius, all of the post-Biblical 1st century literature continues to use the names “bishop” and “elder” for the same office.

8 The First Epistle of Clement says that bishops are appointed “with the consent of the whole church” (1 Clement 44:2). This will later be repeated by Hippolytus of Rome (Apostolic Tradition part 1, section 2.1-5) and Cyprian (Epistle 51.8, 67.5).

9 Ignatius does speak of a bishop standing over the rest of the elders, but his bishop is still a local pastoral figure, one who is instructed to be present at baptisms and eucharists, to oversee weddings, and to know “all men by name” (Letter to Polycarp 4.2).

10 Ignatius gives some reason to think that his position on the bishop was understood as a historical innovation in his own day, and he says that he was taught his view through a charismatic revelation (Letter to the Philadelphians 7:1-2).

11 Both Ignatius and Polycarp deny that they exert the same kind of authority as the apostles (Ignatius, Letter to the Romans 4:3; Polycarp, Letter to the Philippians 3:1-2).

12 Writing around the end of the 2nd century, Irenaeus still calls “bishops” by the name of “presbyters,” though he indicates that the bishop stands over the presbyters in a leading capacity.

13 Irenaeus is the first to argue that the church of Rome was founded by Peter, but he actually argues that it was founded by both Peter and Paul (Against Heresies, 3.3.2).

14 Lists of bishops and their successors began to be written around the end of the 2nd century, but an important contradiction arises as to who Peter ordained as his immediate successor. Irenaeus states that Peter first ordained Linus as his successor and that Linus was followed by Cletus who was then followed by Clement (Against Heresies 3.3.3). Tertullian, writing not long after Irenaeus, states that Peter ordained Clement as his successor (Prescription Against Heretics 32). This gave rise to conflicting lists of bishops which Epiphanius, writing in the fourth century, harmonizes by saying that Peter ordained multiple bishops over the same churches at the same time (Panarion, Book 1, Section 2, 27.6.1-6). Thus when evidence begins to arise for a singular episcopal leader at Rome, it is soon accompanied by contradictory evidence.

15 Tertullian says that contradictory traditions should be prejudged as false (Prescription Against Heretics 21, 28). He says that the rule of faith for proving something to be “apostolic” is that it agrees with the whole church.

16 Tertullian argues that Rome has a position of primacy because Peter and Paul were martyred there (Prescription Against Heretics 36, Against Marcion 4.5). Later in Tertullian’s life, he explicitly rejected the claim that Rome inherited Peter’s apostolic power (On Modesty, chapt 21).

17 Cyprian argues that all bishops equally possess the episcopal authority of Peter (Epistle 26.1 ANF citation, Unity of the Church 4).

18 Cyprian argues that distant church courts should not overturn the judgments of local church courts (Epistle 51.14, ANF citation).

19 Cyprian argues that church-wide consent is the highest authority and that even the bishop of Rome should submit to the judgment of the whole church, which is discerned through councils (Epistle 30.1; 51.4-5, 8 ANF citation).

20 Augustine, writing about 150 years later, restates Cyprian’s position on the authority of councils and says that writing of a bishop (even the bishop of Rome) cannot require another bishop to change his practice. Only a plenary council can resolve disputes over tradition (On Baptism 2.3.4).

If you want to know how to arrive to this conclusion there are 5 articles: calvinistinternational.com/2018/09/19/the-leadership-of-the-catholic-church-now-vs-then-pt-6/

Attached: 1489925297121.jpg (643x576, 72.39K)

Other urls found in this thread:

practicalapologetics.blogspot.com/2013/07/early-church-fathers-on-peter-being.html
biblicalcatholic.com/apologetics/num18.htm
biblicalcatholic.com/apologetics/num16.htm
biblicalcatholic.com/apologetics/a122.htm
biblicalcatholic.com/apologetics/num44.htm
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axios_(acclamation)
academia.edu/10578584/_Ignatius_and_the_Apostolate._The_Witness_of_Ignatius_to_the_Emergence_of_Christian_Scripture._in_M._F._Wiles_and_E._J._Yarnold_eds._Studia_Patristica_XXXVI._Leuven_Peeters_Press_2001_226-48
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

R*me BTFO! How will Babylonians ever recover?

You got us, protodox. How will we ever recover??!??

Attached: _20170704_124827.JPG (768x1005, 189.29K)

...

Nice try, unfortunately we have seen those arguments a million times. Read that verse in the Catena Aurea of Thomas Aquinas and you will see many Church Fathers agreeing that the rock is the confession. And that's on the commentary of the main theologian of the Catholic Church…

O i am laffin

Thank you for your insight on the dogma of Aquinas Infallibility

THESE

Also
"Doctor of the Church (Latin doctor "teacher") is a title given by the Catholic Church to saints whom they recognize as having been of particular importance, particularly regarding their contribution to theology or doctrine."
But as usual it's better to resort to legality stuff like 'n-not ex cathedra!' 'n-not dogma heh'

Let's read more Aquinas, shall we?

Contra Errores Graecorum, Chap. XXXII : That the Roman Pontiff is the first and greatest among all bishops.


ibid, Chap. XXXIII : That the same Pontiff has universal jurisdiction over the entire Church of Christ.


ibid, Chap. XXXIV : That the same possesses in the Church a fullness of power.

ibid, Chap. XXXV : That he enjoys the same power conferred on Peter by Christ.

ibid, Chap. XXXVI : That to him belongs the right of deciding what pertains to faith.'


ibid, Chap. XXXVII : That he is the superior of the other patriarchs.'

ibid, Chap. XXXVIII : That to be subject to the Roman Pontiff is necessary for salvation.'

Attached: 002A1629-DFC1-4855-BC47-EF62096F376C.jpeg (250x272, 45.37K)

Now this is epic.

Acts 10&15
Galatians 1 and Acts 13
Acts 15 says otherwise. Also you are contradicting your own (1) point.
After Acts 13.
There were twofold other already. That terminology developed in the East in next 50 years we see from Ignatian letters. West was late to the party.
From all of Asia.
You do know that there literally FOUR corpuses of documents form 1st century? Two of which being moral catechesis, and Clement's letter as monoepiscopal as Ignatian ones?
Discipline=/=doctrine.
He literally cals Bishop God-Father on Earth.
Literally opposite is drawn from the text.
And noone here claims that Bishops are equal to apostles. They are their successors. But Ignatius is clear that they have more authority than anyone.
See above (5).
Ignatius alredy done it, and arguably Clement too.
Peter chose his successors. And personally delivered them into episcopate. And all witnesses claim that they ruled after one another, i.e. in monoepiscopate.
So that Pope is succeors of Peter.
There is no "St" before Tertullian for a reason - he was heretic latter in life. And he was pissed that whole of Church belived that Rome inherited Peter’s apostolic power.
Cyprian's Ep. 45, 74, 72, 54, 51, 39 give adherence to Catholic doctrine of Papacy.
ROME LOCUTA CAUSA FINITA

If you want to know how not to be a total ahistorical faggot there are few articles:
practicalapologetics.blogspot.com/2013/07/early-church-fathers-on-peter-being.html
biblicalcatholic.com/apologetics/num18.htm
biblicalcatholic.com/apologetics/num16.htm
biblicalcatholic.com/apologetics/a122.htm
biblicalcatholic.com/apologetics/num44.htm

OP will always be faggot though.

1)Yeah
2)Which raised great suspicion, even as a guy that was living at the same time as the rest.
3)yeah
4)He was the high ecclesiastical authority. Even greek catholics don't have to register their appointed bishops through the Pope, first.
5,6,7,9,12)Here's the cool thing. Basically, in early christendom, the apostles planted bishops in every place, for various reasons, that did the sacraments, with presbyters as sort of "prayer leaders".
Now, as the Church grew, and so did heresies, having bishops for every backwater village was stupid, so bishops were taking care of regions, with the presbyters(priests) were taking care of sacraments and all that, but only as the bishop's legally empowered representative(which is why the eastern churches have the antimins/ţablîtho/tâbot/maqta'/gorbura as a show of the priest's bond to his bishop. Without a bishop, he's just a guy larping sacraments in a robe.)
8)en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axios_(acclamation)
10,11)Don't know enough to comment.
13)A sadly overlooked thing, in the attempt of catholics to bring petrine primacy to the forefront.
14)Yeah. Multiple ordinations, but regional bishops started electing a head(which is how we got patriarchs)
15)It's called the valentinian canon. Shockingly, everyone who still has bishops agrees Rome had some primacy.
16)Yeah. Second statement is pushing it.
17)Yeah
18)Chieti document agrees with that
19,20)The exact relationship between Pope and ecum. councils is something still being debated.


That quote is fake. The actual extract has a totally different wording and intention(basically, "we've already answered you twice. what more do you want? Now stop annoying Rome, and get your shit together, North Africa")

4U
biblicalcatholic.com/apologetics/num16.htm

That entire article is trying too hard to wrap a wrong point in apologetics.

The point still stands.
There is no occurence of that phrase.

It's an adaptation of this bit, morphed to push an ideology:

Aka:
Stop being retarded.
We've already had 2 councils, and you can't pull off more appeals.
Now put into practice the decisions of those councils, and stop pestering us, North Africa.
You are just being annoying at this point.

Or rather:

Attached: brainlet .png (403x448, 53.25K)

...

AKA like all Ecumenical counil worked.

...

Appreciate your answer but your critique is too vague compared with the article I posted. Just dropping 2 whole chapters like
doesn't say much to be honest. Maybe you can provide specific citations.

The problem is, like it or not Ignatius and Clement saw the clerical system as a sort of priesthood. Ignatius literally uses terms from Pagan cultic contexts to describe how the clergy would function.

And even worse, Irenaeus literally wrote down an entire system of succession of Rome to show just how the Church's faith is the same yesterday and today hence making succession important.

Ignatius literally writes in mimesis of Paul too and the higher position of the Apostles? Explained by his quasi divine concept of them


academia.edu/10578584/_Ignatius_and_the_Apostolate._The_Witness_of_Ignatius_to_the_Emergence_of_Christian_Scripture._in_M._F._Wiles_and_E._J._Yarnold_eds._Studia_Patristica_XXXVI._Leuven_Peeters_Press_2001_226-48

What is happening?

Attached: Screen Shot 2018-10-08 at 11.28.59 AM.png (454x205, 74.07K)

Why do you people waste your time with these stupid denomination beefs?

People trying to discredit our Church Christ created, nothing new tbh.

Battle of the bumps

The Baptists got home from summer Bible camp.

...

galatians 2

Attached: 0AA09D8A-E66D-4CEC-9ACF-AFB4A3CFD3B6.png (207x243, 7.42K)

...

Remember when Jesus argued about which denomination was the true denomination?

I'm not trying to be sarcastic, but He did say there would be false teachers. Paul then later anathematised anything that seeks to insert something more alongside faith alone that saves that is a gift of God by unmerited favor. That latter would include the vast majority of those denominations that call themselves christian, whether in practice, teaching or both.