(PeaceByJesus) “What so-called powers do you believe “works against” conversion out of a contrite heart?”
(Cristoiglesia) I am still curious as to what you meant by the preceding statement.
(PeaceByJesus) “By briefly looking at your blog, it appears that like most RC apologists, you attempt to argue by assertion, and which is laden with presumptions based on extrapolations, including that the church of Rome is what is being referred to in 1Tim. 3:15, and that Rome today is the same church as that of the apostles, and that “pillar and foundation of the truth means the church is the supreme authority, versus Scripture.”
(Cristoiglesia) I have no idea as to what you think are assertions or extrapolations. If one of those is that the Church of Rome is being referred to in 1Tim 3:15 I would have to say that it was not just speaking of the congregation in Rome but to all of the apostolic Church. The Church of Rome, which I assume you are speaking of the congregation in Rome, certainly has apostolic origin. The Church as defined by St. Ignatius of Antioch are those who gather around the bishop’s. He said in Chapter 8 of his letter to the congregation of the Smyrnaeans :
“See that you all follow the bishop, even as Jesus Christ does the Father, and the presbytery as you would the apostles; and reverence the deacons, as being the institution of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper Eucharist, which is [administered] either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude [of the people] also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church. It is not lawful without the bishop either to baptize or to celebrate a love-feast; but whatsoever he shall approve of, that is also pleasing to God, so that everything that is done may be secure and valid.”
(PeaceBy Jesus)That Rome has apostolic origin is not simply your assertion, but that is that Rome is the OTC (one true church), versus the EOs who also claim it on the same basis, while rejecting that St. Ignatius or other CFs substantiate Rome's assured papal infallibility and all its powers. And the extrapolation would be that Rome with its bishops is the same church at the 1st century on the basis of formal historical decent of office. Is that what you are arguing?
(Cristoiglesia) The Catholic and Orthodox Church share the same apostolic authority from Christ so all congregations that share this authority of Christ are the true Church. Certainly the congregation in Rome shares apostolic succession with all Catholic congregations from the first century until today. I am not sure what papal infallibility has to do with the current discussion.
In absence of any evidence to the contrary from any source including historical, patristic or biblical it behooves one to understand that the Catholic Church is the only Church founded by Jesus and the disciples and that it is the self-same Church that the Bible refers to as the “pillar and foundation of the truth”.
(PeaceByJesus) Rather hasty i would say, since nothing has been offered, yet, but first i want to know if historical decent makes the magisterium of Rome supreme in any conflict, and or why her interpretation of historical, tradition and Scripture is assuredly true.
(Cristoiglesia) No, it is Christ’s promises that provides the veracity for the Church. Matt. 10:20; Luke 12:12; Matt. 16:18; Luke 10:16; John 14:16; John 16:13
The Church is the teaching authority for all Christians by the authority given to the Church by Christ. It was with this authority that the Church wrote the New Testament and canonized the Christian Bible in the late 4th and early 5th centuries at the Councils of Hippo and Carthage under the direction of St. Augustine and the apostolic authority of Pope Damasus and the Council of Florence.
(Peace By Jesus) Are you claiming that Rome provided an infallible, indisputable canon that early?
(Cristoiglesia) So there is certainly no assertion of authority over Scripture as Scripture gets its authority from the Church that created it and that authority comes from Christ.
(PeaceByJesus) Sir, if the Scripture has no authority apart from Rome then it most certainly is claiming to alone be the supreme authority, thus “sola ecclesia.”
(Cristoiglesia) The Church is the teaching authority as an infallible book needs an infallible teacher. One cannot separate the Church from the written Word of God as you are attempting to do. It is not an either or situation but instead a divinely ordained and inspired relationship between the Church and God’s written Word.
The New Testament is the inspired Word of God and so is the Old Testament canonized by the Church thus there is no conflict of authority between the Bible and the Church.
(PeaceByJesus) However, most of Scripture was established as such before there ever was a church in Rome, and truth was preserved without an assuredly infallible magisterium such as Rome claims.
(Cristoiglesia) No, the New Testament books were written concurrently with the establishment of the congregation of the Church in Rome. The Bible would not be canonized for several centuries.