Papacy debunked by history
peter terry
According to the First Vatican Council and other authoritative Catholic
sources, a papacy with universal jurisdiction has existed and been "ever
understood" by the Christian church since the time of Peter
(http://members.aol.com/jasonte2/jasonte1.htm). However, the following five
facts of history make this claim of the Catholic Church untenable:
1. There are no explicit references to a papacy in the earliest centuries
of Christianity. Catholic apologists often suggest that a papacy is alluded
to in Matthew 16, John 21, First Clement, Against Heresies, and other early
documents, but all of these documents can reasonably be interpreted in
non-papal ways. There are explicit references to the church offices of
bishop and deacon, as well as doctrines such as Christ's deity, the Trinity,
and the eucharist, but there aren't any explicit references to a papacy.
2. Many of the words and actions of the earliest Christians contradict the
concept of a papacy. The disciples repeatedly argued about who was the
greatest among them, even after the words of Matthew 16:18-19 were spoken
(Luke 22:24). The disciples don't seem to have had any concept of Peter
having been established as their ruler. Paul wrote about apostles (plural),
not a Pope, being the highest order in the church (1 Corinthians 12:28). He
also wrote that, in terms of apostolic authority, he was in no way inferior
to any other apostle (2 Corinthians 12:11). Many events in early
post-apostolic church history, such as Polycarp's disagreements with the
Roman bishop Anicetus and Cyprian's disagreements with the Roman bishop
Stephen, also contradict the concept of a papacy
(http://members.aol.com/jasonte2/denials.htm).
3. The earliest non-Christian sources who commented on Christianity said
nothing about a papacy. Though Pliny the Younger, Celsus, Lucian, and other
early non-Christian sources wrote about the eucharist, Christ's deity, and
other Christian doctrines, they didn't say anything about a papacy. If one
man was viewed as the ruler of all Christians on earth, the "Vicar of
Christ" and "Bishop of bishops", he would have been an ideal object of
criticism. None of the earliest non-Christian sources seem to have any
concept of a papacy, though.
4. The earliest interpretations of the scripture passages most often cited
in favor of a papacy are all non-papal. Tertullian (On Modesty, 21) writes
that Peter was the "rock" of Matthew 16:18 in the sense that he played a
major role in founding the Christian church. He identifies the usage of the
"keys" of Matthew 16:19 not as papal authority, but as the preaching of the
gospel and the exercising of church discipline. Origen (Commentary on
Matthew, 10-11) writes that everybody who confesses the faith Peter
confessed in Matthew 16:18 is also a "rock". He emphasizes that Matthew
16:18 doesn't apply only to Peter, and he says nothing about this passage
applying in any exclusive way to the bishops of Rome. Cyprian (Epistle 26)
writes that all bishops, not just the bishop of Rome, are the successors of
Peter, so that Matthew 16:18 applies to all of them. The Apostolical
Constitutions (6:5) refers to Luke 22:32 as a passage about the faith of all
Christians, and says nothing of a papacy or of this passage referring to
papal infallibility. Cyril of Alexandria, John Chrysostom, Augustine, and
other church fathers also interpreted Matthew 16, Luke 22, and John 21 in
non-Roman-Catholic ways. Some church fathers even applied multiple
interpretations to these passages of scripture, but the earliest church
fathers never applied the Roman Catholic interpretations to these passages.
5. Men like Clement of Alexandria (The Stromata), Cyprian (On the Unity of
the Church), and Augustine (Sermons) wrote entire treatises relating to
church government and Christian doctrine without mentioning a papacy.
Offices such as bishop and deacon are mentioned over and over again,
councils are discussed, and the authority of scripture is referred to again
and again, yet nobody in the earliest centuries of Christianity writes about
papal authority. There are treatises instructing Christians on how to
interpret scripture, explaining how to view doctrines like the incarnation
and the Trinity, and encouraging Christians to obey bishops and other church
leaders. There are no treatises devoted to a papal office, though, nor is a
papacy even mentioned. For example, the influential bishop of Carthage,
Cyprian, wrote a treatise on church government and unity (On the Unity of
the Church) that not only doesn't mention a papacy, but even contradicts the
concept.
In light of these five realities of history, the Roman Catholic Church's
claims about the papacy are historically untenable. Catholics are encouraged
to believe in transubstantiation, Purgatory, indulgences, the Immaculate
Conception, and other doctrines because of papal authority, yet that
authority is without foundation.
by Jason Engwer
Will Nordmeyer
"peter terry" <namb...@iprimus.com.au> wrote in message
news:3b8a...@news.iprimus.com.au...
______________________________________________________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Still Only $9.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
With Seven Servers In California And Texas - The Worlds Uncensored News Source
Linus
any christian denomination besides a few orthodox.
Who do catholics claim followed Peter? Linus, somebody, then
Clement...let's look what we can find in the Bible and elsewhere.
{It was Peter's idea to replace Judas with another [Matthi'as]}
Acts 1:15 In those days Peter stood up among the brethren ... and
said,
....20 For it is written ... 'His office let another take.'
{Jesus showed Peter's upcoming death to Peter. Peter could prepare
for the martyrdom in Rome.}
1 Peter 1:13 I think it right, as long as I am in this body, to arouse
you by way of reminder,
14 since I know that the putting off of my body will be soon, as our
Lord Jesus Christ showed me.
15 And I will see to it that after my departure you may be able at any
time to recall these things.
* If it was Peter's idea to replace Judas with Matthi'as, then it is
likely that Peter would have prepared for himself to be replaced.
{Linus, the supposed successor of Peter (2nd bishop of rome), is given
one line in the bible as a companion.}
2 Timothy 4:21 - Do your best to come before winter. Eubu'lus sends
greetings to you, as do Pudens and Linus and Claudia and all the
brethren.
**** Note: Claudia is a declared saint with a feastday. Pudens may
have married Claudia. Names found in Rome with Linus.
{And Clement the supposed fourth bishop of Rome, another companion --
whose name is in the BOOK OF LIFE}
Philippians 4:3 - And I ask you also, true yokefellow, help these
women, for they have labored side by side with me in the gospel
together with Clement and the rest of my fellow workers, whose names
are in the book of life.
Letter of Clement to the Corinthians:
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/1010.htm
Because Clement is mentioned as in the book of life, he is at least a
trustable source and friend of the apostles.
You say that Linus and Clement in the Bible are not necessarily the
same people who became leaders in Rome?
Who says otherwise? Ireneaus of Lyons France, 180AD
Source: http://www.ccel.org/fathers/ANF-01/iren/iren3index.html
Ireneaus of Lyons France
Against Heresies, Book 3, Chapter 3, Paragraph 3
CHAP. III.--A REFUTATION OF THE HERETICS, FROM THE FACT THAT, IN THE
VARIOUS CHURCHES, A PERPETUAL SUCCESSION OF BISHOPS WAS KEPT UP.
2. Since, however, it would be very tedious, in such a volume as this,
to reckon up the successions of all the Churches, we do put to
confusion all those who, in whatever manner, whether by an evil
self-pleasing, by vainglory, or by blindness and perverse opinion,
assemble in unauthorized meetings; [we do this, I say,] by indicating
that tradition derived from the apostles, of the very great, the very
ancient, and universally known Church founded and organized at Rome by
the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul; as also [by pointing
out] the faith preached to men, which comes down to our time by means
of the successions of the bishops. For it is a matter of necessity
that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its
pre- eminent authority,(3) that is, the faithful everywhere, inasmuch
as the apostolical tradition has been preserved continuously by those
[faithful men] who exist everywhere.
3. The blessed apostles, then, having founded and built up the Church,
committed into the hands of Linus the office of the episcopate. Of
this Linus, Paul makes mention in the Epistles to Timothy. To him
succeeded Anacletus; and after him, in the third place from the
apostles, Clement was allotted the bishopric. This man, as he had seen
the blessed apostles, and had been conversant with them, might be said
to have the preaching of the apostles still echoing [in his ears], and
their traditions before his eyes. Nor was he alone [in this], for
there were many still remaining who had received instructions from the
apostles. In the time of this Clement, no small dissension having
occurred among the brethren at Corinth, the Church in Rome despatched
a most powerful letter to the Corinthians, exhorting them to peace,
renewing their faith, and declaring the tradition which it had lately
received from the apostles, proclaiming the one God, omnipotent, the
Maker of heaven and earth, the Creator of man, who brought on the
deluge, and called Abraham, who led the people from the land of Egypt,
spake with Moses, set forth the law, sent the prophets, and who has
prepared fire for the devil and his angels. From this document,
whosoever chooses to do so, may learn that He, the Father of our Lord
Jesus Christ, was preached by the Churches, and may also understand
the apostolical tradition of the Church, since this Epistle is of
older date than these men who are now propagating falsehood, and who
conjure into existence another god beyond the Creator and the Maker of
all existing things. To this Clement there succeeded Evaristus.
Alexander followed Evaristus; then, sixth from the apostles, Sixtus
was appointed; after him, Telephorus, who was gloriously martyred;
then Hyginus; after him, Pius; then after him, Anicetus. Sorer having
succeeded Anicetus, Eleutherius does now, in the twelfth place from
the apostles, hold the inheritance of the episcopate. In this order,
and by this succession, the ecclesiastical tradition from the
apostles, and the preaching of the truth, have come down to us. And
this is most abundant proof that there is one and the same vivifying
faith, which has been preserved in the Church from the apostles until
now, and handed down in truth.
CHAP. IV.--THE TRUTH IS TO BE FOUND NOWHERE ELSE BUT IN THE CATHOLIC
CHURCH, THE SOLE DEPOSITORY OF APOSTOLICAL DOCTRINE. HERESIES ARE OF
RECENT FORMATION, AND CANNOT TRACE THEIR ORIGIN UP TO THE APOSTLES.
...
Among others from different times from different parts of God's
creation on Earth. God does not let HIS story disappear.
digimortal
Will Nordmeyer wrote in message <3b8b9...@news5.uncensored-news.com>...
Don Strevel
Constantinople relates issues, ...like that Chef on TV, Emeril,......BAM!
The Catholic Pope excommunicated the breakaway leader in Constntinople, and
visa versa.
--
Don in Las Vegas, NV or Scottsdale, AZ.
email wds at usa dot com
http://www.vegas.mrcool.org
"What is another word for Thesaurus"?
"Linus" <catholi...@post2.com> wrote in message
news:6b089168.01082...@posting.google.com...
Will Nordmeyer
"digimortal" <digim...@starpower.net> wrote in message
news:9mkgq5$6l2$1...@bob.news.rcn.net...
> Will Nordmeyer a REVISIONIST!!!
>
Read Jesus, Peter & the Keys.
Also, why did the Orthodox Church recognize the primacy of the Bishop of
Rome for around 1000 years?
peter terry
"Will Nordmeyer" <wi...@nospam.kimmoore.org> wrote in message
news:3b8e3a57$1...@news5.uncensored-news.com...
>
> "digimortal" <digim...@starpower.net> wrote in message
> news:9mkgq5$6l2$1...@bob.news.rcn.net...
> > Will Nordmeyer a REVISIONIST!!!
> >
> Read Jesus, Peter & the Keys.
>
> Also, why did the Orthodox Church recognize the primacy of the Bishop of
> Rome for around 1000 years?
>
first 1000 years. It resulted form a bitter feud and power struggle within
the Roman church.
Will Nordmeyer
>
> "Will Nordmeyer" <wi...@nospam.kimmoore.org> wrote in message
> news:3b8e3a57$1...@news5.uncensored-news.com...
> >
> > "digimortal" <digim...@starpower.net> wrote in message
> > news:9mkgq5$6l2$1...@bob.news.rcn.net...
> > > Will Nordmeyer a REVISIONIST!!!
> > >
> > Read Jesus, Peter & the Keys.
> >
> > Also, why did the Orthodox Church recognize the primacy of the
Bishop of
> > Rome for around 1000 years?
> >
> What nonsense you peddle..The Orthodox church as such did not exist
for the
> first 1000 years. It resulted form a bitter feud and power struggle
within
> the Roman church.
> >
spring up. They were there. It did split from the Catholic Church (or
they would say that the Latin Rite split from them. Perspective being
what it is).
digimortal
Christianity began in the east)! In fact Peter established His first
Bishopric outside of Jerusalem NOT IN ROME, but in Antioch!!! The first
"Bishop" of the Church was not even Peter but James the Just! The term
"roman catholic" was coined around the same time as the Church in the East
was termed Orthodox because of their "right belief" and unchangable
Tradition! The church at rome was just one of the 5 Patriarchates and your
"pope" only the Bishop of that Patriarchate.
peter terry wrote in message <3b8f...@news.iprimus.com.au>...
Bari Stepanovich
<wi...@nospam.kimmoore.org> wrote:
>
>"digimortal" <digim...@starpower.net> wrote in message
>news:9mkgq5$6l2$1...@bob.news.rcn.net...
>> Will Nordmeyer a REVISIONIST!!!
>>
>Read Jesus, Peter & the Keys.
>
>Also, why did the Orthodox Church recognize the primacy of the Bishop of
>Rome for around 1000 years?
Will, don't confuse "primacy" (first among equals) with "supremacy"
(absolute monarchy over all Christendom).
The Eastern Churches were never in submission to Rome. One Bishop
cannot be "over" the rest. A supreme papacy usurps the rightful place
of the Holy Spirit.
In XC,
Bari Stepanovich
*****************************************************************************
IC XC
--+-- "Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner."
NI KA
timothyctx
> The Eastern Church existed before Christianity ever reached rome (remember
> Christianity began in the east)! In fact Peter established His first
> Bishopric outside of Jerusalem NOT IN ROME, but in Antioch!!! The first
> "Bishop" of the Church was not even Peter but James the Just! The term
> "roman catholic" was coined around the same time as the Church in the East
> was termed Orthodox because of their "right belief" and unchangable
> Tradition! The church at rome was just one of the 5 Patriarchates and your
> "pope" only the Bishop of that Patriarchate.
I have quite a few notes on how the Eastern Patriarchates regarded the
Bishop of Rome - none of them support your position:
ALEXANDRIA:
St. Peter, Bishop of Alexandria (306-311 A.D.):
Head of the catechetical school in Alexandria, he became bishop around A.D.
300, reigning for about eleven years, and dying a martyr’s death.
Peter, set above the Apostles. (Peter of Alexandria, Canon. ix, Galland, iv.
p. 98)
St. Anthony of Egypt (330 A.D.):
Peter, the Prince of the Apostles (Anthony, Epist. xvii. Galland, iv p.
687).
St. Athanasius (362 A.D.):
Rome is called the Apostolic throne. (Athanasius, Hist. Arian, ad Monach. n.
35).
The Chief, Peter. (Athan, In Ps. xv. 8, tom. iii. p. 106, Migne)
St. Macarius of Egypt (371 A.D.):
The Chief, Peter. (Macarius, De Patientia, n. 3, p. 180)
Moses was succeeded by Peter, who had committed to his hands the new Church
of Christ, and the true priesthood.” (Macarius, Hom. xxvi. n. 23, p. 101)
Didymus the Blind (385 A.D.):
Born about 313 and blind from the age of four, Didymus was a monk and one of
the most learned men and prolific authors of his age. Under St. Athanasius,
he was made head of the catechetical school at Alexandria.
How powerful is Peter’s faith and his confession that Christ is the
only-begotten God, the Word, the true Son of God, and not merely a creature.
Though he saw God on earth clothed in flesh and blood, Peter did not doubt,
for he was willing to receive what ‘flesh and blood have not revealed to you
’ .....Upon this Rock the Church was built, the Church which the gates of
hell that is, the arguments of heretics will not overcome. The keys to the
Kingdom of Heaven were given to Peter so that, ‘baptising them in the name
of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit,’ he might open the
gates of God’s Kingdom to those whose faith agreed both with his own
confession and with those things which he and the other apostles heard from
Christ. To those, however, who do not, by like confession, offer a hymn of
praise, Peter shuts the most blessed and hoped-for entrance. (Didymus, De
Trinitare Liber Primus I. 30)
St. Orsiesius (c. 380)
Born in Egypt, he embraced the monastic life under St. Pachomius, whom he
succeeded in 349.
He said to Peter, the prince of Apostles, ‘Simon, son of John, lovest thou
me more than these? &c’ (John 21: 15-16). Three times did he bind him ‘feed
His sheep,’ and thereby has He imposed this duty upon all, to feed
diligently the Lord’s sheep.” (Orsiesius, Doctrina de Instit. Monach. n. 17,
p. 42, t.v. Galland).
St. Cyril of Alexandria (c. 424):
He suffers him no longer to be called Simon, exercising authority and rule
over him already having become His own. By a title suitable to the thing, He
changed his name into Peter, from the word ‘petra’ (rock); for on him He was
afterwards to found His Church. (Cyril, T. iv. Comm. in Joan., p. 131)
‘Blessed art thou ...,’ calling, I imagine, nothing else the rock, in
allusion to his name, but the immovable and stable faith of the disciple on
which the Church of Christ is founded and fixed without danger of falling.”
(Cyril, On the Holy Trinity [426 A.D.])
He (Christ) promises to found the Church, assigning immovableness to it, as
He is the Lord of strength, and over this He sets Peter as shepherd.”
(Cyril, Comm. on Matt., ad loc.)
Therefore, when the Lord had hinted at the disciple’s denial in the words
that He used, ‘I have prayed for thee that thy faith not fail,’ He at once
introduced a word of consolation, and said (to Peter): ‘And do thou, when
once thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren.’ That is, ‘Be thou a
support and a teacher of those who through faith come to me.’ Again, marvel
also at the insight of that saying and at the completeness of the Divine
gentleness of spirit. For so that He should not reduce the disciple to
despair at the thought that after his denial he would have to be debarred
from the glorious distinction of being an Apostle, He fills him with good
hope, that he will attain the good things promised. ...O loving kindness!
The sin was not yet committed, and He already extends His pardon and sets
him (Peter) again in his Apostolic office. (Cyril Comm. on Luke’s Gospel)
For the wonderous Peter, overcome by uncontrollable fear, denied the Lord
three times. Christ heals the error done, and demands in various ways the
threefold confession ... For although all the holy disciples fled, ...still
Peter’s fault in the threefold denial was in addition, special and peculiar
to himself. Therefore, by the threefold confession of blessed Peter, the
fault of the triple denial was done away. Further, by the Lord’s saying,
Feed my lambs, we must understand a renewal as it were of the Apostleship
already given to him, washing away the intervening disgrace of his fall, and
the littleness of human infirmity. (Cyril, Comm. on John’s Gospel).
They (the Apostles) strove to learn through one, that preeminent one, Peter.
(Cyril, Ib. 1. ix. p. 736).
And even blessed Peter, though set over the holy disciples, says ‘Lord, be
it far from Thee, this shall be done to Thee. (Cyril, Ibid. 924).
If Peter himself, that prince of the holy disciples, was, upon an occassion,
scandalized, so as suddenly to exclaim, ‘Lord, be it far from Thee,’ what
wonder that the tender mind of woman should be carried away? (Cyril, Ibid,
p. 1064)
That the Spirit is God we shall also learn hence. That the prince of the
Apostles, to whom ‘flesh and blood,’ as the Savior says, ‘did not reveal’
the Divine mystery, says to Ananias, ‘Why hath satan tempted thy heart, &c.’
(Cyril, T. v. Par. 1. Thesaur. p. 340)
Besides all these, let there come forward that leader of the holy disciples,
Peter, who, when the Lord, on a certain occassion, asked him, ‘Whom do men
say that the Son of man is?’ instantly cried out, ‘Thou art the Christ, the
Son of the living God.’ (Cyril, T. v. P.2, Hom. viii. De Fest. Pasch. p.
105)
‘If I wash thee not, thou shalt have no part with me.’ When the Coryphaeus
(Peter) had heard these words, he began to change. (Cyril, Ib. Hom.)
This bold man (Julian), besides all this, cavils at Peter, the chosen one of
the holy Apostles. (Cyril, T. vi.l. ix. Contr. Julian. p. 325).
Eulogius of Alexandria (581 A.D.):
Born in Syria, he became the abbot of the Mother of God monastery at
Antioch. In 579, he was made Patriarch of Alexandria; and became an
associate of St. Gregory the Great while visiting Constantinople. Much of
their subsequent correspondence is still extant.
Neither to John, nor to any other of the disciples, did our Savior say, ‘I
will give to thee the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven,’ but only to Peter.
(Eulogius, Lib. ii. Cont. Novatian. ap. Photium, Biblioth, cod. 280)
ANTIOCH
Victor of Antioch (405 A.D.):
To Simon He gave the name Peter [Rock], that the name may anticipate the
event itself; because as Christ our Lord was about to build His Church on
Peter that is, on the unbroken and sound doctrine of Peter and his unshaken
faith therefore, in prophetic spirit does He call him Peter. (Victor, In
Evang. Marc. c. 3)
Paul of Emesa (c. 440):
Made bishop of Emesa after 410, he took part in the Council of Ephesus,
representing Patriarch John of Antioch in his talks of reconciliation with
Cyril of Alexandria.
Upon this faith the Church of God has been founded. With this exception,
upon this rock the Lord God placed the foundations of the Church. When the
Lord Christ was going to Jerusalem, He asked His disciples, saying: ‘Whom do
men say that the Son of man is?’ The Apostles say, ‘Some Elias, others
Jeremias, or one of the prophets.’ And He says, but you, that is, my elect,
you who have followed me for three years, and have seen my power, and
miracles, and beheld me walking on the sea, who have shared my table, ‘Whom
do you say that I am?’ Instantly, says the Coryphaeus of the Apostles, the
mouth of the disciples, Peter, ‘Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living
God.’ (Paul of Emesa, Hom. de Nativ.)
Theodoret, Bishop of Cyrus in Syria (450):
A native of Antioch, Theodoret ruled under the Antiochean Patriarch.
The great foundation of the Church was shaken, and confirmed by the Divine
grace. And the Lord commanded him to apply that same care to the brethren.
‘And thou,’ He says, ‘converted, confirm thy brethren.’ (Theodoret, Tom. iv.
Haeret. Fab. lib. v.c. 28)
‘For as I,’ He says, ‘did not despise thee when tossed, so be thou a support
to thy brethren in trouble, and the help by which thou was saved do thou
thyself impart to others, and exhort them not while they are tottering, but
raise them up in their peril. For this reason I suffer thee also to slip,
but do not permit thee to fall, thus through thee gaining steadfastness for
those who are tossed.’ So this great pillar supported the tossing and
sinking world, and permitted it not to fall entirely and gave it back
stability, having been ordered to feed God’s sheep. (Theodoret, Oratio de
Caritate in J. P. Minge, ed., Partrologiae Curses Completus: Series Graeca).
I therefore beseech your holiness to persuade the most holy and blessed
bishop (Pope Leo) to use his Apostolic power, and to order me to hasten to
your Council. For that most holy throne (Rome) has the sovereignty over the
churches throughout the universe on many grounds. (Theodoret, Tom. iv.
Epist. cxvi. Renato, p. 1197).
It pertains to you (Pope Leo) to hold the primacy in all things, for your
throne is adorned with many prerogatives. (Theodoret Ibid, Epist. Leoni)
If Paul, the herald of the truth, the trumpet of the Holy Spirit, hastened
to the great Peter, to convey from him the solution to those in Antioch, who
were at issue about living under the law, how much more do we, poor and
humble, run to the Apostolic Throne (Rome) to receive from you (Pope Leo)
healing for wounds of the the Churches. For it pertains to you to have
primacy in all things; for your throne is adorned with many prerogatives.
(Theodoret Ibid, Epistle Leoni)
For that all holy throne has the office of heading the Churches of the whole
world, for many reasons; and, above all others, because it has remained free
of the communion of heretical taint, and no one holding heterodox sentiments
ever sat in it, but it has preserved the Apostolic grace unsullied.
(Theodoret, Epist Renato)
St. Cyril of Jerusalem, Patriarch (363):
Our Lord Jesus Christ then became a man, but by the many He was not known.
But wishing to teach that which was not known, having assembled the
disciples, He asked, ‘Whom do men say that the Son of man is?’ ...And all
being silent (for it was beyond man to learn) Peter, the Foremost of the
Apostles, the Chief Herald of the Church, not using the language of his own
finding, nor persuaded by human reasoning, but having his mind enlightened
by the Father, says to Him, ‘Thou art the Christ,’ not simply that, but ‘the
Son of the living God.’ (Cyril, Catech. xi. n. 3)
For Peter was there, who carrieth the keys of heaven. (Cyril, Catechetical
Lectures A.D. 350).
He said to Peter, ‘and upon this Rock I will build my Church, and the gates
of hell shall not prevail against it. (Cyril, Catech. Lec. 350)
Peter, the chief and foremost leader of the Apostles, before a little maid
thrice denied the Lord, but moved to penitence, he wept bitterly. (Cyril,
Catech ii. n. 15)
In the power of the same Holy Spirit, Peter, also the foremost of the
Apostles and the key-bearer of the Kingdom of Heaven, healed Aeneas the
paralytic in the name of Christ. (Cyril, Catech. xviii. n. 27)
St. Sophronius, Patriarch of Jerusalem (c. 638):
Teaching us all orthodoxy and destroying all heresy and driving it away from
the God-protected halls of our holy Catholic Church. And together with these
inspired syllables and characters, I accept all his (the pope’s) letters and
teachings as proceeding from the mouth of Peter the Coryphaeus, and I kiss
them and salute them and embrace them with all my soul ... I recognize the
latter as definitions of Peter and the former as those of Mark, and besides,
all the heaven-taught teachings of all the chosen mystagogues of our
Catholic Church. (Sophronius, Mansi, xi. 461)
Transverse quickly all the world from one end to the other until you come to
the Apostolic See (Rome), where are the foundations of the orthodox
doctrine. Make clearly known to the most holy personages of that throne the
questions agitated among us. Cease not to pray and to beg them until their
apostolic and Divine wisdom shall have pronounced the victorious judgement
and destroyed from the foundation ...the new heresy. (Sophronius,[quoted by
Bishop Stephen of Dora to Pope Martin I at the Lateran Council], Mansi, x.,
893)
Stephen, Bishop of Dora in Palestine (645):
And for this cause, sometimes we ask for water to our head and to our eyes a
fountain of tears, sometimes the wings of a dove, according to holy David,
that we might fly away and announce these things to the Chair (the Chair of
Peter at Rome) which rules and presides over all, I mean to yours, the head
and highest, for the healing of the whole wound. For this it has been
accustomed to do from old and from the beginning with power by its canonical
or apostolic authority, because the truly great Peter, head of the Apostles,
was clearly thought worthy not only to be trusted with the keys of heaven,
alone apart from the rest, to open it worthily to believers, or to close it
justly to those who disbelieve the Gospel of grace, but because he was also
commissioned to feed the sheep of the whole Catholic Church; for ‘Peter,’
saith He, ‘lovest thou Me? Feed My sheep.’ And again, because he had in a
manner peculiar and special, a faith in the Lord stronger than all and
unchangeable, to be converted and to confirm his fellows and spiritual
brethren when tossed about, as having been adorned by God Himself incarnate
for us with power and sacerdotal authority .....And Sophronius of blessed
memory, who was Patriarch of the holy city of Christ our God, and under whom
I was bishop, conferring not with flesh and blood, but caring only for the
things of Christ with respect to your Holiness, hastened to send my
nothingness without delay about this matter alone to this Apostolic see,
where are the foundations of holy doctrine.
CYPRUS
St. Epiphanius, Archbishop of Salamis (385):
...And the blessed Peter, who for a while denied the Lord, Peter who was the
Chief of the Apostles, he who became unto us truly a firm Rock upon which is
based the Lord’s faith, upon which rock the Church is in every way built;
first, in that he confessed that Christ was the Son of the living God, and
heard that upon this Rock of firm faith I will build my Church. Further, he
then also became a firm rock of the building, and Foundation of the house of
God, in that having denied Christ, and being again converted, being both
found of the Lord and found worthy to hear, ‘Feed my sheep and feed my
lambs.’ (Epiphanius, Adv. Haeres).
Holy men are therefore called the temple of God, because the Holy Spirit
dwells in them; as that Chief of the Apostles testifies, he that was found
to be blessed by the Lord, because the Father had revealed unto him. To him
then did the Father reveal His true Son; and the same (Peter) furthermore
reveals the Holy Spirit. This was befitting in the First of the Apostles,
that firm Rock upon which the Church of God is built, and the gates of hell
shall not prevail against it. The gates of hell are heretics and
heresiarchs. For in every way was the faith confirmed in him who received
the keys of heaven; who looses on earth and binds in heaven. For in him are
found all subtle questions of faith. He was aided by the Father so as to be
(or lay) the Foundation of the security (firmness) of the faith. He (Peter)
heard from the same God, ‘feed my lambs’; to him He entrusted the flock; he
leads the way admirably in the power of his own Master. (Epiphanius, T. ii.
in Anchor).
Sergius, Metropolitain of Cyprus (649 A.D.)
He writes to Pope Theodore, ....
O Holy Head, Christ our God hath destined thy Apostolic See to be an
immovable foundation and a pillar of the Faith. For thou art, as the Divine
Word truly saith, Peter, and on theee as a foundation-stone have the pillars
of the Church been fixed. (Sergius Ep. ad Theod. lecta in Sess. ii. Concil.
Lat. anno 649)
CONSTANTINOPLE:
St. John Chrysostom, Patriarch of Constantinople (c. 387):
Peter himself the Head or Crown of the Apostles, the First in the Church,
the Friend of Christ, who received a revelation, not from man, but from the
Father, as the Lord bears witness to him, saying, ‘Blessed art thou, &c.’
This very Peter and when I name Peter I name that unbroken Rock, that firm
Foundation, the Great Apostle, First of the disciples, the First called, and
the First who obeyed he was guilty ...even denying the Lord.” (Chrysostom,
T. ii. Hom)
Peter, the Leader of the choir of Apostles, the Mouth of the disciples, the
Pillar of the Church, the Buttress of the faith, the Foundation of the
confession, the Fisherman of the universe. (Chrysostom, T. iii Hom).
Peter, that Leader of the choir, that Mouth of the rest of the Apostles,
that Head of the brotherhood, that one set over the entire universe, that
Foundation of the Church. (Chrys. In illud hoc Scitote)
(Peter), the foundation of the Church, the Coryphaeus of the choir of the
Apostles, the vehement lover of Christ ...he who ran throughout the whole
world, who fished the whole world; this holy Coryphaeus of the blessed
choir; the ardent disciple, who was entrusted with the keys of heaven, who
received the spiritual revelation. Peter, the mouth of all Apostles, the
head of that company, the ruler of the whole world. (De Eleemos, iii. 4;
Hom. de decem mille tal. 3)
In those days Peter rose up in the midst of the disciples (Acts 15), both as
being ardent, and as intrusted by Christ with the flock ...he first acts
with authority in the matter, as having all put into his hands ; for to him
Christ said, ‘And thou, being converted, confirm thy brethren. (Chrysostom,
Hom. iii Act Apost. tom. ix.)
He passed over his fall, and appointed him first of the Apostles; wherefore
He said: ‘ ‘Simon, Simon,’ etc. (in Ps. cxxix. 2). God allowed him to fall,
because He meant to make him ruler over the whole world, that, remembering
his own fall, he might forgive those who should slip in the future. And that
what I have said is no guess, listen to Christ Himself saying: ‘Simon,
Simon, etc.’ (Chrys, Hom. quod frequenter conveniendum sit 5, cf. Hom 73 in
Joan 5).
The Apostles do not see their own affairs, but those of others, all together
and each separately. Peter, the leader of the choir, the mouth of all the
Apostles, the head of that tribe, the ruler of the whole world, the
foundation of the Church, the ardent lover of Christ; for He says, ‘Peter,
lovest thou me more than these?’ I speak his praises that you may learn that
he loves Christ, for the care of the slaves is the greatest proof of love to
the Lord. ‘If thou lovest me,’ He says, ‘feed my sheep.’ Let us see whether
he has primacy of a shepherd. (Chrys. Homily on 2 Timothy 3.1)
And why, then, passing by the others, does He converse with Peter on these
things? (John 21:15). He was the chosen one of the Apostles, and the mouth
of the disciples, and the leader of the choir. On this account, Paul also
went up on a time to see him rather than the others (Galatians 1:18). And
withal, to show him that he must thenceforward have confidence, as the
denial was done away with, He puts into his hands the presidency over the
brethren. And He brings not forward the denial, nor reproches him with what
had past, but says, ‘If you love me, preside over the brethren, ...and the
third time He gives him the same injunction, showing what a price He sets
the presidency over His own sheep. And if one should say, ‘How then did
James receive the throne of Jerusalem?,’ this I would answer that He
appointed this man (Peter) teacher, not of that throne, but of the whole
world. (Chrysostom, In Joan. Hom. 1xxxviii. n. 1, tom. viii)
St. Proclus, Patriarch of Constantinople (434):
A disciple of St. John Chrysostom,...
Peter, the coryphaeus of the disciples, and the one set over (or chief of)
the Apostles. Art not thou he that didst say, ‘Thou art the Christ, the Son
of the living God’? Thou Bar-Jonas (son of the dove) hast thou seen so many
miracles, and art thou still but Simon (a hearer)? He appointed thee the
key-bearer of Heaven, and has though not yet layed aside thy fisherman’s
clothing? (Proclus, Or. viii In Dom. Transfig. t. ix. Galland)
John Cassian, Monk (c. 430):
That great man, the disciple of disciples, that master among masters, who
weilding the government of the Roman Church possessed the principle
authority in faith and in priesthood. Tell us, therefore, we beg of you,
Peter, prince of Apostles, tell us how the Churches must believe in God
(Cassian, Contra Nestorium, III, 12, CSEL, vol. 17, p. 276).
St. Nilus of Constantinople (448):
A disciple of St. John Chrysostom, ....
Peter, Head of the choir of Apostles. (Nilus, Lib. ii Epistl.)
Peter, who was foremost in the choir of Apostles and always ruled amongst
them. (Nilus, Tract. ad. Magnam.)
Macedonius, Patriarch of Constantinople (466-516):
Macedonius declared, when desired by the Emperor Anastasius to condemn the
Council of Chalcedon, that ‘such a step without an Ecumenical Synod presided
over by the Pope of Rome is impossible.’ (Macedonius, Patr. Graec. 108: 360a
(Theophan. Chronogr. pp. 234-346 seq.)
The Emperor Justinian (520-533):
Writing to the Pope, ...
Yielding honor to the Apostolic See and to Your Holiness, and honoring your
Holiness, as one ought to honor a father, we have hastened to subject all
the priests of the whole Eastern district, and to unite them to the See of
your Holiness, for we do not allow of any point, however manifest and
indisputable it be, which relates to the state of the Churches, not being
brought to the cognizance of your Holiness, since you are the Head of all
the holy Churches. (Justinian Epist. ad. Pap. Joan. ii. Cod. Justin. lib. I.
tit. 1).
Let your Apostleship show that you have worthily succeeded to the Apostle
Peter, since the Lord will work through you, as Surpreme Pastor, the
salvation of all. (Coll. Avell. Ep. 196, July 9th, 520, Justinian to Pope
Hormisdas).
St. Maximus the Confessor (c. 650):
A celebrated theologian and a native of Constantinople, ...
The extremities of the earth, and everyone in every part of it who purely
and rightly confess the Lord, look directly towards the Most Holy Roman
Church and her confession and faith, as to a sun of unfailing light awaiting
from her the brilliant radiance of the sacred dogmas of our Fathers,
according to that which the inspired and holy Councils have stainlessly and
piously decreed. For, from the descent of the Incarnate Word amongst us, all
the churches in every part of the world have held the greatest Church alone
to be their base and foundation, seeing that, according to the promise of
Christ Our Savior, the gates of hell will never prevail against her, that
she has the keys of the orthodox confession and right faith in Him, that she
opens the true and exclusive religion to such men as approach with piety,
and she shuts up and locks every heretical mouth which speaks against the
Most High. (Maximus, Opuscula theologica et polemica, Migne, Patr. Graec.
vol. 90)
Hom much more in the case of the clergy and Church of the Romans, which from
old until now presides over all the churches which are under the sun? Having
surely received this canonically, as well as from councils and the apostles,
as from the princes of the latter (Peter & Paul), and being numbered in
their company, she is subject to no writings or issues in synodical
documents, on account of the eminence of her pontificate .....even as in all
these things all are equally subject to her (the Church of Rome) according
to sacerodotal law. And so when, without fear, but with all holy and
becoming confidence, those ministers (the popes) are of the truly firm and
immovable rock, that is of the most great and Apostolic Church of Rome.
(Maximus, in J.B. Mansi, ed. Amplissima Collectio Conciliorum, vol. 10)
If the Roman See recognizes Pyrrhus to be not only a reprobate but a
heretic, it is certainly plain that everyone who anathematizes those who
have rejected Pyrrhus also anathematizes the See of Rome, that is, he
anathematizes the Catholic Church. I need hardly add that he excommunicates
himself also, if indeed he is in communion with the Roman See and the
Catholic Church of God ...Let him hasten before all things to satisfy the
Roman See, for if it is satisfied, all will agree in calling him pious and
orthodox. For he only speaks in vain who thinks he ought to pursuade or
entrap persons like myself, and does not satisfy and implore the blessed
Pope of the most holy Catholic Church of the Romans, that is, the Apostolic
See, which is from the incarnate of the Son of God Himself, and also all the
holy synods, accodring to the holy canons and definitions has received
universal and surpreme dominion, authority, and power of binding and loosing
over all the holy churches of God throughout the whole world. (Maximus,
Letter to Peter, in Mansi x, 692).
John VI, Patriarch of Constantinople (715):
The Pope of Rome, the head of the Christian priesthood, whom in Peter, the
Lord commanded to confirm his brethren. (John VI, Epist. ad Constantin. Pap.
ad. Combefis, Auctuar. Bibl. P.P. Graec.tom. ii. p. 211, seq.)
St. Nicephorus, Patriarch of Constantinople (758-828):
Without whom (the Romans presiding in the seventh Council) a doctrine
brought forward in the Church could not, even though confirmed by canonical
decrees and by ecclesiastical usuage, ever obtain full approval or currency.
For it is they (the Popes of Rome) who have had assigned to them the rule in
sacred things, and who have received into their hands the dignity of
headship among the Apostles. (Nicephorus, Niceph. Cpl. pro. s. imag. c 25
[Mai N. Bibl. pp. ii. 30]).
St. Theodore the Studite of Constantinople (759-826):
Writing to Pope Leo III ....
Since to great Peter Christ our Lord gave the office of Chief Shepherd after
entrusting him with the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, to Peter or his
successor must of necessity every novelty in the Catholic Church be
referred. [Therefore], save us, oh most divine Head of Heads, Chief Shepherd
of the Church of Heaven. (Theodore, Bk. I. Ep. 23)
Writing to Pope Paschal, ...
Hear, O Apostolic Head, divinely-appointed Shepherd of Christ’s sheep,
keybearer of the Kingdom of Heaven, Rock of the Faith upon whom the Catholic
Church is built. For Peter art thou, who adornest and governest the Chair of
Peter. Hither, then, from the West, imitator of Christ, arise and repel not
for ever (Ps. xliii. 23). To thee spake Christ our Lord: ‘And thou being one
day converted, shalt strengthen thy brethren.’ Behold the hour and the
place. Help us, thou that art set by God for this. Stretch forth thy hand so
far as thou canst. Thou hast strength with God, through being the first of
all. (Letter of St. Theodore and four other Abbots to Pope Paschal, Bk. ii
Ep. 12, Patr. Graec. 99, 1152-3)
Writing to Emperor Michael, ...
Order that the declaration from old Rome be received, as was the custom by
Tradition of our Fathers from of old and from the beginning. For this, O
Emperor, is the highests of the Churches of God, in which first Peter held
the Chair, to whom the Lord said: Thou art Peter ...and the gates of hell
shall not prevail against it. (Theodore, Bk. II. Ep. 86)
I witness now before God and men, they have torn themselves away from the
Body of Christ, from the Surpreme See (Rome), in which Christ placed the
keys of the Faith, against which the gates of hell (I mean the mouth of
heretics) have not prevailed, and never will until the Consummation,
according to the promise of Him Who cannot lie. Let the blessed and
Apostolic Paschal (Pope St. Paschal I) rejoice therefore, for he has
fulfilled the work of Peter. (Theodore Bk. II. Ep. 63).
In truth we have seen that a manifest successor of the prince of the
Apostles presides over the Roman Church. We truly believe that Christ has
not deserted the Church here (Constantinople), for assistance from you has
been our one and only aid from of old and from the beginning by the
providence of God in the critical times. You are, indeed the untroubled and
pure fount of orthodoxy from the beginning, you the calm harbor of the whole
Church, far removed from the waves of heresy, you the God-chosen city of
refuge. (Letter of St. Theodor & Four Abbots to Pope Paschal).
Let him (Patriarch Nicephorus of Constantinople) assemble a synod of those
with whom he has been at variance, if it is impossible that representatives
of the other Patriarchs should be present, a thing which might certainly be
if the Emperor should wish the Western Patriarch (the Roman Pope) to be
present, to whom is given authority over an ecumenical synod; but let him
make peace and union by sending his synodical letters to the prelate of the
First See. (Theodore the Studite, Patr. Graec. 99, 1420)
--
http://www.geocities.com/timothyc1/
Will Nordmeyer
> The Eastern Church existed before Christianity ever reached rome
(remember
> Christianity began in the east)! In fact Peter established His first
> Bishopric outside of Jerusalem NOT IN ROME, but in Antioch!!! The
first
> "Bishop" of the Church was not even Peter but James the Just! The term
> "roman catholic" was coined around the same time as the Church in the
East
> was termed Orthodox because of their "right belief" and unchangable
> Tradition! The church at rome was just one of the 5 Patriarchates and
your
> "pope" only the Bishop of that Patriarchate.
>
>
Just where the authority was. And if you study the history of the
Church, you will see the Orthodox Church deferring to the Bishop of Rome
in the beginning.
No... the Bishop of Rome was the one with the authority vested in
Peter.
Will Nordmeyer
"Bari Stepanovich" <nomail...@thanx.com> wrote in message
news:3b8fc9c3...@tornado.usenetplanet.com...
> On 30 Aug 2001 14:06:31 +0100, "Will Nordmeyer"
> <wi...@nospam.kimmoore.org> wrote:
>
> >
> >"digimortal" <digim...@starpower.net> wrote in message
> >news:9mkgq5$6l2$1...@bob.news.rcn.net...
> >> Will Nordmeyer a REVISIONIST!!!
> >>
> >Read Jesus, Peter & the Keys.
> >
> >Also, why did the Orthodox Church recognize the primacy of the Bishop
of
> >Rome for around 1000 years?
>
> Will, don't confuse "primacy" (first among equals) with "supremacy"
> (absolute monarchy over all Christendom).
>
> The Eastern Churches were never in submission to Rome. One Bishop
> cannot be "over" the rest. A supreme papacy usurps the rightful place
> of the Holy Spirit.
>
V
>>> Bishop of Rome for around 1000 years?
I think that the Orthodox Church would be delighted to once again
recognize *primacy* but not *supremecy* of the Bishop of Rome.
>> What nonsense you peddle..The Orthodox church as such did not exist
>> for the first 1000 years. It resulted form a bitter feud and power
>> struggle within the Roman church.
I think you need to read some more *objective* history books.
> It did exist for the first 1000 years Peter. Those churches didn't just
> spring up. They were there. It did split from the Catholic Church (or
> they would say that the Latin Rite split from them. Perspective being
> what it is).
It's just a tad bit more than perspective. Follow the doctrines -
the Orthodox church hasn't added any dogma (or cannon law) since the
last Ecuminical council. Saints such as St. John Chrysostom could
teach the same things today as they did in their time and still be
considered Saints in the Orthodox Church. In the Roman Catholic
church, St. John for one would have to *change his teachings about
Mary* or be excommunicated. He'd ask which councils added Purgatory,
the Filoque, Immaculate Conception, Papal *Supremecy*, or which
ones changed the understanding about the Original Sin, turned
the priests around, ruled that priests *must* be unmarried, etc.
-V
peter terry
>
> "peter terry" <namb...@iprimus.com.au> wrote in message
> news:3b8f...@news.iprimus.com.au...
> >
> > "Will Nordmeyer" <wi...@nospam.kimmoore.org> wrote in message
> > news:3b8e3a57$1...@news5.uncensored-news.com...
> > >
> > > "digimortal" <digim...@starpower.net> wrote in message
> > > news:9mkgq5$6l2$1...@bob.news.rcn.net...
> > > > Will Nordmeyer a REVISIONIST!!!
> > > >
> > > Read Jesus, Peter & the Keys.
> > >
> > > Also, why did the Orthodox Church recognize the primacy of the
> Bishop of
> > > Rome for around 1000 years?
> > >
> > What nonsense you peddle..The Orthodox church as such did not exist
> for the
> > first 1000 years. It resulted form a bitter feud and power struggle
> within
> > the Roman church.
> > >
> It did exist for the first 1000 years Peter. Those churches didn't just
> spring up. They were there. It did split from the Catholic Church (or
> they would say that the Latin Rite split from them. Perspective being
> what it is).
>
Matt12 : 25-26
digimortal
held IN JERUSALEM in the beginning! Why were NONE of the original Church
councils ever held in rome if it held such primacy???
Will Nordmeyer wrote in message <3b8fd795$1...@news5.uncensored-news.com>...
digimortal
Bari Stepanovich wrote in message
<3b8fc9c3...@tornado.usenetplanet.com>...
digimortal
Will Nordmeyer wrote in message <3b8fd7b2$1...@news5.uncensored-news.com>...
digimortal
V wrote in message ...
digimortal
peter terry wrote in message <3b90...@news.iprimus.com.au>...
Will Nordmeyer
> All the Patriarchates were EQUAL! You speak roman revisionism! Primacy was
> held IN JERUSALEM in the beginning! Why were NONE of the original Church
> councils ever held in rome if it held such primacy???
>
Look at Timothyctx's post... All recognizing the Bishop of Rome's authority.
Will Nordmeyer
> ONLY in YOUR mind LOL!
>
those early easter Church leaders...
digimortal
Will Nordmeyer wrote in message <3b917...@news5.uncensored-news.com>...
digimortal
disprove HIS hypothesis!
Will Nordmeyer wrote in message <3b917...@news5.uncensored-news.com>...
Will Nordmeyer
> LOL!!! Central location!!!
>
OK... why does the UN occasionally meet in Geneva? Paris? etc. instead
of Rome? Does it mean that it's not REALLY the UN meeting? That New York
isn't REALLY where the UN is centered?
digimortal
such primacy and authority, why then was NOT one council held there nor even
presided at?
Will Nordmeyer wrote in message <3b919...@news5.uncensored-news.com>...
peter terry
> LOL!!! Central location!!!
>
Do ducks have lips?
Will Nordmeyer
> We are not talking of that we are talking about IF Rome (the pope) was in
> such primacy and authority, why then was NOT one council held there nor
even
> presided at?
>
Secretary General of the UN not preside over them?
Your argument is flawed from the very start.
peter terry
It has been muted for quite some time that the a.r.c.r.c NG has been
infiltrated by catholic neo Nazi whose hidden agendas are to promote
religious imperialism with strong racially superior overtones. You don't
have to wear an SS uniform to be a Nazi or a white supremacist, you only
need to proclaim such as cultural and religious superiority by insisting
that black African village traditions should be replaced with cucasian
catholic culture.
I have on more than a few occasions been asked by a some posters as to why
I have continued badgering Will if he is a neo-Nazi.
Allow me to explain.
This initial conversation which generated my suspicions was all about a
discussion concerning Aids in Africa which touched on topics such as, the
pope condemning of condoms causing aids, promiscuity as an endemic reality
to African culture, Wills insistence that immorality among ALL African was
the prime reason why aids continued to spread so vehemently and Wills
insistence that African Village life (i.e.Historic African cultural
traditions) be changed to Catholic culture (even though he denied saying
this till I posted the evidence which refuted his denials) as being his view
of the basis by which aids in Africa could be halted. That is the final
solution according to Will in not as many words: they are black!! they are
immoral!! and they have to change their culture to suit Catholicism!!..Spare
me it sounds like something out of medieval papacy or an inquisition, which
I suggested at the time it WAS!
Put simply in as few words as possible...I said as a reaction to Wills
grandstanding on the morality question (even though most Catholics including
the religious hierarchy do and have never ever lived up to these ideals),
that telling Africans that they are immoral is difficult because promiscuity
is such an integral part of African culture and traditions. Will spitting
the dummy angrily came back at me with some draconian racist overtone that;
well African culture is immoral and thus they will have to change their
traditional village life and replace it with CATHOLIC CULTURE. (evidence
provided forthwith).
Naturally being the kinds of person that I am, I reacted in disbelief at his
racist and almost imperial overtones.
I could not believe that in this modern age of intellectual honesty and
especially from one that say's he follows Christ, that anyone but a HARDENED
RACIST could say such an ignorant and hurtful thing against a third world
peoples, not privy to our education and monetary advantage. To my thinking
his off the cuff opinion simply exposed a deeper side of this person as I
will demonstrate. Given that the issue here was whether a cultural
promiscuous African village people can live up to a religious based Roman
catholic standard of morality that even Catholics never ever live up to.
Will, the clear patterns within your racist based response are NO different
to what one would expect from Adolph Hitler or some White supremacist group.
This is what you said in the very FIRST statement on the issue on the
12-7-01...not the postings you have been deceiving the group with you made
after backtracking from this original statement, much LATER.
(((If we want to help these people, we also need to teach them that they
can live in *1 of 2 cultures - Either the *Catholic culture that does
notcondone, promote, etc. that lifestyle, or the culture of the
village,etc. which does. *There is a clear disconnect between those
cultures... *I don't mean to be stigmatizing them...just pointing out
that the Pope is not to blame for the actions. *the cases you rightly
pointed out where it is culturally wrong for the woman to not consent to
sex, etc. *That is NOT a Catholic culture. They are not living a
Catholic lifestyle, so blaming Catholicism & the Pope for the spread of
AIDs is an incorrect conclusion.)))
((( KEY phrases.. * 1 of 2 cultures, * Catholic culture does not condone
that lifestyle or the culture of the village etc. * There is a clear
distinction between those cultures. * That is not Catholic culture. *They
are NOT living catholic lifestyle. * I do not mean stigmatising them)))
Wills underlying attitude is endemic to the beliefs promoted by Adolph
Hitler and right winged KKK white supremacy groups!!
** Adolph Hitler said: All human culture, all the result of art, science of
technology that we see before us today, are almost exclusively the product
of the Aryan. The very facts admits of the not founded inference that he
alone was the founder of all higher humanity, therefore representing
prototype all of that we understand of the word man. (Mein Kamphf, 290)
** Will Vordm..said: Either the catholic culture that does not condone,
promote etc, that lifestyle, or the culture of the village....There is a
clear distinction between those cultures....( Yes Will as you are clearly
saying that there is a distinction between immoral black African village
traditions and white catholic culture..right??)
** Adolph Hitler said: We do NOT JUDGE by merely artistic or military
standards or even by scientific ones. We judge by SPIRITUAL ENERGY which a
people are capable of putting forth. ( Edouard Caloc. Secrete conversations
with Hitler, 68.)
** Will Vordm said: I do not mean to be stigmatising them..That is not
catholic culture..They are not living catholic lifestyles. ( One thing
indicative about racists and what I found in most neo Nazi or white
supremacist sites is that while they ALL claim not be to judging people,
they do SO by some hidden
doctrinal or spiritual religious supremacy. You are no different Will.)
** Knights of the KKK say: We are promoters of white Christian
civilisation...These cherished and essential engrediances to a civilised and
moral society..
** Will Vordm says: There is a clear distinction between those two cultures.
Catholic that does not promote, condone etc that lifestyle or culture of the
village...that is not catholic culture...they are not living catholic
lifestyle. ( How can you judge the whole of African culture as some kind of
immoral cespit that does not match catholic ideals. Don't you know anything
about the history of your perverted Roman religion.)
** Knights of the KKK say: When we give honour to these ideals we give
honour to our ancestors and our white Christian culture.
** Will Vordm says: this is not catholic culture....they are not living
catholic culture.
** Adolph Hitler said: Since the blood (soul) and the Aryans contained
specific energies, the "cultural energies" or "racial elements". ( Mein
Khampf, 394)
** Will Vordm says: There is a clear distinction between those
cultures..they can live in one or two cultures...either the Catholic culture
or the culture of the village!
This is not catholic culture. (It' really not about the distinction between
immoral Africans and catholic ideology is it Will..It's the fact that they
are black and your using religion to hide your prejudices.)
** Adolph Hitler said: TWO worlds face each other. men of God or men of
Satan. ( Rauschning, Hitler speaks, 238.)
Will Vordm says: We also need to teach them that they can live in 1 or 2
cultures. either catholic....or village lifestyle. ( This statement is quite
unbelievable and even by itself leaves you standing naked...a german
american racist???)
Furthermore..I invite you to measure Wills statement below with what I
have illustrated above.
Message ID: JXB37.304$JS2....@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net
Date: 2001-07-13 05:37:05 PST
Subject: Re: UN accuses church of helping to spread aids
I'm not judging their morality - their culture teaches one thing. By my
standards, they are wrong, yes. BUT, they are not living by my standards.
They are living by their cultural standards that they have had for
generations. The Catholic Church came to teach them... ... If they choose
to
embrace those teachings, then they will see, that by the Bible, some of
their cultural traditions are wrong. If they choose to not embrace those
teachings, then they will continue. I'm not saying that they are
immoral....
Apologise Will, because no amount of diversion will make this GO AWAY!
SHOULD ANYONE WANT THE FULL POSTS WITH HEADERS CONCERNING ANY OF THE ABOVE I
WOULD BE MOST HAPPY TO E-MAIL THEM TO YOU.)
PeterT
"Will Nordmeyer" <wi...@nospam.kimmoore.org> wrote in message
news:3b926...@news5.uncensored-news.com...
Will Nordmeyer
other times, so he wants to try again...This time he extensively quotes
Hitler & the KKK, but to no avail...
Here's the message IDs in question...
Message ID: 5In37.1614$IJ.1...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net
Message ID: BSB37.345$23.5...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net
He tried this debate and lost badly... here's the data...
Subject: VILL NORDi boy.step up and explain lad..(2)
X-Original-Trace: 4 Sep 2001 23:49:31 +1100, 210.50.127.10
Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2001 22:40:08 +1000
Message-ID: 3b94...@news.iprimus.com.au
Here's the thread
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&safe=off&threadm=3b9a9fee%40news.iprim
us.com.au&rnum=1&prev=/groups%3Fq%3Dgroup:alt.religion.christian.roman-catho
lic%2Binsubject:Will%2Binsubject:Nordi%2Bauthor:Peter%2Bauthor:Terry%26hl%3D
en%26safe%3Doff%26as_drrb%3Db%26as_mind%3D29%26as_minm%3D8%26as_miny%3D2001%
26as_maxd%3D8%26as_maxm%3D9%26as_maxy%3D2001%26rnum%3D1%26selm%3D3b9a9fee%25
40news.iprimus.com.au
And here
Subject: WILL NORDi boy..**step right up son**
X-Original-Trace: 4 Sep 2001 17:36:53 +1100, 210.50.126.3
Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2001 16:27:32 +1000
Message-ID: 3b94...@news.iprimus.com.au
Here's the thread...
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&safe=off&threadm=3b97f2bf%40news.iprim
us.com.au&rnum=4&prev=/groups%3Fq%3Dgroup:alt.religion.christian.roman-catho
lic%2Binsubject:Will%2Binsubject:Nordi%2Bauthor:Peter%2Bauthor:Terry%26hl%3D
en%26safe%3Doff%26as_drrb%3Db%26as_mind%3D29%26as_minm%3D8%26as_miny%3D2001%
26as_maxd%3D8%26as_maxm%3D9%26as_maxy%3D2001%26rnum%3D4%26selm%3D3b97f2bf%25
40news.iprimus.com.au
And here
Subject: WILL NORDi..caught fibbing again son???
X-Original-Trace: 5 Sep 2001 20:56:55 +1100, 203.134.109.58
Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2001 19:47:28 +1000
Message-ID: 3b95f6e7$1...@news.iprimus.com.au
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&safe=off&threadm=3b9a992f%40news.iprim
us.com.au&rnum=2&prev=/groups%3Fq%3Dgroup:alt.religion.christian.roman-catho
lic%2Binsubject:Will%2Binsubject:Nordi%2Bauthor:Peter%2Bauthor:Terry%26hl%3D
en%26safe%3Doff%26as_drrb%3Db%26as_mind%3D29%26as_minm%3D8%26as_miny%3D2001%
26as_maxd%3D8%26as_maxm%3D9%26as_maxy%3D2001%26rnum%3D2%26selm%3D3b9a992f%25
40news.iprimus.com.au
And twisted it a bit, but started it here too.
Subject: Will Nordi...get a life!
X-Original-Trace: 7 Sep 2001 20:43:02 +1100, 203.134.111.121
Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2001 19:33:22 +1000
Message-ID: 3b98...@news.iprimus.com.au
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&safe=off&threadm=3b9a97b0%40news.iprim
us.com.au&rnum=3&prev=/groups%3Fq%3Dgroup:alt.religion.christian.roman-catho
lic%2Binsubject:Will%2Binsubject:Nordi%2Bauthor:Peter%2Bauthor:Terry%26hl%3D
en%26safe%3Doff%26as_drrb%3Db%26as_mind%3D29%26as_minm%3D8%26as_miny%3D2001%
26as_maxd%3D8%26as_maxm%3D9%26as_maxy%3D2001%26rnum%3D3%26selm%3D3b9a97b0%25
40news.iprimus.com.au
peter terry
> Snipped Peter wanting to start this debate over
Allow me to explain.
and ----------------------------------------------->
You've become very pathetic in your denials my friend, given the mountain of
evidence where you have proven yourself to be no more than a liar, a redneck
and most probably even a neo Nazi. I am not in the least surprised that NO
Catholics in here who incidentally would absolutely love to have a slice of
me, are NOT cuing up to defend you.
Neither would I given the evidence against you.
It has been muted for years that neo Nazis have infiltrated a.r.c.r.c and a
simple scan down the line of headers is all it takes to see that the joint
is brimming with anti- Semitics and racists. What you categorically
advocated concerning your solution to aids in Africa, that is; the
replacement of 'African village traditions' that go back thousands of years
with 'Roman Catholic culture', (to quote you), is indicative to the exact
sentiments that Adolph Hitler and various historical Catholic popes also
advocated as a solution for the Jews. Only a brief scan through various neo
Nazi sites on the Internet reveals that they too share YOUR sentiments and
feelings on racial and cultural superiority. If you would like me to show
you specifics from Mien Kamphf and KKK affiliated sites to prove my point I
would be most happy to do so.
What prompted my suspicions that you may have been a racist or anti Semite
was the hysterical and verging on fanatical way you insisted that the CC had
absolutely NO case to answer concerning it's involvement in Hitler's
war...calling everyone who added voice or evidence LIARS. I personally don't
even believe all the anti levelled against the Church in regards to it's
connection with Hitler, but you demonstrated no balance whatsoever on the
issue, as if in reality Hitler and the church were in no way anti-Semitic.
When I suggested that you had advocated the annexation of African culture as
a method of containing Aids you denied for 3 days that you had even
suggested such an assertion, REPEATEDLY calling me a LIAR, until I found
actual evidence contravening your denials sitting in my sent items box.
After posting this evidence your next tactic of denial was to say that I had
edited what you had said in an attempt to misconstrue your statement. So we
will see the full text of your statement which if anything further proves
your racial slur.
Wills full quote which as posted within 48 hours of the commencement of the
discussion on the 12-7-01. Clearly you make the distinction that Africans in
total have a clear choice being 1 or 2, that is their ancient traditions of
the village or catholic culture.
What originally introduced culture into this discussion on Aids was myself
explaining how difficult it was for Africans whose long traditions of
promiscuity were now an integral part of their cultural realities...to which
you came back with...then they should change their culture..as I have given
evidence to below.
Will responds::
>If we want to help these people, we also need to teach them that they
>can live in *1 of 2 cultures - Either the *Catholic culture that does
>notcondone, promote, etc. that lifestyle, or *the culture of the
>village,etc. which does. *There is a clear disconnect between those
>cultures... I don't mean to be stigmatizing them...just pointing out
>that the Pope is not to blame for the actions. The cases you rightly
>pointed out where it is culturally wrong for the woman to not consent to
>sex, etc. *That is NOT a Catholic culture. *They are not living a
>Catholic lifestyle, so blaming Catholicism & the Pope for the spread of
>AIDs is an incorrect conclusion.
((( KEY words.. ** 1 of 2 cultures, ** Catholic culture does not condone
that lifestyle or the culture of the village etc. ** There is a clear
distinction between those cultures. ** That is not Catholic culture. **They
are NOT living catholic lifestyle.)))
As you know Will I reacted accordingly and questioned you on what I had
interpreted as a pure racial slur against Africans. In disbelief and at the
lack of empathy at what you had said I questioned your education, what your
parents had taught you and whether this kinds of imperialistic jibe was part
and parcel of American culture.
to quote my response on the same day and in the same thread: 12-7-01
Peter said:
> am trying soooo hard not to be sarcastic here... But I have to ask you...
>have you ever had an education...have you ever travelled beyond the borders
<of the US...are your parents as imperialistic and ignorant as clearly you
>are??? next you will be suggesting that McDonalds acts as a mediator
between
> US and African culture..
and further quote on the same thread on the same day:
Peter said:
> Perhaps you should write to JP and suggest that he order an
> inquisition to stymie or force village life from Africa. make sure though
that you
>insist that he puts his Vatican money where your mouth is..
Will this is what transpired and when ever over the subsequent weeks I
raised these issues with you, you denied having ever said any of these
things, repeatedly calling me a LIAR.
From your OWN post below here is a collection of statements made by you
several weeks after your original remarks, backtracking & denying that you
had even said any of the above.
**********Then finally on the 8 september 2001 after repeatedly calling me a
liar and deneying he even said it Will succombs and actually changes his
mind and agree that all the above is true and correct.*************
said by Will last week
"Will Nordmeyer" <wi...@nospam.kimmoore.org> wrote in message
news:3b955...@news5.uncensored-news.com...
peter says:
> You are even out of step with your own church. In most of Africa the
> church accepts or tolerates the integration of many of their customs and
>rituals into catholic ideals.
> >
Will replies:
> **I never said their customs should be removed.**
>
And now a change of direction!
said by Will 8-9-01
>For what? For stating that your conclusion is wrong? For stating that
>you cannot blame Catholicism for a problem in a culture that is NOT
>Catholic? For stating that we should *NOT* have an inquisition and
>force Catholicism on them? ((((( For stating that if the Africans are
living
>by their village & cultural traditions, they are not living a Catholic
>Lifestyle? ))))) No... because all of those are true facts.
(still the total deviate though Will having changed 'catholic culture' for
'catholic lifestyle')
"Will Nordmeyer" <wi...@nospam.kimmoore.org> wrote in message
news:3b86597f$1...@news5.uncensored-news.com...
Will said:
> I have never said that all of African culture should be annexed. I
>have never said the doctrines should be "inflicted" especially if they
>don't want it. I advocate that if Africans claim to be Catholic, they
should
> follow Catholic teachings and evaluate where their cultural traditions
don't
> match with the teachings from the Bible.
>
In your original statement there is no reference whatsoever to you defining
your racial slurs only to Catholic Africans..WHO LIES WILL?
>
Will said:
> IF the African community is claiming to be Catholic, then they should
> follow the teachings of the Catholic Church. The FIRST one being that,
> promiscuity is wrong. Secondly, contraception is wrong. If they are
> claiming Catholicism, then they should follow those teachings. If they
>are claiming Christianity, then promiscuity is STILL wrong. If they are
not
> following a Christian religion at all, then the Catholic Church's ban on
> contraception doesn't matter to them. I'm only saying they should change
> their culture if they claim to be Catholic, and their cultural traditions
do
>
You say nothing even close to this as a part of your initial nonsense.
This is an example of you backtracking after having your butt kicked and
been badgered by me for sounding like a Nazi.
WHO LIES WILL?
>
Will said:
> I have repeatedly said - if the Africans claim to be Catholic, then YES,
> they should follow Catholic teachings and change their culture. If they
>do not, then that's fine
>
You have said nothing of the sort as the evidence categorically provides.
WHO LIES WILL?
>
Will said:
> The other lie you stated: I never said that the Church should re-engineer
> african culture to reflect my religion. I said that if the African people
> profess to be Catholic, they should live Catholic lives and reject
>cultural traditions that don't comply with Catholic Teachings.
>
When one recommends that an ancient tradition be replaced with another this
is nothing more than cultural engineering.. That is re engineering of
African village traditions with catholic culture. Surely you must understand
that Will...or perhaps you don't. On the basis of your original slur how can
one change the fundamentals of one culture without re engineering it. WHO
LIES WILL?
>
Will said:
> I said African CATHOLICS. Stop lying Peter. I was referring to Catholics
> in Africa who's culture conflict with Catholic Teachings.
>
Goodness that's an obvious lie or fabrication. Scroll up and find out for
yourself.
WHO LIES WILL?
>
Will said:
> There Peter... Now you have ANOTHER google thread showing that you are
> incorrect.I have never said that all of Africa should be forced to follow
the
> Catholic teachings.
>
Are you suffering from hallucinations mate. Look at the evidence posted
12-7-01.
WHO LIES WILL?
>
Will said:
> You should really check the commandments before lying like this. Is
>the bearing false witness commandment in your bible, or did you black that
> one out?
>
Yes indeed Will you certainly should. Seems that this analysis you now give
reflects the babble which always follows any interpretation you have ever
attempted to make of the Bible, especially concerning the teachings of
Jesus!
If you have changed your mind over the weeks after making your original slur
on Black Africa then I am pleased that my badgering of you has had some
positive
effect causing you to backtrack which it would appear that you are
attempting to now do.
But let this be a warning that if you are going to claim to be reflecting
the morals and virtues of Christ then you will have to make a greater effort
to attempt to actually find out what Christ in fact represents. I have
little time for racists and my opinion being that KKK NG's are more suited
to people such as you have been proven to be, rather than NG's that at
least on the surface make some attempt to speak and breath Christ.
Apologise Will!!
PeterT