For you see your calling, brethren, that not many wise according to the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called. But God has chosen the foolish things of the world to put to shame the wise, and God has chosen the weak things of the world to put to shame the things which are mighty... that no flesh should glory in His presence.... —that, as it is written, “He who glories, let him glory in the LORD.”
1 Corinthians 1:26-31
Monday, September 06, 2010
Beggars All: Reformation And Apologetics: In a discussion at Called to Communion
Here's a post by John Bugay that links to a discussion at 'Called to Communion' about some new scholarship on the structure of the early church at Rome.
Jennie - without meaning to, you have linked to some absolutely brilliant answers to false issues you have raised. John Bugay links to a post at a Catholic site that Bugay thinks is addressing issues he (Bugay) has raised. In the comments at Called to Communion, he receives a gentle slap-down on that point - then Frank Beckwith and other very smart people effectively break down the reformed arguments against the papacy and apostolic succession. Challenging, brilliant site - Called to Communion - wish I had the time to explore all the writers and topics on offer there.
I'd love to hear your take on it, Leo, John, and Elena.
Christine, Peter Lampe isn't the first historian by far to research the structure of the early church. Maybe you should read the book, and also some other historians who have written about this. I believe Philipp Schaff wrote quite a bit about it. I'll find some links on it.
I haven't read the whole thread yet, but I suspect the reformed arguments will be just as challenging. It all depends on who you agree with as to who you think is brilliant, I guess.
Who said anything about anyone being the first historian to research the structure of the early church. Don't look for anti-Catholic links for my sake . . . I just wanted to alert folks to what I think is a great site, Called to Communion. Where dialogue is civil and respectful.
John Bugay gives this comment in the thread on 'Called to Communion', to the author of the post who quoted from 'Ignatius':
The selection that you give from “Ignatius, to the Trallians” itself is a spurious interpolation — a fourth century addition to what his held to be an authentic letter of Ignatius — that is, it is evidence that has been tampered with.
What you’ve quoted as Ignatius is a fake, a forgery, and you yourself have cited it as if it were genuine. This perfectly illustrates a process, writ large, that helped to solidify the authority of the papacy, and helps to maintain it today, among those of you who choose to believe myths and fables (and worse) rather than to consider the genuine evidence.
Oh I love to read young apologists doing their thing!
I think it's pretty heady stuff.
I think if Jennie really understood what the debate is about and how good the Cathlics were going to meet the challenge, she wouldn't have linked to it. Too late now of course- I've book marked it!
I've been on there a few times, and am fairly familiar with it. I've interacted a little with them. I know they're very scholarly, but I expect John to hold his own, and have some help from others. It's not a surprise to me that they are prepared. We don't need to be afraid of the truth coming out.
13 comments:
Jennie - without meaning to, you have linked to some absolutely brilliant answers to false issues you have raised. John Bugay links to a post at a Catholic site that Bugay thinks is addressing issues he (Bugay) has raised. In the comments at Called to Communion, he receives a gentle slap-down on that point - then Frank Beckwith and other very smart people effectively break down the reformed arguments against the papacy and apostolic succession. Challenging, brilliant site - Called to Communion - wish I had the time to explore all the writers and topics on offer there.
I'd love to hear your take on it, Leo, John, and Elena.
Christine,
Peter Lampe isn't the first historian by far to research the structure of the early church. Maybe you should read the book, and also some other historians who have written about this. I believe Philipp Schaff wrote quite a bit about it. I'll find some links on it.
I haven't read the whole thread yet, but I suspect the reformed arguments will be just as challenging. It all depends on who you agree with as to who you think is brilliant, I guess.
Here's another recent post on Beggar's All about the papacy:
http://pilgrimsdaughter.blogspot.com/2010/07/historical-literature-on-earliest.html
Here's Schaff's 'History of the Christian Church'.
http://www.ccel.org/s/schaff/history/About.htm
Who said anything about anyone being the first historian to research the structure of the early church. Don't look for anti-Catholic links for my sake . . . I just wanted to alert folks to what I think is a great site, Called to Communion. Where dialogue is civil and respectful.
In Schaff's book, Vol. 2 and Chapter IV is where he writes about the early structure and how that changed.
John Bugay gives this comment in the thread on 'Called to Communion', to the author of the post who quoted from 'Ignatius':
The selection that you give from “Ignatius, to the Trallians” itself is a spurious interpolation — a fourth century addition to what his held to be an authentic letter of Ignatius — that is, it is evidence that has been tampered with.
What you’ve quoted as Ignatius is a fake, a forgery, and you yourself have cited it as if it were genuine. This perfectly illustrates a process, writ large, that helped to solidify the authority of the papacy, and helps to maintain it today, among those of you who choose to believe myths and fables (and worse) rather than to consider the genuine evidence.
Here's an interesting post by John Bugay that he links in the comments:
http://beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com/2010/06/answers-for-dozie.html
Probably my favorite Catholic apologist is Peter Kreeft. I invite you to find his website and see what you think.
Oh I love to read young apologists doing their thing!
I think it's pretty heady stuff.
I think if Jennie really understood what the debate is about and how good the Cathlics were going to meet the challenge, she wouldn't have linked to it.
Too late now of course- I've book marked it!
OMG!!!All the authors of that site are converts to Catholicism!
How cool is that!
God has a great sense of humor!
I've been on there a few times, and am fairly familiar with it. I've interacted a little with them. I know they're very scholarly, but I expect John to hold his own, and have some help from others. It's not a surprise to me that they are prepared. We don't need to be afraid of the truth coming out.
Post a Comment