Ok for all you anti Catholics explain these Paragraph's Written By ST.Ignatius a disciple Of ST.John ?

As you can see, it doesn't matter who you quote. If it's not in the Bible, obviously it must be disregarded.

It's a double standard: On one hand, all Christians accept the authority of these men when it comes the canonization of the Bible. Then some Christians turn right around and reject them as apostates when they speak of a teaching that doesn't jive with their particular church.

As for me... I feel it's wrong to just dismiss the early Church Fathers simply because their writings aren't in the Bible. Of course they're not in the Bible; they were written too late! But that doesn't make them any less valuable. These men learned at the feet of Jesus' own Apostles. They give us a glimpse of the early Church that the NT doesn't give. Its history ends in the 60s A.D. What about after that?

I'm not anti-Catholic anymore, but I used to be.

David's right on this. It's like people attacking the Roman Catholic Canon and documents just to make themselves feel superior because of past mistakes. Pride is a sin.

But the fact is without the Roman Catholic Church there would be no Protestants or Christians today.

Many will just deny history. They will say, prove it really happened that way.

There is nothing so repellent as a close-minded person. They'll say the Catholic Church didn't start till Constantine's time.

It's like they have rewritten history to suit their heresy. Jehovah Witnesses and the Bolsheviks are and were masters at this.

Yes, The Church does have the writings of Our Early Church Fathers.

I will quote one of Our R&S Regulars on this:

"I suppose The KJV sprouted wings and Floated down from Heaven".

(((Wolfie))) Oh so true.

They simply don't have the Full Truth.

God Bless You.

I guess being ignorant of the early Church gives them pleasure. It makes it easier to accept their own heresies if they do not know what Jesus taught His disciples. For those hermeneutically challenged, the Bible states that the written Word is just a small part of Jesus' teaching and that the fullness of truth is in His Church passed on through apostolic succession.

I guess we should be happy that they accept the New Testament we wrote and most of the Old Testament that we canonized. I guess it is too much to ask for them to understand history or to respect the people that the disciples of our Lord chose to continue the leadership of the enduring Church Christ and the disciples founded that Jesus prayed we all be one within.

A little more about St. Ignatius, He was the disciple of St, John and St. Peter. His best friends were St. Barnabas and St. Polycarp. It is believed that He was ordained to the office of Bishop by St. Peter himself. St. Peter also appointed him to the bishopric that St. Peter personally founded at Antioch and St. Ignatius was the third Bishop there.

The letters you are referring to were written after he was condemned by the Roman Emperor to be eaten by the beasts in the coliseum in Rome. One of the letters He wrote of the total of seven was to the Roman Christians who were the followers of St. Peter and St. Paul begging them not to interfere with his martyrdom. Another of His letters defines the early Church as those that gather around the Bishop and He calls these Christians Catholic. The name of the followers of Jesus were first called Christian in Antioch as well. St. Ignatius was indeed consumed by the beasts in the Coliseum as he desired.

It is a shame that some Protestants reject the teaching of the early Church fathers and in doing so it is no surprise that they are clueless as to the teaching and practices of the first century Church and beyond. But, what is more of a shame is that they have no desire for knowledge based on facts. They just do not have the Berean spirit that is spoken of in Scriptures and remain largely ignorant as a result making them vulnerable to false teachers and doctrines such as Sola Scriptura, Eternal Security and Faith Alone, which are all condemned in Scripture.

Someone said that St. Ignatius' teaching is evidence that the Church fell into apostasy in the first century. I guess that person does not have any fear of proclaiming Jesus a liar when He said that His Church would withstand the attacks of Satan and never fall into apostasy. I feel sorry for him when he is judged. Let us all pray for his repentance.

Often trying to teach fundamentalist Protestants biblical teaching is akin to trying to teach a pig to fly. God bless!

In Christ

Fr. Joseph

NOTE:

Someone said,"Once again, Pharisaical "catholicism" has gone to "traditions of man" and rejected the Word of God, the Bible."

This is one of the most halarious statements I have seen on here from its display of ignorance. Someone has the unmitigated gall to criticise Catholics for being Pharisaical where in their Protestant bible the Old Testament they use is the Pharisaical Canon from the Jewish Council of Jamnia. Catholic Christians use the Christian Canon of the Old Testament that was used by Jesus, the disciples and biblical authors instead.

He was a great writer. I, as a Catholic, personally think that many Christians that aren't Catholic read the Bible and the Bible alone. They don't read writtings from the saints and think that anything that isn't in the Bible isn't necessary to read and understand. I've read two encyclicals from Pope John Paul II and they are great! But non Catholics would never read them because they aren't the Bible.

thanks you LH. this is one of my favorites. ignatius was the ice breaker for me in my conversion. Thank God!! I was once as ignorant as those who posted. it is a hard thing to get over when everything you believe is shown to be wrong. I was and they are scared to read anything but the bible, because they DO know it will toss their beliefs in the crapper.

John 6:47 "Truly, truly, I say to you, He that believes on me has everlasting life

John 6:54, "Whoever eats My flesh, and drinks My blood, has eternal life; and I will raise him up on the last day.

John 6:55 - to clarify further, Jesus says "For My Flesh is food indeed, and My Blood is drink indeed.

The traditions That the Bible speaks of that is as opposed to the traditions of Fundie' Fanaticism is not Christian.

Free Grace Fundie’ Fanaticism leads to eternal torment in hell, because Free Grace Fundie’ Fanaticism teaches EASY BELIEVEISM,

One Prayer and your saved forever ,Once saved always saved, faith alone, baptism is optional for salvation, Only accept the writings Of Paul and John and consider the rest of the Bible false gospel ‘s of works (Galatians 1:6-9).

Please prove that any of that was written. Please prove that Ignatius was "John's disciple".

he just did with written text from the time but fundies cant read anything thats not in the Bible ... Except if its written by a fundie pastor.. Its called The Early Church Fathers you Know the ones who Cannonized the Bible

History informs us that Peter was the bishop of Antioch at the time; in fact, Church Fathers claim that Ignatius was ordained by Peter himself. Ignatius must have worshiped with Peter and Paul and John. He lived with or near them and was an understudy of these special apostles. Ignatius is known and revered as an authentic witness to the traditions and practice of the apostles.

I write these things to thee hoping to come to thee shortly, but in order that thou mayest know, if I am delayed, how to conduct thyself in the house of GOD, which is the Church of the Living GOD, the pillar and mainstay of the truth." 1Tim 3:14-15

Show me in Jesus own words

If a dispute arises, first begin at the lowest level to resolve it, a one on one discussion. If that fails, then take one or two witnesses with you to confirm the wording of the dispute. If that fails then appeal to the Church, the final authority...

"And if he refuse to hear them, appeal to the Church, but if he refuse to hear even the Church, let him be to thee as the heathen and the publican." Matt 18:15-18.

Move onto the first Catholic council of jeruselem

Apostolic succession is not a Bible teaching

gee if it wasnt for Apostolic succession and Apostolic tradition you would not have the bible you have today without it you sola scriptura doctrine crumbles funny how that works out huh

such a good scripture the clone david picked

13when slandered, we entreat.(N) We have become, and are still, like the scum of the world,(O) the refuse of all things

perfect to decscribe a Free Grace cultist

"a Free Grace cultist" LH -- we're gonna have to remember that one dude. ;-)

Sure, I can explain that...

Acts 20:29,30: "I know that after my going away oppressive wolves will enter in among YOU and will not treat the flock with tenderness, and from among YOU yourselves men will rise and speak twisted things to draw away the disciples after themselves."

2 Thessalonians also speaks of an apostasy that would come. This began shortly after the death of the last apostle, and we can here see its beginnings in the writings of Ignatius (assuming of course, that this is authentic). You cannot use information that most others won't recognize as inspired of God to support a belief that is equally uninspired.

Apostolic succession is not a Bible teaching. You use it as the foundation for so many of your beliefs, but since it isn't true much Catholic doctrine crumbles.