You are on page 1of 48


The Witness of the Church Fathers With Regard to Catholic Distinctives
With Examples of Protestant Corroboration of Catholic Doctrines or Clear Contradiction of Patristic Consensus
--- Copiously Documented with 315 Footnotes --TAB E !F C!"TE"T# $%&per'lin(ed)

I. History of the Doctrines of Tradition and Scripture II. History of the Doctrine of Justification III. History of the Idea of Development of Doctrine IV. History of the Doctrine of the Eucharist V. History of the Doctrine of the Sacrifice of the Mass VI. History of the Doctrine of the Communion of Saints VII. History of the Doctrine of Pur atory VIII. History of the Doctrine of Penance I!. History of Mariolo y !. The Early Church and the "ishop of #ome
Note: Every 20th footnote will be hyper-linked (20, 40, 160, 280, etc. *+ %istor& of the Doctrines of Tradition and #cripture ,an& prominent Protestant scholars and historians agree that- for the earl& Church- #cripture and Tradition freel& coexisted and .ere not in the least mutuall& exclusive+ $/) While the earl& Church Fathers constantl& assert the supreme authorit& of the Bible- the& do not oppose the #criptures to the Church- .hich had for them a necessar& practical priorit&+ *n this .a& the& are much nearer in spirit to the continuous Catholic vie. than to the classic Protestant outloo(+ Protestant polemicists tend to impose upon the earl& Church categories of thought .hich have onl& been prevalent from the 01th centur& to the present time+ This is a common error- since ever&one has their preconceived notions .hich the& .ould li(e to see substantiated+ *n the late first centur&- the Didache spea(s of Tradition as something 2received-2 reflecting the biblical language of #t+ Paul+ $0) *n the second centur& #t+ Pol&carp $3) and #t+ *renaeus $4) reiterate this teaching more explicitl&and spea( of apostolic succession+ Tertullian $5) and #t+ %ippol&tus $6) expand upon this understanding in the earl& third centur&+ And !rigen statesThat alone is to be believed as the truth .hich is in no .a& at variance .ith ecclesiastical and Apostolic Tradition+ $1) *n the fourth centur&- #t+ Basil the 7reat- $8) #t+ 7regor& of "&ssa- $9) and #t+ Epiphanius inform us that dogmas of the Church are received both from .ritten and oral sources- or the 2tradition of the Apostles-2 and that- as in #t+ Epiphanius: .ords- 2not ever&thing can be gotten from #acred #cripture+2 $;) *n the earl& fifth centur&- #t+ <ohn Chr&sostom- .hom man& consider the greatest preacher .ho ever lived- cites 3 Thessalonians 3=06 $examined above) and concludes from it that-

2 + + + there .as much also that .as not .ritten+ i(e that .hich is .ritten- the un.ritten too is .orth& of belief+ #o let us regard the Tradition of the Church also as .orth& of belief+ $0/) *n the same period- #t+ Augustine ' the greatest of all the Fathers and highl& regarded b& utherCalvin and most Protestants ' clearl& teaches that there exists a Tradition of the Church .hich is extrascriptural $00) and- in some cases- not even &et dealt .ith in ecumenical Councils+ $03) For example- he mentions the rebaptism of heretics and schismatics as a practice .hich is contrar& to apostolic Tradition- even though the matter had not been .ritten about+ %e opposes rebaptism $over against the Donatist heres&) because it is not in accordance .ith the practice 2(ept b& the .hole Church ever&.here and handed do.n b& the Apostles themselves+2 $04) Thus- for #t+ Augustine- the authorit& of the Church- derived from apostolic Tradition- is normative and final+ This is exactl& the opposite of the Protestant vie.- .hich regards #cripture as someho. the final arbiter $even though it still has to be interpreted b& someone authoritativel&)+ #t+ >incent of erins- .riting c+545- soon after #t+ Augustine:s death- ma(es the same point about the necessit& of Church authorit& and interpretation- since+ + + ?uite plainl&- #acred #cripture- b& reason of its o.n depth- is not accepted b& ever&one as having one and the same meaning + + + it can almost appear as if there are as man& opinions as there are men+ $05) Thus- all the essential components of the Catholic vie. of #cripture and Tradition are in place .ithin the first 5// &ears of the Church:s existence- and this .as the unanimous Christian vie. until the time of the rise of Protestantism in the 01th centur&+ The constant Catholic teaching .as strongl& reaffirmed and presented even more explicitl& in the Council of Trent in 0651 $06) and the #econd >atican Council in 0;16+ $01) ,artin uther- .ho essentiall& originated the notion of sola #criptura- did so some.hat reluctantl& and graduall&- as dictated b& unfortunate circumstances $vie.ed from his perspective)+ *n his examination at Augsburg in !ctober- 0609 he placed the Bible $that is- his interpretation of it) above the pope- but still admitted the e?ual authorit& of Councils+ *n the eip@ig Disputation .ith Catholic apologist <ohann Ec( in <ul&- 060;- he .as more or less forced in the heat of debate to place the authorit& of #cripture above that of Councils as .ell+ Even in this instance he tried in vain to evade the conse?uences of the inner logic of his o.n theological position+ This evolution is .ell' documented in man& Protestant biographies of uther+ *n the final anal&sis- both uther and Calvin espoused a radicall& subAective and experiential method of determining Christian truth .hich is some.hat contradictor& and not even strictl& in harmon& .ith a sola #criptura perspective- since the interpretational supremac& of the individual $itself an unbiblical notion) is accepted as an unproven axiom+ This overl&'idealistic assumption .as sho.n to be evidentl& false in uther:s o.n lifetime- and all the more so since+ *n 0633 uther said that Christians must not regard the 2opinion of all Christendom-2 but that 2each one for himself alone2 must believe the #criptures+ $08) ater- ho.ever- he set up a #tate Church .hich operated on mar(edl& authoritarian principles diametricall& opposed to his earlier- more radical and subAective stance+ *n theor&- then- for uther #cripture .as both supreme and self'interpreting for all honest and sincere Protestant in?uirers+ *n practice- ho.ever- since this Protestant 2axiom2 is demonstrabl& false- Luther's own theology simpl& became the substitute for traditional Catholic theolog&+ The sheer arbitrariness of such a position is apparent upon fair'minded reflection+

3 i(e.ise- <ohn Calvin- a much more logical and s&stematic thin(er than uther- .ound up in the same logical conundrum- a foundational fla. in Protestantism:s sola #criptura not often dealt .ith b& Protestant scholars and clerg&men+ *n his *nstitutes he .rites- 27od besto.s the actual (no.ledge of himself upon us onl& in the #criptures+2 $09) Bet in the ver& next chapter- Calvin becomes radicall& subAective- not seeming to notice the contradiction involved= #cripture indeed is self'authenticatedC hence it is not right to subAect it to proof and reasoning + + + *llumined b& his .e believe neither b& our o.n nor b& an&one else:s Audgment that #cripture is from 7od + + + We see( no proofs- + + + #uch- then- is a conviction that re?uires no reasons + + + * spea( of nothing other than .hat each believer experiences .ithin himself+ $0;) This perspective- if ta(en to its logical conclusion- .ould dispose of reason- Christian apologeticsauthoritative interpretation b& some ecclesiastical bod& $as opposed to the mere individual under the illumination of the %ol& #pirit)- and even the nature of the biblical Canon itself+ Calvin seems to thin( that ever& Christian $that is- the predestined elect) .ould (no. .hat boo(s constituted #cripture even if the Canon had never been authoritativel& determined b& the Council of Carthage in 4;8 $this Canon also contained the boo(s .hich Protestants call the Apocr&pha- .hich the& removed from their Bibles)+ Bet this is clearl& not the case+ We (no. from the actual histor& of the establishment of the Canon that sincere- godl&- and learned Christians had great disagreements about .hat boo(s .ere biblical- $3/) and it is ?uite unrealistic and fanciful to thin( that Christians of an& period $especiall& man& &ears later) .ould be an& different+ Calvin:s s&stem- then- is ever& bit as self'defeating as the ,ormon belief- .here one 2(no.s2 the truth of the Boo( of ,ormon b& means of a 2burning in the bosom+2 %e himself constantl& emplo&s highl& complex reasoning and hermeneutical arguments- and even appeals to Church histor&- .here it suits his purpose+ #uch a methodolog& is contrar& to the above citation+ Calvin:s extremel& influential theological schema $and Protestantism- generall& spea(ing) might be self'consistent once certain axioms are accepted uncriticall&- and presuppositional fla.s overloo(edbut .hen these are examined obAectivel&- the Achilles: %eel of Protestantism- sola #criptura- is revealed to be a ver& .ea( pillar indeed+ FOOTNOTES (Scripture and Tradition 0. Oberman, Heiko, The Harvest of Medieval Theology, Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, rev. ed., 1967, 366 371! "e#ikan, $aros#av, The Emergence of the Catholic Tradition, %&i'a(o: )niv. o* %&i'a(o "ress, 1971, 11+ 119 ,bo-& ./-&eran so/r'es0. 1. Didache, 1:13. ,'*. 2e/-eronom3 1:2, 12:320. 2. 2nd .e--er -o -&e "&i#ippians, 7,2. 3. Against Heresies, 1,10,1 2! 2,9,1! 3,3,1! 1,33,4. 1. Demurrer Against the Heretics, 19,3! 21:2 1! 37,1. +. Against the Heresy of Noetus, 17. 6. The Fundamental Doctrines, 1, "re*a'e, 2. 5rom $/r(ens, 6i##iam 7., ed. and -r., The Faith of the Early Fathers ,5E50, 3 vo#/mes, %o##e(evi##e, M8: .i-/r(i'a# "ress, 1970, vo#. 1, 190. 7. The Holy Spirit, 27,66. 4. Against Eunomius, 9k. 3 ,10. 9. Panacea Against All Heresies, 61,6. $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 2, 73. 10. Homi#ies on 2 :&ess 1:2. $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 2, 121. 11. .e--er -o $an/ari/s, +1,1,1. 12. aptism, 1,21,31. 13. !"id., 2,7,12. $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 3, 66. 11. The Note"oo#s, 2,2. $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 3, 262 263. 1+. ;2e'ree %on'ernin( -&e %anoni'a# <'rip-/res,; %o/n'i# o* :ren-, <ession I=, 7pri# 4, 1+16. 7## :ren- 'i-a-ions

1 are -aken *rom Dogmatic Canons and Decrees, Ro'k*ord, I.: :78 9ooks > "/b#is&ers, 1977 ,ori(. 19120. 16. ;2o(ma-i' %ons-i-/-ion on 2ivine Reve#a-ion,; 8ov. 14, 196+. 17. 5rom: Grisar, Har-mann, $uther, -r. E.M. .amond, ed. ./i(i %appade#-a, 6 vo#/mes, .ondon: ?e(an "a/#, :ren'&, :r/bner > %o., 1917, vo#. 1, 391 392! =on Mens'&en #eren -@/ me3den, 1+22. 14. %a#vin, !nstitutes of the Christian %eligion, 1++9 ed., 9ook I, '&. 6, se'. 1, emp&asis added ,-&is is -&e -i-#e o* -&e se'-ion0. 5rom -r. o* 5ord .. 9a--#es, ed. $o&n :. M'8ei##, "&i#ade#p&ia: 6es-mins-er "ress, -Ao vo#/mes, 1960, vo#. 1, 69. 19. !"id., 9ook I, '&. 7, se'. +. 9a--#esBM'8ei##, i"id., vo#. 1, 40 41! emp&asis added. 20. <ee, e.(., 6es-'o--, 9rooke 5oss, A &eneral Survey of the History of the Canon of the Ne' Testament, Grand Rapids, MI: 9aker 9ook Ho/se, 1940 ,ori(. 6-& ed., 14490! 9r/'e, 5.5., The Canon of Scripture, 2oAners Grove, I.: In-er=arsi-3 "ress, 1944 ,bo-& "ro-es-an- so/r'es0. **+ %istor& of the Doctrine of <ustification "o theologian or Christian figure of an& note believed in forensic- imputed Austification until uther and Calvin came onto the scene of Church histor& in the 01th centur&+ *t is simpl& implausible and incredible $and unbiblical= ,atthe. 01=09- <ohn 05=31) to thin( that a theological concept considered so absolutel& crucial b& Protestants could have been lost immediatel& after the Apostles and for fifteen centuries thereafter+ We have seen ho. Protestant notions of Austificationabsolute assurance of a salvation .hich can:t be lost- eradication of free .ill- double predestinationand so forth- are unbiblical+ "o. .e shall establish that the unbro(en Tradition of Catholic Christianit& up until uther:s time also bears .itness to the above outlined vie. of soteriolog&+ *n the late first centur& and earl& second- #t+ Clement of Rome spea(s of 2being Austified b& .or(s and not b& .ords-2 $30) Aust as #t+ <ames does+ i(e.ise- #t+ *gnatius of Antioch .arns against 2desertion2 and describes .or(s as 2deposited .ithholdings2 .hich .ill accumulate 2bac('pa&+2 $33) Thus- the concepts of merit and loss of salvation are delineated ver& earl& on+ *n the second centur&- #t+ <ustin ,art&r refers to 2the merit of each man:s actions-2 upholds free .ill- $34) and directl& denies imputed Austification+ $35) #t+ Theophilus $36) and #t+ *renaeus $31) discuss merit and good .or(s .ith regard to salvation- as does Tertullian- around 3/5 A+D+ $38) *n the third centur&- #t+ Clement of Alexandria defines baptism as 2a .ashing b& .hich .e are cleansed of sins-2 $39) and denies 2faith alone+2 $3;) !rigen $4/) and #t+ C&prian $40) espouse good .or(s and merit- and the latter expressl& affirms baptismal regeneration+ $43) *n the fourth centur&- #t+ 7regor& of "&ssa .rites- 2Faith .ithout .or(s of Austice is not sufficient for salvation+2 $44) #t+ <ohn Chr&sostom ma(es the same denial of 2faith alone2 $45) and teaches infused Austification= 2%e has not onl& delivered us from sins- but has made us lovable+2 $46) #t+ Ambrose ma(es .or(s $and merit) the scale upon .hich our eternal destin& .ill be .eighed+ $41) #t+ <erome condemns 2faith alone+2 $48) *n the earl& fifth centur&- #t+ Augustine repudiates the Calvinist ideas of Dnconditional Election and *rresistible 7race= 2%e does not Austif& &ou .ithout &our .illing it+2 $49) %e teaches an initial Austification $4;) .hich enables the Christian to perform meritorious good .or(s- $5/) in order to .or( out their salvation- as #t+ Paul taught+ Around 530- he elaborated his vie. of infused Austification= 7race ma(es a man entirel& ne. + + + it even rene.s a man perfectl&- to the extent that it achieves his deliverance from absolutel& all sins+ $50) And a fe. &ears before his death- he .arned of the possible loss of one:s salvation= *f someone alread& regenerate and Austified should- of his o.n .ill- relapse into his evil lifecertainl& that man cannot sa&= :* have not received:C because he lost the grace he received from 7od and b& his o.n free choice .ent to evil+ $53)

+ This utterl& contradicts Calvinism:s Perseverance of the #aints as .ell as *rresistible 7race+ #t+ Augustine .as no Protestant- and most assuredl& not a CalvinistE The #econd Council of !range in 63; $54) condemned the heresies of Pelagianism and #emi' Pelagianism $.hich #t+ Augustine had alread& done a centur& earlier)+ Pelagianism denied !riginal #in and regarded grace as .ithin man:s natural capacities+ #emi'Pelagianism made man primaril& responsible for his o.n salvation and denigrated the necessit& of 7od:s enabling grace+ The Council made man& binding definitions of grace and salvation .hich ma& be ?uite surprising to man& Protestants- .ho are .ont to accuse the Catholic Church of the same heresies .hich it anathemati@ed fourteen centuries ago+ The Catholic Church full& agrees .ith %ol& #cripture that faith- the subAective condition of Austification- is a gift of 7od $Ephesians 3=9 ff+- <ohn 1=11%ebre.s 03=03- Philippians 0=1- 0=3;- 0 Corinthians 5=8)+ This .as the emphasis of 3nd !range+ $55) The Council of Trent $0656'0614) reiterated the decrees of a thousand &ears earlier- developing them further- and emphasi@ing man:s free .ill $in opposition to Protestantism) but adding nothing essential+ #ome of the more notable portions of the Decree on <ustification $<anuar& 04- 0658) follo.= Chapter 5= + + + The beginning of the said Austification is to be derived from the prevenient grace of 7od through <esus ChristC that is to sa&- from %is vocation- .hereb&- .ithout an& merits existing on their parts- the& are calledC that so the& .ho b& sins .ere alienated from 7od ma& be disposed through %is ?uic(ening and assisting grace to convert themselves to their o.n Austification b& freel& assenting to and cooperating .ith that said grace= in such sort that- .hile 7od touches the heart of man b& the illumination of the %ol& 7host- neither is man himself utterl& .ithout doing an&thing .hile he receives that inspiration- for as much as he is also able to reAect itC &et he is not able- b& his o.n free'.ill- .ithout the grace of 7od- to move himself unto Austice in %is sight+ Canon I= *f an&one saith that man ma& be Austified before 7od b& his o.n .or(s- .hether done through the teaching of human nature or that of the la.- .ithout the grace of 7od through <esus ChristC let him be anathema+ $56) Canon IV= *f an&one saith that man:s free'.ill- moved and excited b& 7od- b& assenting to 7od exciting and calling- no .ise cooperates to.ards disposing and preparing itself for obtaining the grace of AustificationC that it cannot refuse its consent- if it .ould- but that- as something inanimate- it does nothing .hatever and is merel& passiveC let him be anathema+ Canon VI= *f an&one saith that it is not in man:s to ma(e his .a&s evil- but that the .or(s that are evil 7od .or(eth as .ell as those that are good- not permissibl& onl&- but properl& and of %imself- in such .ise that the treason of <udas is no less %is o.n proper .or( than the vocation of PaulC let him be anathema+ Canon XI= *f an&one saith that men are Austified- either b& the sole imputation of the Austice of Christ or b& the sole remission of sins- to the exclusion of the grace and the charit& .hich is poured forth in their hearts b& the %ol& 7host and is inherent in themC or even that the grace.hereb& .e are Austified- is onl& the favour of 7odC let him be anathema+ Canon XXIV= *f an&one saith that the Austice received is not preserved and also increased before 7od through good .or(sC but that the said .or(s are merel& the fruits and signs of Austification obtained- but not a cause of the increase thereofC let him be anathema+ Canon XXVI= *f an&one saith that the Aust ought not- for their good .or(s done in 7od- to expect and hope for an eternal recompense from 7od- through %is merc& and the merit of <esus Christ- if so be that the& persevere to the end in .ell'doing and in (eeping the commandmentsC let him be anathema+

6 Canon XXVII= *f an&one saith that there is no mortal sin but that of infidelit& $unbelief)C or that grace once received is not lost b& an& other sin- ho.ever grievous and enormous- save b& that of infidelit&C let him be anathema+ Canon XXX= *f an&one saith that- after the grace of Austification has been received- to ever& penitent sinner the guilt is remitted- and the debt of eternal punishment is blotted out in such .ise that there remains not an& debt of temporal punishment to be discharged either in this .orld- or in the next in Purgator&- before the entrance to the Fingdom of %eaven can be opened $to him)C let him be anathema+ ,artin uther exhibited unorthodox tendencies as earl& as his Commentar& on Romans $0601).here he .rote that even .hen .e 2do good- .e sin- Gbene operando peccamus in atinH but Christ covers over .hat is .anting and does not impute it+2 %e denies merit and the existence of venial sin+ For uther- all sins- even the smallest- are mortal+ %e even goes so far as to sa& that those .ho determine that the& are predestined to hell should resign themselves to their fate- since it is 7od:s .ill ' this (no.ledge being a source of 2ineffable Ao&+2 Even <esus Christ 2offered %imself to the eternal Father to be consigned to eternal damnation for us+2 uther thus .as at variance .ith the Catholic Church on soteriological and christological issues at least a &ear before he criti?ued the doctrine of *ndulgences- .hich is commonl& considered his first departure'point+ $51) *n the %eidelberg Disputation in 0609- uther stated= 27od + + + graciousl& accepts our .or(s and our life not.ithstanding their complete .orthlessness + + + All that a man does is the .or( of the devilof sin- of dar(ness and foolishness+2 $58) uther biographer %artmann 7risar concludes= *t .as onl& in 0609'060; that he developed the doctrine of the so'called 2special faith-2 b& .hich the individual assures himself of pardon and secures salvation+ Thereb& he transformed faith into trust- for .hat he termed fiducial faith partoo( more of the nature of a strong- artificiall& stimulated hopeC it reall& amounted to an intense confidence that the merits of Christ obliterated ever& sin+ $59) The radical subAectivit& and inade?uac& of uther:s vie.s on 2assurance2 of salvation are evident in his revised Commentar& on 7alatians= We must da& b& da& struggle to.ards greater and greater certaint& + + + Ever&one should therefore accustom himself resolutel& to the persuasion that he is in a state of grace + + + #hould he feel a doubt- then let him exercise faithC he must beat do.n his doubts and ac?uire certaint& + + + And even .hen .e have fought ver& hard for this- it .ill still cost us much + + + The matter of Austification is difficult and delicate- not indeed in itself- for in itself it is as certain as can be- but in our regardC of this * have fre?uent experience+ $5;) Therefore- uther:s assurance of salvation amounts to the in order to possess assurance of salvation &ou must believe ' despite doubts ' that &ou have salvation+ *t doesn:t ta(e a roc(et scientist to see that this is reasoning in a vicious circle+ $6/) Cardinal " criti?ued uther:s vie.s on faith and assurance .hen he .as still an Anglican= A s&stem of doctrine has risen up during the last three centuries- in .hich faith or spiritual'mindedness is contemplated and rested on as the end of religion instead of Christ + + + And in this .a& religion is made to consist in contemplating ourselves instead of ChristC not simpl& in loo(ing to Christ- but in ascertaining that .e loo( to Christ- not in %is Divinit& and Atonement- but in our conversion and our faith in those truths + + + WhatE is this the

7 libert& .here.ith Christ has made us free- and .herein .e stand- the home of our o.n thoughts- the prison of our o.n sensations- the province of selfI + + + "o .onder that .here the thought of self obscures the thought of 7od- pra&er and praise languish- and onl& preaching flourishes + + + To loo( at Christ is to be Austified b& faithC to thin( of being Austified b& faith is to loo( from Christ and to fall from grace + + + G utherH found Christians in bondage to their .or(s and observancesC he released them b& his doctrine of faithC and he left them in bondage to their feelings + + + Whereas he preached against reliance on selfhe introduced it in a more subtle shapeC .hereas he professed to ma(e the .ritten .ord all in all- he sacrificed it in its length and breadth to the doctrine .hich he had .rested from a fe. texts+ $60) FOOTNOTES (!usti"ication 21. 1s- %#emen- ,-o -&e %orin-&ians0, 30:3, 31:2, 32:3 1, 33:1 2,7, 31:1 3. 5rom .i(&-*oo-, $osep& 9. > $.R. Harmer, -r., The Apostolic Fathers, 2nd ed., ed. > rev. b3 Mi'&ae# 6. Ho#mes, Grand Rapids, MI: 9aker 9ook Ho/se, 1949 ,1s- ed. 14910, 1+. 22. .e--er -o "o#3'arp, 6,2. 5rom $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 1, 26. 23. First Apology, 13. $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 1, +3. 21. Dialogue (ith Trypho the )e', 111. $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 1, 62 63. 2+. :o 7/-o#3'/s, 1,11. 26. Against Heresies, 1,37,7. 27. %epentance, 2,11C 6,1. 24. The !nstructor of Children, 1,6,26,1 2. $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 1, 174. 29. Miscellanies ,<-roma-eis0, 6,11,104,1 +. $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 1, 141. 30. %ommen-aries on $o&n, 19,6. 31. (or#s and Almsgiving, 11. 32. :o 2ona-/s, 1. 33. Homi#ies on E''#esias-es, 4. $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 2, 16. 31. Homi#ies on -&e Gospe# o* $o&n, 31,1. 3+. Homi#ies on Ep&esians, 1,3. $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 2, 120. 36. .e--er -o %ons-an-i/s, a 9is&op, 2,16! The Duties of the Clergy, 1,1+,+7. 37. %ommen-aries on Ga#a-ians, 2,3,11. 34. <ermons, 169,13. $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 3, 29. 39. =ario/s D/es-ions -o <imp#i'ian, 1,2,2. 10. !"id., 1,2,21. 11. Against )ulian* Defender of Pelagianism, 6,13,10. $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 3, 116. 12. Admonition and &race, 6,9. $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 3, 1+7. 13. :&e <e'ond %o/n'i# o* Oran(e Aas no- an e'/meni'a#, or Genera# %o/n'i#, b/- is so#emn#3 a/-&ori-a-ive *or a## %a-&o#i's d/e -o -&e 'on*irma-ion o* "ope 9oni*a'e II ,"apa# 9/##: Per Filium Nostrum, $an/ar3 2+, +310. 11. <ome o* -&e more impor-an- de'rees o* -&e <e'ond %o/n'i# o* Oran(e in +29: !"non #: I* an3one sa3s -&a- -&e (ra'e o* God 'an be 'on*erred in ansAer -o manEs pe-i-ion, b/- -&a- -&e pe-i-ion i-se#* is no- d/e -o -&e a'-ion o* (ra'e, &e 'on-radi'-s -&e prop&e- Isaia& and -&e 7pos-#e, A&o bo-& sa3: EI Aas *o/nd b3 -&em -&a- did no- seek me, I appeared open#3 -o -&em -&a- ask no- a*-er meE ,Romans 10:20, Isaia& 1+:10. FIn 9o/3er, .o/is, The Spirit and Forms of Protestantism, -r. 7.=. .i--#eda#e, .ondon: Harvi## "ress, 19+6, 67G. !"non 4: I* an3one 'on-ends -&a- God Aai-s *or o/r Ai## so Ae ma3 be '#eansed *rom sin and does noadmi- -&a- -&e ver3 *a'- -&a- Ae even Ai## -o be '#eansed 'omes in /s b3 -&e in*/sion and Aork o* -&e Ho#3 <piri-, &e resis-s -&e same Ho#3 <piri-. FIn Mos-, 6i##iam G., Catholic Apologetics Today, Ro'k*ord, I.: :78 9ooks and "/b#is&ers, 1946, 110G. !"non $: I* an3bod3 sa3s -&a- -&e . . . be(innin( o* 5ai-& and -&e 7'- o* 5ai-& i-se#* . . . is in /s na-/ra##3 and no- b3 a (i*- o* (ra'e -&a- is b3 -&e inspira-ion o* -&e Ho#3 G&os-, &e is opposed -o 7pos-o#i' -ea'&in(.

4 FIn O--, ./dAi(, Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, -r. "a-ri'k .3n'&, Ro'k*ord, I.: :78 9ooks and "/b#is&ers, 1971 Fori(. 19+2 in GermanG, 230G. !"non 6: I* an3one sa3s -&a- God &as mer'3 on /s A&en, Ai-&o/- &is (ra'e, Ae be#ieve, Ai##, desire, s-rive, Aork, Aa-'&, s-/d3, ask, seek, kno'k, and does no- 'on*ess -&a- Ae be#ieve, Ai##, and are enab#ed -o do a## -&is in -&e Aa3 Ae o/(&-, b3 -&e in*/sion and inspira-ion o* -&e Ho#3 <piri- Ai-&in /s! or makes -&e &e#p o* (ra'e depend on -&e &/mi#i-3 or obedien'e o* man, ra-&er -&an as'ribin( s/'& &/mi#i-3 and obedien'e -o -&e *ree (i*- o* (ra'e! &e (oes 'o/n-er -o -&e 7pos-#e, A&o sa3s, E6&a- &as- -&o/ -&a- -&o/ &as- no- re'eivedHE and E93 -&e (ra'e o* God I am A&a- I amE ,1 %orin-&ians 1:7 and 1+:100. F9o/3er, 67 64G. !"non %: I* an3one asser-s -&a- Ae 'an, b3 o/r na-/ra# poAers, -&ink as Ae o/(&-, or '&oose an3 (ood per-ainin( -o -&e sa#va-ion o* e-erna# #i*e, -&a- is, 'onsen- -o sa#va-ion or -o -&e messa(e o* -&e Gospe#, Ai-&o/- -&e i##/mina-ion and inspira-ion o* -&e Ho#3 <piri- . . . &e is mis#ed b3 a &ere-i'a# spiri-, no/nders-andin( A&a- -&e voi'e o* God sa3s in -&e Gospe#, E6i-&o/- me 3o/ 'an do no-&in(E ,$o&n 1+:+0, nor -&e Aords o* -&e 7pos-#e, E8o- -&a- Ae are s/**i'ien- -o -&ink an3-&in( o* o/rse#ves, as o* o/rse#ves, b/- o/r s/**i'ien'3 is *rom GodE ,2 %orin-&ians 3:+0. F9o/3er, 64G. !"non &: 7s o*-en as Ae do (ood God opera-es in /s and Ai-& /s, so -&a- Ae ma3 opera-e. FO--, 229G. !"non 1#: 5ree Ai##, Aeakened in -&e person o* -&e *irs- man, 'an be repaired on#3 b3 -&e (ra'e o* 9ap-ism . . . I'i-es $n 4:36J. F9o/3er, 64G. !"non 20: Man does no (ood eK'ep- -&a- A&i'& God brin(s abo/- -&a- man per*orms . . . FO--, 229G. !"non 2$: In a Aord, -o #ove God is a (i*- o* God. He, 3e- /n#oved, #oves /s and (ave /s -&e poAer -o #ove . . . :&ro/(& -&e sin o* -&e *irs- man, -&e *ree Ai## is so Aeakened and Aarped, -&a- no one -&erea*-er 'an ei-&er #ove God as &e o/(&-, or be#ieve in God, or do (ood *or -&e sake o* God, /n#ess moved, previo/s#3, b3 -&e (ra'e o* -&e divine mer'3 . . . In ever3 (ood Aork -&a- Ae do, i- is no- Ae A&o &ave -&e ini-ia-ive, aided, s/bseL/en-#3, b3 -&e mer'3 o* God, b/- -&a- &e be(ins b3 inspirin( *ai-& and #ove -oAards &im, Ai-&o/- an3 prior meri- o* o/rs. F9o/3er, 69G. 1+. Anathema: 7 'ondemna-ion /sed b3 -&e %&/r'& -o de'#are -&a- a posi-ion or vieApoin- is 'on-rar3 -o %a-&o#i' *ai-& or do'-rine, derived *rom Ga#a-ians 1:9. I- means, #i-era##3, ;#e- &im be eK'omm/ni'a-ed,; or barred *rom -&e sa'ramen-s, no- d"'ned, as man3 mis-aken#3 s/ppose. 16. In*orma-ion derived *rom Har-mann Grisar, $uther, -r. E.M. .amond, ed. ./i(i %appade#-a, 6 vo#s., .ondon: ?e(an "a/#, -ren'&, :r/bner > %o., 1917, vo#. 1, 216 217,221 222,234 210! Grisar in -/rn 'i-es ./-&er &imse#* *rom -&e edi-ion o* Commentary on %omans b3 $. 5i'ker ,.eip@i(: 19040. 17. Grisar, i"id., vo#. 1, 319. 14. !"id., vo#. 1, 132, 1+6 1+7. 19. !"id., vo#. 1, 137 113. +0. :&e %o/n'i# o* :ren-, in i-s 2e'ree on $/s-i*i'a-ion ,'&ap-ers 9, 12, 1+0, reCe'-ed "ro-es-an-ismEs no-ion o* s/bCe'-ive ass/ran'e o* sa#va-ion: 9/-, a#-&o/(& i- is ne'essar3 -o be#ieve -&a- sins nei-&er are remi--ed, nor ever Aere remi--ed save (ra-/i-o/s#3 b3 -&e mer'3 o* God *or %&ris-Es sake, 3e- i- is no- -o be said -&a- sins are *or(iven, or &ave been *or(iven, -o an3 one A&o boas-s o* &is 'on*iden'e and 'er-ain-3 o* -&e remission o* sins, and res-s on -&a- a#one! seein( -&a- i- ma3 eKis-, 3ea does in o/r da3 eKis-, amon(s- &ere-i's and s'&isma-i's! and Ai-& (rea- ve&emen'e is -&is vain 'on*iden'e, and one a#ien *rom a## (od#iness, prea'&ed /p in opposi-ion -o -&e %a-&o#i' %&/r'&. 9/- nei-&er is -&is -o be asser-ed, -&a- -&e3 A&o are -r/#3 C/s-i*ied m/s- needs, Ai-&o/- an3 do/b-in( A&a-ever, se--#e Ai-&in -&emse#ves -&a- -&e3 are C/s-i*ied, and -&a- no one is abso#ved *rom sins and C/s-i*ied b/- &e -&a- be#ieves *or 'er-ain -&a- &e is abso#ved and C/s-i*ied! and -&a- abso#/-ion and C/s-i*i'a-ion are e**e'-ed b3 -&is *ai-& a#one! as -&o/(& A&oso &as no- -&is be#ie* do/b-s o* -&e promises o* God and o* -&e e**i'a'3 o* -&e dea-& and res/rre'-ion o* %&ris-. 5or even as no pio/s person o/(&- -o do/bo* -&e mer'3 o* God, o* -&e meri- o* %&ris-, and o* -&e vir-/e and e**i'a'3 o* -&e sa'ramen-s, even so ea'& one, A&en &e re(ards &imse#* and &is oAn Aeakness and indisposi-ion, ma3 &ave *ear and appre&ension -o/'&in( &is oAn (ra'e! seein( -&a- no one 'an knoA Ai-& a 'er-ain-3 o* *ai-&, A&i'& 'anno- be s/bCe'- -o error, -&a- &e &as ob-ained -&e (ra'e o* God.

9 8o one, moreover, so #on( as &e is in -&is mor-a# #i*e, o/(&- so *ar -o pres/me as re(ards -&e se're- m3s-er3 o* divine predes-ina-ion as -o de-ermine *or 'er-ain -&a- &e is ass/red#3 in -&e n/mber o* -&e predes-ina-e! as i* i- Aere -r/e -&a- &e -&a- is C/s-i*ied ei-&er 'anno- sin an3 more, or, i* &e do sin, -&a- &e o/(&- -o promise &imse#* an ass/red repen-an'e! *or eK'ep- b3 spe'ia# reve#a-ion i- 'anno- be knoAn A&om God &a-& '&osen /n-o Himse#*. . . . I- is -o be main-ained -&a- -&e re'eived (ra'e o* C/s-i*i'a-ion is #os- no- on#3 b3 in*ide#i-3, A&ereb3 even *ai-& i-se#* is #os-, b/- a#so b3 an3 o-&er mor-a# sin A&a-ever, -&o/(& *ai-& be no- #os- . . . +1. 8eAman, $o&n Henr3, $ectures on )ustification, 1434, ,Ne'man+s (or#s, .ondon: .on(mans, Green > %o., 14410, 323 4,330,336 7,339 11. ***+ %istor& of the *dea of Development of Doctrine *n the late second centur&- #t+ *renaeus spea(s of Christian doctrine as 2ever&.here the same+2 Bet he goes on to assert that= + + + constantl& it has its &outh rene.ed b& the #pirit of 7od- as if it .ere some precious deposit in an excellent vesselC and it causes the vessel containing it also to be reAuvenated+2 $63) Tertullian- .riting c+3/1- states that 2the grace of 7od .or(s and perfects up to the end+2 $64) #t+ >incent of erins- .riting around 545- gave the classic exposition found in the Church Fathers= *n the Catholic Church herself ever& care must be ta(en that .e ma& hold fast to that .hich has been believed ever&.here- al.a&s- and b& all+ For this is- then trul& and properl& Catholic + + + $65) Will there- then- be no progress of religion in the Church of ChristI Certainl& there is- and the greatest + + + But it is trul& progress and not a change of faith+ What is meant b& progress is that something is brought to an advancement .ithin itselfC b& change- something is transformed from one thing into another+ *t is necessar&- therefore- that understanding(no.ledge and .isdom gro. and advance strongl& and mightil& + + + and this must ta(e place precisel& .ithin its o.n (ind- that is- in the same teaching- in the same meaning- and in the same opinion+ The progress of religion in souls is li(e the of bodies- .hich- in the course of &ears- evolve and develop- but still remain .hat the& .ere + + + Although in the course of time something evolved from those first seeds and has no. expanded under careful cultivation- nothing of the characteristics of the seeds is changed+ 7ranted that appearance- beaut& and distinction has been added- still- the same nature of each (ind remains+ $66) Dogma + + + ma& be consolidated in the course of &ears- developed in the se?uence of timeand sublimated b& age ' &et remain incorrupt and unimpaired + + + so that it does not allo. of an& change- or an& loss of its specific character- or an& variation of its inherent form+ $61) *t should flourish and ripenC it should develop and become perfect + + + but it is sinful to change them + + + or mutilate them+ The& ma& ta(e on more evidence- clarit&- and distinctness- but it is absolutel& necessar& that the& retain their plenitude- integrit&- and basic character + + + The Church of Christ is a faithful and ever .atchful guardian of the dogmas .hich have been committed to her charge+ *n this sacred deposit she changes nothing- she ta(es nothing + + +- she adds nothing to it+ $68)

10 %ere .e have almost all the elements outlined b& " fourteen centuries later- &et Protestant controversialists such as 7eorge #almon claim that " vie.s .ere a radical departure from Catholic precedentE $69) Cardinal " points out the relative development of t.o doctrines in the earl& Church- as an example= #ome notion of suffering + + + or other vague forms of the doctrine of Purgatory- has in its favour almost a consensus of the first four ages of the Church + + + Whereas no one .ill sa& that there is a testimon& of the Fathers- e?uall& strong- for the doctrine of Original Sin + + + *n spite of the forcible teaching of #t+ Paul on the subAect- the doctrine of !riginal #in appears neither in the Apostles: nor the "icene Creed+ $6;) Finall&- #t+ Thomas A?uinas $0336'85) commented= Regarding its substance- then- faith does not gro. .ith the passage of time- for .hatever has been believed since .as contained from the start in the faith of the ancient fathers+ As regards its explication- ho.ever- the number of articles has increased- for .e moderns explicitl& believe .hat the& believed implicitl&+ $1/) Development of doctrine- then- has been the constant teaching of the Catholic Church from the beginning- and all through its histor&+ !nl& a misunderstanding of .hat development entails- or ignorance of the histor& of Christian doctrine- could cause an&one to doubt this+ "or is the concept hostile in an& .a& to the considerable amount of biblical data .hich can be brought to bear on the subAect+ Development is not necessaril& corruption- as so man& evangelical Protestants casuall& assume+ Rather- it is novel innovation- according to #cripture- the earl& Church- the Fathers- the Councilsand continuous Catholic Tradition- .hich is certainl& a corruption of true apostolic Christianit& $see Acts 3=53- 0 Corinthians 00=3- 3 Thessalonians 4=1- 7alatians 0=;-03- <ude 4)+ FOOTNOTES (De#elopment o" Doctrine +2. Against Heresies, 3,21,1. In $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 1, 91. +3. The ,eiling of ,irgins, 1,3. $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 1, 137. +1. Note"oo#s, 2,3. $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 3, 263. ++. !"id., 23:24 30. Emp&asis added. $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 3, 26+. +6. !"id., 23. 5rom %&apin, $o&n, ed., The oo# of Catholic -uotations, 8M: 5arrar, <-ra/s > %/da&3, 19+6, 271. +7. !"id., 23B23:30 **. 5rom %&apin, i"id., 271! Gibbons, $ames %ardina#, The Faith of /ur Fathers, 8M: ".$. ?ened3 > <ons, rev. ed., 1917, 12. +4. <a#mon, Geor(e, The !nfalli"ility of the Church, Grand Rapids, MI: 9aker 9ook Ho/se ,ori(. 14440, 31 3+. +9. 8eAman, $o&n Henr3 %ardina#, An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine ,141+! revised 14740, edi-ion p/b#is&ed b3 )niv. o* 8o-re 2ame "ress, 1949, 21,23. In-rod/'-ion, nos. 1+ 16. 60. 7L/inas, <-. :&omas, Summa Theologica, 2 2,2,7. In %&apin, i"id., 271. *>+ %istor& of the Doctrine of the Eucharist *n the earl& second centur& $before 00/ A+D+)- #t+ *gnatius of Antioch held that 2the Eucharist is the Flesh of our #avior <esus Christ+2 $10) *n the middle of the same centur&- #t+ <ustin ,art&r distinguishes the Eucharist from 2common2 bread and drin( and calls it 2both the flesh and the blood of that incarnated <esus+2 $13) A little later- #t+ *renaeus .rites- 2The bread over .hich than(s have been given is the Bod& of $the) ord- and the cup %is Blood+2 $14) *n the third centur&- Tertullian sa&s that <esus at the ast #upper too( bread 2and made it into %is bod& b& sa&ing= :This is ,& bod&+:2 $15) !rigen spea(s of 2receiving the Bod& of the ord2 and ta(ing care 2lest a particle of it fall+2 $16) #t+ C&prian believed that 2Christ is our bread- .e .ho touch %is Bod&+2 $11) Also- alread& in this period- ancient Christian liturgies- inscriptions and art

11 $both eastern and .estern) bear plain .itness to the Real Presence and even $in some fashion) transubstantiation+ #t+ Athanasius- in the fourth centur&- maintained that= after the great and .onderful pra&ers have been completed- then the bread is become the Bod&- and the .ine the Blood- of our ord <esus Christ+ $18) #t+ C&ril of <erusalem ma(es an almost identical statement $19) and rebu(es those .ho ?uestion the Real Presence 2even though the senses suggest to &ou the other+2 $1;) #t+ %ilar& of Poitiers deems the Eucharist 2trul&2 Flesh and Blood- and suggests a connection bet.een the denial of this and the reAection of the ver& *ncarnation of Christ+ $8/) #t+ Basil the 7reat regards Communion as a 2parta(ing2 in the Bod& and Blood of Christ+ $80) #t+ 7regor& of "&ssa holds that 2The bread + + + has been made over into the Bod& of 7od the Word-2 and that Christ in the Eucharist is 2blending %imself .ith the bodies of believers+2 $83) #t+ <ohn Chr&sostom spea(s of the priest as the representative of 7od in the ,ass- exercising solel& %is and grace- in order to 2transform the gifts2 .hich 2become the Bod& and Blood of Christ+2 $84) he e?uates the Eucharist .ith Christ:s 2blood'stained2 Bod&- 2pierced b& a lance+2 $85) #t+ Ambrose of ,ilan concurs in all these beliefs and refers to a transformation in .hich 2even nature itself is changed+2 $86) *n the earl& fifth centur&- #t+ C&ril of Alexandria li(e.ise denies that the Eucharist is a 2figure2 $81) or 2solel& intellectual+2 $88) astl&- #t+ Augustine- the greatest of the Fathers- .rites that 2Christ .as carried in %is o.n hands- .hen- referring to %is o.n Bod&- %e said :This is ,& Bod&+:2 $89) %e expressl& sanctions adoration of the consecrated %ost= %e too( flesh from the flesh of ,ar& + + + and gave us the same flesh to be eaten unto salvation+ But no one eats that flesh unless first he adores it + + + .e do sin b& not adoring+ $8;) #t+ Augustine repeatedl& affirms the Real Presence and transubstantiation+ $9/) !ften- Protestants cite #t+ Augustine:s references to the Eucharist as a 2sign-2 thin(ing that thereb& he denied the Real Presence+ But this is merel& a .ea( false dichotom&- as the ?uotes above prove+ *t is entirel& possible for something to be both a sign and realit& simultaneousl&- and this is most emphaticall& the case .ith the Eucharist- Aust as- for instance- <esus referred to %is actual Resurrection as the sign of <onah $,atthe. 03=49'5/)- or %is #econd Coming as the sign of the #on of man in heaven $,atthe. 35=3;'40)+ #t+ Augustine- understanding the richness of biblical and Catholic s&mbolic imager& as fe. have before or since- alluded to this .ith regard to the Eucharist- never for a moment den&ing or doubting the Real Presence+ This 2double significance2 is full& in accord .ith Catholic teaching and biblical norms+ The first Christians of an& note .ho denied the Real Presence .ere t.o French mon(s= Ratramnus $d+919)- .ho deviated some.hat but not totall&- and Berengarius $d+0/99)- .ho adopted a s&mbolic vie. .hich he later retracted+ *n the 03th and 04th centuries- the Cathari and Albigensians- ' heretical sects influenced b& the earlier 7nostics- ,anichaeans and Docetists- repudiated it+ *n response to this threat- the Fourth ateran Council in 0306 officiall& formulated dogmaticall& the full&'developed doctrines of transubstantiation- Real Presence- and the exclusive sacramental of validl&'ordained priests+ <ohn W&cliffe $d+0495) maintained a position on the Eucharist a(in to that of Calvin ' a 2d&namic-2 or 2spiritual2 presence onl& $(no.n as the remanence theor&)+ Eastern !rthodox& maintains a firm belief in the Real Presence- although it is reluctant to attempt an& explanation of the manner of the change- thin(ing that this is impious and unnecessar&+ $90)

12 i(e.ise- man& Anglicans $such as C+#+ accept the Real Presence- especiall& those .ho call themselves 2high church2 Anglicans or 2Anglo'Catholics+2 $93) ,artin uther- .hile reAecting the #acrifice of the ,ass- nevertheless held tenaciousl& to the Real Presence in the form of 2consubstantiation-2 in .hich the t.o substances of bread and Christ:s Bod& are present simultaneousl&- rather than one substantiall& changing into the other+ *n fact- he regarded those .ho denied the Real Presence $such as J.ingli) as heretics and non'Christians- 2out of the Church-2 and applied to them some of the most graphic and scathing rebu(es in his colorful linguistic repertoire+ Even so- in his earl& period- around 063/- he himself .as tempted to discard this vie. in opposition to Catholic dogma- $94) but found both the biblical evidence and the unanimit& of Christian Tradition too unavoidable= * am caughtC * cannot escape- the text is too forcible + + + * .restled and struggled and .ould gladl& have escaped+ $95) *t is ver& dangerous to assume that the Church .hich had existed for so man& centuriesand had been the instructor of the .hole of Christendom- should not have taught the true doctrine of the sacraments+ $96) As late as 0654- uther did not forbid an&one .ho believed in transubstantiation from Aoining his movement+ $91) And- .hen as(ed .hether utherans should do a.a& .ith the Elevation of the %ost in the liturg&- uther consistentl& replied in 0655 $t.o &ears before he died)= B& no means- for such abrogation .ould tend to diminish respect for the #acrament and cause it to be undervalued + + + *f Christ is trul& present in the Bread- .h& should %e not be treated .ith the utmost respect and even be adoredI <oachim- one of uther:s friends- added= We sa. ho. uther bo.ed lo. at the Elevation .ith great devotion and reverentl& .orshiped Christ+ $98) For these beliefs- uther .as accused b& fello. Reformer <ohn Calvin of being 2half'papist2 and of committing idolatr&= %e has sinned + + + from ignorance and the grossest extravagance+ For .hat absurdities he pa.ned upon us + + + .hen he said the bread is the ver& bod&E + + + a ver& foul error+ $99) J.ingli- Bucer- !ecolampadius- and Carlstadt $all Protestant Reformers) Aettisoned the doctrine of Real Presence- and adopted a purel& s&mbolic- commemorative vie.+ <ohn Calvin $and eventuall& uther:s right'hand man Philip ,elanchthon) too( an intermediate position- in .hich Christ is present in the Eucharist in some sort of profoundl& spiritual and 2d&namic2 fashion- but not substantiall&- .ith Communion being efficacious onl& for the trul& faithful- the elect- or the 2predestined+2 At times- ho.ever- Calvin sounds $li(e uther) almost Catholic= The ord:s bod& .as once for all so sacrificed for us that .e ma& no. feed upon it- and b& feeding feel in ourselves the .or(ing of that uni?ue sacrifice + + + We are therefore bidden to ta(e and eat the bod& .hich .as once for all offered for our salvation + + + *n this #acrament .e have such full .itness of all these things + + + as if Christ here present .ere himself set before our e&es and touched b& our hands + + +

13 The ord intended- b& calling himself the 2bread of life2 + + + to teach + + + that- b& true parta(ing of him- his life passes into us and is made ours + + + "othing remains but to brea( forth in .onder at this m&ster&- .hich plainl& neither the mind is able to conceive nor the tongue to express + + + Christ:s flesh- separated from us b& such great distance- penetrates to us- so that it becomes our food + + + the #pirit trul& unites things separated in space + + + *f the ord trul& represents the participation in his bod& through the brea(ing of bread + + + he trul& presents and sho.s his bod& + + + B& the of the s&mbol the thing itself is also sho.n + + + When .e have received the s&mbol of the bod& + + + the bod& itself is also given to us + + + $9;) *t is remar(able and curious $from a Catholic perspective) that Calvin can conceive of and strongl& espouse an ethereal supernatural impartation of Christ:s 2flesh2 to us- .hich supercedes natural la.s of space- &et feel compelled to go to the greatest lengths to denounce transubstantiation ' .hereb& 7od transcends $primaril&) natural la.s of substance and matter ' as inherentl& 2monstrous2 and absurd+ From a purel& rational- theoretical standpoint- neither concept is a priori an& more difficult to believe than the other+ Either scenario is perfectl& possible for an omnipotent 7od+ Calvin:s theor& is no more plausible- all things considered- than the traditional Catholic vie.+ Bet at the same time Calvin $consciousl& or not) approximates man& of the same d&namics of thought+ %is position might legitimatel& be regarded as inconsistent and illogical $especiall& given the above biblical proofs)- &et .hatever one thin(s of it- the praise.orth& reverence and a.esomeness .hich Calvin clearl& retains must be respectfull& ac(no.ledged+ ,ost Protestants toda&- especiall& evangelicals- pentecostals- and non'denominationalists- are inclined to accept the s&mbolic vie.- as first expounded b& J.ingli- .hile man& others $particularl& Anglicans and utherans) fail to comprehend or accept the ostensible official creedal teaching of their o.n denominations+ Thus- it is helpful for all Christians to freshl& approach the #criptures in order to obAectivel& determine our ord:s teaching on this ver& important matter- .hich Catholics regard as the central purpose of Christians gathering together- the 2Blessed #acrament+2 FOOTNOTES (Eucharist 61. .e--er -o -&e <m3rnaeans, 7,1. 5rom $/r(ens, 6i##iam 7., ed. and -r., The Faith of the Early Fathers ,5E50, 3 vo#/mes, %o##e(evi##e, M8: .i-/r(i'a# "ress, 1970, vo#. 1, 2+. 62. First Apology, 66,2. $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 1, ++. 63. Against Heresies, 1,14,1 B 1,33,2! '*. 1,14,+. $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 1, 9+,97. 61. Against Marcion* 1,10,3. $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 1, 111. 6+. Homi#ies on EKod/s, 13,3. $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 1, 20+ 206. 66. 2e domini'a ora-., 14. 5rom O--, ./dAi(, Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, -r. "a-ri'k .3n'&, Ro'k*ord, I.: :78 9ooks and "/b#is&ers, 1971 ,ori(. 19+2 in German0, 377. 67. <ermon -o -&e 8eA#3 9ap-i@ed. 5rom ?ea-in(, ?ar#, Catholicism and Fundamentalism, <an 5ran'is'o: I(na-i/s, 1944, 234. 64. %a-e'&e-i'a# .e'-/res, 19,7. 69. !"id., 22,1! 22,2! 22,6. $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 1, 360 361. 70. The Trinity, 4,11. 71. .e--er -o a "a-ri'ian .ad3 %aesaria, 93! .i-/r(3 o* <-. 9asi# -&e Grea-. 72. The &reat Catechism, 37. $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 2, 19. 73. Homi#ies on $/das, 1,6. $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 2, 101 10+. 71. Homi#ies on 1 %orin-&ians, 21,1. $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 2, 114. 7+. The Mysteries* 9,+0 +1! '*. The Sacraments, 1,1,11. $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 2, 171 176.

11 76. %ommen-ar3 on Ma--&eA ,26:270. $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 3, 220. 77. %ommen-ar3 on $o&n, 10,2 ,1+:10. $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 3, 223. 74. EKp#ana-ions o* -&e "sa#ms, 33,1,10. $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 3, 16. 79. !"id., 94,9. $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 3, 20. 40. E.(., <ermons, 227! 231,2! 272. 41. <ee 6are, :imo-&3 ,?a##is-os0, The /rthodo0 Church, 8M: "en(/in 9ooks, rev. 1940, 290. 42. <ee 5.%. %ross > E.7. .ivin(s-one, eds., The /0ford Dictionary of the Christian Church, OK*ord )niversi-3 "ress, 2nd ed., 1943, 176! $o&ns-one, =erne3, The Anglican (ay, .ondon: MoAbra3, 1914, 30 31. 43. Ori(ina# ./-&er so/r'e: .e--er -o -&e %&ris-ians o* <-rassb/r(, 2e'ember 11, 1+21. ./-&er s-a-es Ai-& '&ara'-eris-i' bras&ness: ;I 'o/#d -&/s &ave (iven a (rea- sma'k in -&e *a'e -o "oper3.; 5rom Grisar, Har-mann, $uther, -r. E.M. .amond, ed. ./i(i %appade#-a, 6 vo#/mes, .ondon: ?e(an "a/#, :ren'&, :r/bner > %o., 1917, vo#. 1, 192. 41. !"id. 4+. 2e 6e--e, M., $etters of $uther, 9er#in: 1424, + vo#s., vo#. 1, ++9 60 B .e--er -o "&i#ip Me#an'&-&on in 1+36. 46. !"id., vo#. +, +64 B .e--er -o -&e Evan(e#i'a#s a- =eni'e, $/ne 13, 1+13. 5rom Grisar, i"id., vo#. 3, 342. 47. ./-&er, Mar-in, Ta"le Tal#* ed. Ma-&esi/s, ,.eip@i( ed., 19030, 311. 5rom Grisar, i"id., vo#. 1, 239 210. 44. .e--er o* %a#vin -o Mar-in 9/'er, $an/ar3 12, 1+34. 5rom )ohn Calvin1 Selections From His (ritings, ed. $o&n 2i##enber(er, Garden %i-3, 8M: 2o/b#eda3 7n'&or 9ooks, 1971, 17. 49. !nstitutes of the Christian %eligion, 9ook 1: '&ap-er 17, se'-ions 1, 3, +, 7, 10. 5rom -r. o* 5ord .. 9a--#es, ed. $o&n :. M'8ei##, "&i#ade#p&ia: 6es-mins-er "ress, 2 vo#/mes, 1960, vo#. 2, 1361 2, 136+, 1367, 1370 1371. >+ %istor& of the Doctrine of the #acrifice of the ,ass From the earliest times- Christians freel& applied the !ld Testament terminolog& of sacrifice and gift to their Eucharisticall&'centered gatherings- and from the beginning- this language .as established in the ecclesiasticall&'sanctioned liturgies+ #t+ Clement of Rome- .riting around 9/ A+D+- refers to those in the priesthood 2.ho blamelessl& and holil& have offered its #acrifices+2 $;/) The Didache- an apostolic .riting .hich has been dated as earl& as 1/ to 9/ A+D+- or- in the most critical estimates- not much later than 06/- cites ,alachi 0=00-05 and instructs Christians to 2gather together- brea( bread and give than(s- after confessing &our transgressions so that &our sacrifice ma& be pure+2 $;0) *n the second centur&- #t+ <ustin ,art&r- commenting on the same passage- refers to 2the sacrifices offered to %im in ever& place b& us- the gentiles- that is- of the Bread of the Eucharist+2 $;3) i(e.ise- #t+ *renaeus believed that 2%e G<esusH taught the ne. sacrifice of the ne. covenantof .hich ,alachias + + + had signified beforehand-2 $;4) and sa&s- 2There are sacrifices no.sacrifices in the Church+2 $;5) *n the third centur&- Tertullian alludes to 2participation in the #acrifice + + + .hen &ou receive the Bod& of the ord+2 $;6) And #t+ C&prian states ver& forthrightl&= *n the priest ,elchisedech .e see the #acrament of the #acrifice of the ord prefigured + + + "or is the sacrifice of the ord celebrated .ith a legitimate consecration unless our offering and sacrifice corresponds to the passion + + + *f <esus Christ- our ord and 7od- is %imself the Chief Priest of 7od the Father- and has first offered %imself a #acrifice to the Father- and has commanded this to be done in commemoration of %imself- surel& that priest discharges the office of Christ .ho imitates .hat Christ didC and he then offers a true and full #acrifice to 7od the Father + + + The ord:s Passion is the sacrifice .hich .e offer+ $;1)

1+ *n the fourth centur&- #t+ C&ril of <erusalem spea(s of 2the spiritual #acrifice- the bloodless .orship-2 and the 2propitiator& victim+2 $;8) #t+ Ambrose believed that 2*t is %e %imself that is offered in sacrifice here on earth .hen the Bod& of Christ is offered+2 $;9) And later in that centur&- and earl& in the fifth- #t+ <ohn Chr&sostom .rites= %ave reverence before this table- of .hich .e all participate- before Christ- .ho .as slain for us- before the sacrifice- .hich lies on the table+ $;;) Do .e not offer dail&I Bes- .e offer- but ma(ing remembrance of %is deathC and this remembrance is one and not man& + + + #ince the #acrifice is offered ever&.here- are therethen- a multiplicit& of ChristsI B& no meansE Christ is one ever&.here + + + #o too is there one #acrifice+ $0//) The venerable #t+ Augustine taught that 2Christ is both the Priest- offering %imself- and %imself the >ictim+2 $0/0) %e applies ,alachi 0=00 to the ,ass- calling it the 2#acrifice of Christians-2 and also cites the precedent of ,elchi@ede(+ $0/3) Referring to this priest'(ing of #alem in his famous .or(- The Cit& of 7od $01- 33)- he .rites= 2The sacrifice appeared for the first time there .hich is no. offered to 7od b& Christians throughout the .hole .orld+2 And so the doctrine of the Catholic Church has remained do.n to our present time+ The first serious challenge to it .as put forth b& ,artin uther- the Founder of Protestantism- .ho- although accepting a .ea(ened form of the Real Presence- relegated the ,ass $some.hat inconsistentl&) to the status of a mere memorial+ As usual- he made a number of polemical remar(s on the subAectcalling the ,ass 2idolatr& and a shameful abuse + + + t.ofold impiet& and abomination-2 $0/4) and 2the abomination standing in the %ol& Place+2 $0/5) uther:s successor Philip ,elanchthon felt certain that 2the cruel raging of the Tur(s is inflicted no. as a punishment for the idolatr& in the ,ass+2 $0/6) <ohn Calvin- arguabl& more influential for later Protestantism than uther himself- unleashed his full fur& against this long'standing Christian belief- and it is instructive to ?uote him at length in order to understand the historical bac(ground of the Reformation and the great repugnance .ith .hich man& Protestants $largel& out of miscomprehension) regard the ,ass= The height of frightful abomination .as .hen the devil + + + blinded nearl& the .hole .orld .ith a most pestilential error ' the belief that the ,ass is a sacrifice + + + *t is most clearl& proved b& the Word of 7od that this ,ass + + + inflicts signal dishonor upon Christ- buries and oppresses his cross- consigns his death to oblivion- ta(es a.a& the benefit .hich came to us from it + + + This perversit& .as un(no.n to the purer Church + + + *t is ver& certain that the .hole of anti?uit& is against them + + + Augustine himself in man& passages interprets it as nothing but a sacrifice of praise + + + Chr&sostom also spea(s in the same sense + + + But * observe that the ancient .riters also misinterpreted this memorial + + + because their #upper displa&ed some appearance of repeated or at least rene.ed sacrifice + + + * cannot bring m&self to condemn them for an& impiet&C still- * thin( the& cannot be excused for having sinned some.hat in acting as the& did+ For the& have follo.ed the <e.ish manner of sacrificing more closel& than either Christ had ordained or the nature of the gospel allo.ed + + +

16 The ,ass + + + from root to top- s.arms .ith ever& sort of impiet&- blasphem&- idolatr&- and sacrilege+ $0/1) *t .as to be expected- therefore- that anti'Catholicism is no. $and al.a&s has been) so scandalousl& and tragicall& prevalent among so man& Protestants $but not all- b& an& means)+ %o. can one consider another a Christian 2brother2 .hen that person:s .ee(l& .orship is regarded as 2abomination-2 2blasphem&-2 and 2idolatr&2I The Catholic cannot help but be frustrated over the ab&smal disinformation .hich so often circulates among non'Catholics+ Calvin even errs on the plain facts of earl& Church histor&- as indisputabl& demonstrated in the proofs from the Fathers Aust presented above+ With all due respect to Protestants and Calvin- the evidence of #cripture and the facts of Christian histor&- once revealed and discovered- strongl& contradict the 7enevan Reformer+ #ome Anglicans $mostl& 2Anglo'Catholics2 or 2%igh Churchmen2)- contrar& to the norm in Protestantism- believe in the #acrifice of the ,ass+ $0/8) ,ost Anglicans- ho.ever- probabl& regard the Catholic ,ass in the same .a& as does Article 40 of the Anglican Thirt&'"ine Articles $its creed)= + + + The sacrifices of ,asses- in the .hich it .as commonl& said- that the Priest did offer Christ for the ?uic( and the dead- to have remission of pain or guilt- .ere blasphemous fables- and dangerous deceits+ $0/9) The vie. of Eastern !rthodox& regarding the sacrificial nature of the ,ass $2Divine iturg&2)- is in all essentials identical to that of the Catholic Church+ $0/;) FOOTNOTES (Sacri"ice o" the $ass 90. .e--er -o -&e %orin-&ians, 11, 1. 5rom $/r(ens, 6i##iam 7., ed. and -r., The Faith of the Early Fathers ,5E50, 3 vo#/mes, %o##e(evi##e, M8: .i-/r(i'a# "ress, 1970, vo#. 1, 11. 91. 2ida'&e, 11:1,3. $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 1, 1. 92. Dialogue 'ith Trypho, 11. $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 1, 60. 93. Against Heresies, 1, 17, +. $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 1, 9+. 91. !"id., 1,14,2. $/r(ens, i"id. In -&e same 'on-eK- ,1,14,1 +! 1,33,20, <-. Irenae/s dis'/sses -&e E/'&aris-, -&/s makin( '#ear -&e meanin( o* &is -a#k o* ;sa'ri*i'e.; 9+. 2e Ora-ione, 19. 5rom %onAa3, 9er-rand .., The -uestion o0, 8M: "a/#is- "ress, 1929, 267. 96. .e--er -o %e'i#, 63:1,9. $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 1, 232! %onAa3, i"id., 264. 97. Catechetical $ectures, 23,4,10. $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 1, 363. 94. %ommen-aries on :Ae#ve o* 2avidEs "sa#ms, 34,2+. $/r(ens, 5E5, v. 2, 1+0. 99. Homi#ies on Romans, 4,4. In O--, ./dAi(, Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma* -r. "a-ri'k .3n'&, Ro'k*ord, I.: :78 9ooks and "/b#is&ers, 1971 ,ori(. 19+2 in German0, 106. 100. Homi#ies on HebreAs, 17,3. <ee a#so The Priesthood, 3,1,177! Homi#ies on 1 %orin-&ians, 21,2. %i-a-ion *rom $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 2, 12+. 101. City of &od, 10,20. $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 3, 99. 102. <ermon 7(ains- -&e $eAs, 9,13. <ee a#so D/es-ions o* -&e Hepa-e/'&, 3,+7. $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 3, 164. City of &od 'i-a-ion *rom O--, i"id., 103. 103. 5rom Grisar, Har-mann, $uther, -r. E.M. .amond, ed. ./i(i %appade#-a, 6 vo#/mes, .ondon: ?e(an "a/#, :ren'&, :r/bner > %o., 1917, vo#. 1, +07. 101. 7(ains- Henr3 =III, ,1+220! re*errin( -o 2anie# 9:27. Grisar, i"id., v. 1, +11. 10+. Me#an'&-&on, "&i#ip, $oci Communes, 1+++ ed., '&ap-er 22. 5rom -r. o* %#3de .. Mans'&re'k, Grand Rapids, MI: 9aker 9ook Ho/se, 1942 ,*rom OK*ord )niv. "ress ed. o* 196+0, 221. 106. %a#vin, $o&n, !nstitutes of the Christian %eligion, 1++9 ed., 9ook 1, '&ap-er 14, se'-ions 1, 9 11, 14. 5rom -r. o* 5ord .. 9a--#es ,ed. $o&n :. M'8ei##0, "&i#ade#p&ia: 6es-mins-er "ress, 2 vo#/mes, 1960, vo#. 2, 1129 30, 1137, 1139 10, 1116. 107. <ee $o&ns-one, =erne3, The Anglican (ay* .ondon: MoAbra3, 1914, 30 31.

17 104. The oo# of Common Prayer, ,1401 7meri'an ed.0, 8M: <eab/r3 "ress, 1979 ed., 471. 109. 6are, :imo-&3 ,?a##is-os0, The /rthodo0 Church, 8M: "en(/in 9ooks, rev. 1940, 292 291. >*+ %istor& of the Doctrine of the Communion of #aints *n the Catacombs underneath Rome $.hich date bac( to the earliest Christian period)- inscriptions are fre?uentl& found on tombs .hich appeal to dead Christians- such as= 2As( for us in th& pra&ersfor .e (no. thou art .ith Christ+2 Even the eminent Protestant church historian Philip #chaff- .ho is openl& hostile to such practices- admits this+ $00/) The oldest testimon& in the Fathers for the veneration of saints occurs around 061 in The ,art&rdom of Pol&carp $08=4)= GChristH .e .orship as the #on of 7odC but the ,art&rs .e love as disciples and imitators of the ordC and rightl& so- because of their unsurpassable devotion to their o.n Fing and Teacher+ *n the same .or( $09=3)- it is recounted ho. the Christians of #m&rna collected the bones of #t+ Pol&carp- 2more precious than the richest Ae.els and more tried than gold+2 $000) #t+ <erome later defended the veneration of relics against the charge of idolatr&- $003) and #t+ Augustine- $004) Theodoret of C&r- $005) Pope #t+ 7regor& the 7reat- $006) and #t+ <ohn Damascene $001) also sanctioned this practice+ Around 3/5- #t+ %ippol&tus- commenting on Daniel 00=4/- addresses Daniel:s three companions .ith the invocation- 2Thin( of me- * beseech &ou- so that * ma& achieve .ith &ou the same fate of mart&rdom+2 $008) This is the first attestation of invocation of the saints among the Fathers+ !rigen $d+c+365)- believed that 2the angels and the souls of the pious .ho sleep pra&+2 $009) B& the fourth centur&- the testimon& is practicall& universal+ #t+ C&ril of <erusalem .rote concerning 2the patriarchs- prophets- Apostles- and mart&rs2 that 2through their pra&ers and supplications 7od .ould receive our petition+2 $00;) #t+ %ilar& of Poitiers refers to 2the guardianship of the saints-2 and 2the protection of the angels+2 $03/) #t+ <ohn Chr&sostom- in a sermon on t.o saints- Bernice and Prosdoce- said that- in their mart&rdom- 2the& no. bear the stigmata of Christand .hen the& sho. these- the& can persuade the Fing to an&thing+2 $030) #t+ Basil the 7reat calls the fort& soldiers .ho suffered mart&rdom under icinius in #ebaste around 43/- 2helpers of our pra&ers and most might& intercessors .ith 7od+2 $033) #t+ Ephraem addresses the saints in general thusl&= Remember me- &e heirs of 7od- &e brethren of Christ- pra& to the #aviour for me- that * through Christ ma& be delivered + + + $034) #t+ 7regor& of "&ssa invo(es this same Ephraim= Thou .ho standest at the hol& altar- + + + remember us all- and implore for us the forgiveness of sins and the enAo&ment of the eternal (ingdom+ $035) #t+ 7regor& "a@ian@en addresses #t+ C&prian as present and implores his favor+ $036) #t+ Ambrose believed that= The angels- .ho are appointed to guard us- must be invo(ed for usC the mart&rs- to .hose intercession .e have claim b& the pledge of their bodies- must be invo(ed+ The& .ho have .ashed a.a& their sins b& their o.n blood- ma& pra& for our sins + + + We need not blush to use them as intercessors+ $031) *n the fifth centur& $5/1)- #t+ <erome as(ed=

14 *f Apostles and mart&rs- .hilst still in the flesh- and still needing to care for themselvescan pra& for others- ho. much more .ill the& pra& for others after the& have .on their cro.ns- their victories- their triumphsI ,oses- one man- obtains 7od:s pardon for six hundred thousand armed men- and #tephen pra&s for his persecutors+ When the& are .ith Christ .ill the& be less po.erfulI + + + #hall G#t+ PaulH close his lips after death- and not mutter a s&llable for those .ho throughout the .orld have believed in his gospelI $038) #t+ Augustine- .riting around 5//- asserts= We- the Christian communit&- assemble to celebrate the memor& of the mart&rs .ith ritual solemnit& because .e .ant to be inspired to follo. their example- share in their merits- and be helped b& their pra&ers+ Bet .e erect no altars to an& of the mart&rs + + + but to 7od himself- the 7od of those mart&rs + + + What is offered is offered al.a&s to 7od- .ho cro.ned the mart&rs + + + #o .e venerate the mart&rs .ith the same veneration of love and fello.ship that .e give to the hol& men of 7od still .ith us + + + But the veneration strictl& called .orship- or latria that is- the special homage belonging onl& to the divinit&- is something .e give and teach others to give to 7od alone+ The offering of a sacrifice belongs to .orship in this sense $that is .h& those .ho sacrifice to idols are called idol'.orshippers)- and .e neither ma(e nor tell others to ma(e an& such offering to an& mart&r- an& hol& soul- or an& angel + + + The saints themselves forbid an&one to offer them the .orship the& (no. is reserved for 7od- as is clear from the case of Paul and Barnabas $see Acts 05=9'09)+ $039) #t+ Augustine inferred from the concern of the rich man in #heol for his brothers $ u(e 01=38)that those in heaven must have much more interest in human affairs- $03;) and calls the saints our 2intercessors+2 $04/) *n a sermon he begs #t+ #tephen and #t+ Paul for their petitions- $040) and attributes miracles- even the raising of the dead- to #tephen:s pra&ers+ $043) Pope #t+ eo the 7reat stressed in his sermons the po.erful intercession of the Apostles Peter and Paul- and also the Roman mart&r aurentius+ $044) Pope #t+ 7regor& the 7reat- at the end of the next centur&upheld these doctrines to an even greater extent+ $045) Whatever one thin(s about such practices- it is clearl& not the case that those .ho developed and defended these vie.s intended to lessen the veneration of 7od+ The Protestant accusation of 2idolatr&2 and so forth- betra&s an utter noncomprehension of the rationale behind the communion of saints+ Whenever and .herever trul& idolatrous excesses occur among the common people- these are not in accord .ith the teaching of the Catholic Church- and must be thought of as aberrationsrather than sanctioned practices of Catholicism+ Except for a si@able minorit& faction .ithin Anglicanism $and perhaps tin& factions here and there)the communion of the saints- as understood in the Catholic Tradition- has been reAected outright b& Protestantism- on grounds that it is either idolatrous- unbiblical- unnecessar&- or ?uasi'occultic+ But even in recent times- an 2icon2 of sorts among evangelical Protestants- C+#+ maintained that the invocation of saints had a legitimate theological rationale behind it- even though he himself did not completel& agree .ith this vie.point+ $046) *n doctrine and practice- Eastern !rthodox& entirel& concurs .ith the Catholic Church .ith regard to the communion of saints+ $041) FOOTNOTES (The Communion o" Saints

19 110. <'&a**, "&i#ip, History of the Christian Church, Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1976 ,ori(. +-& ed., 14490, vo#. 2, '&ap-er 7, se'-ion 46, 302 3. In &is -rea-men- o* pa-ris-i' vieAs on -&e sain-s, <'&a** Ari-es: In -&e n/mero/s memoria# dis'o/rses o* -&e *a-&ers, -&e mar-3rs are #oaded Ai-& e/#o(ies, addressed as presen-, and beso/(&- *or -&eir pro-e'-ion. :&e /niversa# -one o* -&ose prod/'-ions is o**ensive -o -&e "ro-es-an- -as-e, and 'an &ard#3 be re'on'i#ed Ai-& evan(e#i'a# ideas o* -&e eK'#/sive and a## s/**i'ienmedia-ion o* %&ris- and o* C/s-i*i'a-ion b3 p/re (ra'e Ai-&o/- -&e meri- o* Aorks. 9/- . . . -&e bes- '&/r'& *a-&ers, -oo, never separa-ed -&e meri-s o* -&e sain-s *rom -&e meri-s o* %&ris-, b/- 'onsidered -&e *ormer as *#oAin( o/- o* -&e #a--er. ,vo#. 3, '&ap-er 7, se'-ion 41, 134! emp&asis added0. :&is is a ver3 va#/ab#e -es-imon3 *rom a de'ided#3 &os-i#e Ai-ness. %on'ernin( -&e 5a-&ersE vieAs on re#i's, <'&a** 'on'#/des *or#orn#3: :&e mos- and -&e bes- o* -&e '&/r'& -ea'&ers o* o/r period, Hi#ar3, -&e -Ao Gre(ories, 9asi#, %&r3sos-om, Isidore o* "e#/si/m, :&eodore-, 7mbrose, $erome, 7/(/s-ine, and .eo, . . . (ave -&e Aei(&- o* -&eir 'o/n-enan'e -o -&e Aors&ip Ii.e., venera-ionJ o* re#i's, A&i'& -&/s be'ame an essen-ia# 'ons-i-/en- o* -&e Greek and Roman %a-&o#i' re#i(ion. :&e3 Aen- L/i-e as *ar as -&e %o/n'i# o* :ren-. ,vo#. 3, '&ap-er 7, se'-ion 47, 1+6! emp&asis added0 111. 5rom $/r(ens, 6i##iam 7., ed. and -r., The Faith of the Early Fathers ,5E50, 3 vo#/mes, %o##e(evi##e, M8: .i-/r(i'a# "ress, 1970, vo#. 1, 31 ,17:30, and <'&a**, i"id., vo#. 3, '&. 7, se'. 47, 1+3 ,14:20. 112. Epis-#e 109, 1. 113. City of &od ,'.1260, 1:13. 111. The Cure of Pagan Maladies ,b.1190, 4. 11+. .e--er -o Empress %ons-an-ina 7/(/s-a ,$/ne, +910, 1:30. 116. The Source of 2no'ledge ,'.7130, 1:1+. 117. In O--, ./dAi(, Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, -r. "a-ri'k .3n'&, Ro'k*ord, I.: :78 9ooks and "/b#is&ers, 1971 ,ori(. 19+2 in German0, 319. 114. O--, i"id. 119. Catechetical $ectures, 23:9 10. In -&e immedia-e 'on-eK- &e a#so 'ondones pra3er *or -&ose in p/r(a-or3, and -&e <a'ri*i'e o* -&e Mass. 5rom $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 1, 363. 120. %ommen-aries on -&e "sa#ms, 121. 5rom %onAa3, 9er-rand .., The -uestion o0, 8M: "a/#is- "ress, 1929, 370. 121. Opp. -om., 2, 770. <ee a#so Ora-., 4, 7dv. $/s., 6. %i-a-ion *rom <'&a**, i"id., vo#. 3, '&. 7, se'. 41, 139. 122. M. Hom. 19 in 5or-3 Mar-3rs. 5rom <'&a**, i"id., vo#. 3, '&. 7, se'. 41, 134. 123. In <'&a**, i"id., vo#. 3, '&. 7, se'. 41, 134. 121. The $ife of St. Ephraem* -om. 3. 5rom <'&a**, i"id., 139. 12+. In <'&a**, i"id., 139. 126. 2e vid/is, '.9. <'&a**, i"id., 110. <'&a** 'ommen-s on -&e same pa(e -&a- in -&is passa(e, ;7mbrose (oes *ar-&er -&an -&e %o/n'i# o* :ren-, A&i'& does no- 'ommand -&e invo'a-ion o* sain-s, b/- on#3 'ommends i-, and represen-s i- no- as d/-3, b/- on#3 as privi#e(e.; 127. 7(ains- =i(i#an-i/s, 6. 5rom %onAa3, i"id., 369. 124. 7(ains- 5a/s-/s, 20 21. 5rom <'&re'k, 7#an, Catholic and Christian, 7nn 7rbor, MI: <ervan- 9ooks, 1941, 1+7 1+4. 129. Epis-#e 2+9. <'&a**, i"id., 111. 130. <ermon 24+. <'&a**, i"id. 131. <ermon 317. <'&a**, i"id. 132. <ermon 321. <'&a**, i"id. 133. <ermon 4+. <'&a**, i"id., 112. 131. In <'&a**, i"id., 112. 13+. .eAis, %.<., $etters to Malcolm1 Chiefly /n Prayer, 8M: Har'o/r- 9ra'e $ovanovi'&, 1961, 1+ 16. :&is is one o* .eAisE #as- Aorks. He a#so makes an over- re*eren'e -o -&e 'omm/nion o* sain-s in &is *amo/s Scre'tape $etters, 8M: Ma'mi##an, 1961, 12. O-&er no-ab#e "ro-es-an-s A&o s-ressed a sense o* -&e ;a#iveness; o* -&e sain-s in &eaven and -&eir in'#/sion in -&e 9od3 o* %&ris- ,eK'#/din( -&eir invo'a-ion0 in'#/de $o&n 6es#e3, -&e *o/nder o*

20 Me-&odism ,.e--er -o a Roman %a-&o#i', 2/b#in: 17190, and 7.6. :o@er ,;:&e %omm/nion o* <ain-s,; in A Treasury of A.(. To3er, Grand Rapids, MI: 9aker 9ook Ho/se, 1940, 164 700. :&e ./-&eran 'reeda# 7/(sb/r( %on*ession ,1+300, A&i'& Aas san'-ioned b3 ./-&er &imse#*, in i-s 7r-i'#e 21, re'ommends -&a- ;sain-s s&o/#d be kep- in remembran'e so -&a- o/r *ai-& ma3 be s-ren(-&ened . . . Moreover, -&eir (ood Aorks are -o be an eKamp#e *or /s; ,5rom .ei-&, $o&n H., ed., Creeds of the Churches, Garden %i-3, 8M: 2o/b#eda3 7n'&or, 1963, 770. ./-&er, a#-&o/(& es'&eAin( invo'a-ion o* sain-s, 'er-ain#3 venera-ed -&e 9#essed =ir(in Mar3, sin'e &e &e#d -o vir-/a##3 a## -&e %a-&o#i' Marian do(mas, in'#/din( -&e Imma'/#a-e %on'ep-ion. 136. <ee 6are, :imo-&3 ,7r'&bis&op ?a##is-os0, The /rthodo0 Church, 8M: "en(/in, rev. ed., 1940, 2+4,261. >**+ %istor& of the Doctrine of Purgator& *n the Catacombs- Christian burial caves .hich extend for hundreds of miles underneath Rome- and date from the beginning of Christianit&- there are numerous examples of inscriptions representing pra&ers for the dead $.hich onl& ma(e sense given some conception of purgator&- ho.ever vague)for blessings- peace- and refreshment upon these souls+ Among these inscriptions are the sa&ings= 2Refresh- ! 7od- the soul of + + +-2 2Peace to th& soul-2 2Th& spirit in peace-2 2,a& &ou live in the %ol& #pirit+2 $048) With regard to ancient Christian liturgies- <ames Cardinal 7ibbons summari@es the evidence= A iturg& is the established formular& of public .orship- containing the authori@ed pra&ers of the Church + + + The principal iturgies are the iturg& of #t+ <ames the Apostle- .ho founded the Church of <erusalemC the iturg& of #t+ ,ar( the Evangelist- founder of the Church of Alexandria- and the iturg& of #t+ Peter- .ho established the Church in Rome+ These iturgies are called after the Apostles .ho compiled them+ There are- besides- the iturgies of #t+ Chr&sostom and #t+ Basil- .hich are chiefl& based on the model of that of #t+ <ames + + + all these iturgies- .ithout exception- have pra&ers for the dead+ $049) *n the late 3nd centur&- in the apocr&phal Acts of Paul and Thecla $39 ff+)- Thecla pra&s= 2Thou 7od of the %eavens- #on of the All'%ighest grant to her $to the ,other Tr&phaena)- according to her .ish- that her daughter Falconilla ma& live in eternit&+2 $04;) *n the same period- the epitaph of Abercius- bishop of %ierapolis in central Tur(e&- reads= 2+ + + ,a& ever&one .ho is in accord .ith this and .ho understands it pra& for Abercius + + +2 $05/) *n the third centur&- Tertullian- .riting around 30/- asserts that= There are alread& punishments and re.ards there Gin %adesHC and there &ou have a poor man and a rich one G u(e 01=33 ff+H + + + *n short- if .e understand that prison of .hich the 7ospel spea(s to be %ades- and if .e interpret the last farthing G,atthe. 6=36'1H to be the light offense .hich is to be expiated there before the resurrection- no one .ill doubt that the soul undergoes some punishments in %ades- .ithout preAudice to the fullness of the resurrection- after .hich recompense .ill be made through the flesh also+ $050) Tertullian also spea(s of offering 2sacrifices for the dead on their birthda& anniversaries-2 $053) and of a .ido. pra&ing for here deceased husband and offering this &earl& sacrifice+ $054) #hortl& after this- !rigen taught that those dead .ho hadn:t performed penance commensurate .ith their sins- .ould be purified b& a 2purgatorial fire2 after death+ $055) !rigen had developed this vie. #t+ Clement of Alexandria:s teaching+ $056) #t+ C&prian- in the middle of the centur&spo(e of being 2tormented in long pains and + + + cleansed and purified from one:s sins b& continuous fire-2 $051) and condoned 2oblations2 and 2sacrifices2 for the dead+ $058) The Protestant church historian Philip #chaff- .ho can definitel& be considered a 2hostile .itness2 as pertains this topic- summari@ed the belief of the Christian Church in its first three centuries=

21 These vie.s of the middle state in connection .ith pra&ers for the dead sho. a strong tendenc& to the Roman Catholic doctrine of Purgator& + + + there are traces of the purgatorial idea of suffering the temporal conse?uences of sin- and a painful struggle after holiness + + + The common people and most of the fathers understood it of a material fireC but this is not a matter of faith + + + A material fire .ould be ver& harmless .ithout a material bod&+ $059) *n the fourth centur&- actantius asserted around 4/8 that= 2When 7od .ill Audge the Aust- it is li(e.ise in fire that he .ill tr& them+2 $05;) The first Christian historian- Eusebius- recounts that at the death of the emperor Constantine $448)- a vast cro.d- led b& priests- offered pra&ers for his soul .ith great lamentation+ $06/) #t+ Ephraim believed that 2the dead are benefited b& the pra&ers of living #aints+2 $060) #t+ C&ril of <erusalem chronicles ho. the Christians 2offer pra&ers to %im for those .ho have fallen asleep- though the& be sinners+2 $063) #t+ 7regor& of "&ssa is of the opinion that = 2After his departure out of the bod&- he + + + finds that he is not able to parta(e of divinit& until he has been purged of the filth& contagion in his soul b& the purif&ing fire+2 $064) #t+ Epiphanius held that- concerning the dead- 2useful too is the pra&er fashioned on their behalf- + + + begging 7od:s merc& for them + + +2 $065) #t+ Ambrose pra&ed for emperors .ho had died in the fashion= G!n the death of Emperors 7ratian and >alentinianH Blessed shall both of &ou be- if m& pra&ers can avail an&thing + + + "o night shall hurr& b& .ithout on &ou a mention in m& pra&ers + + + G!n the death of Emperor TheodosiusH 7ive perfect rest to Th& servant Theodosius- that rest .hich Thou hast prepared for Th& #aints+ ,a& his soul return thither .hence it descended + + + "or .ill * leave him until- b& tears and pra&ers- * shall lead him + + + unto the hol& mountain of the ord + + + $066) *n the earl& fifth centur&- #t+ <ohn Chr&sostom- citing <ob 0=6 as an example- enAoins Christians to 2assist2 the dead .ho had neglected their souls- 2b& pra&ing for them and b& entreating others to pra& for them- b& constantl& giving alms to the poor on their behalf+2 $061) #t+ Augustine- the greatest of the Fathers- expressed a number of clear statements on these beliefs= B& the pra&ers of the %ol& Church- and b& the salvific sacrifice- and b& the alms .hich are given for their spirits- there is no doubt that the dead are aided + + + For the .hole Church observes this practice .hich .as handed do.n b& the Fathers + + + *f- then- .or(s of merc& are celebrated for the sa(e of those .ho are being remembered- .ho .ould hesitate to recommend them- on .hose behalf pra&ers to 7od are not offered in vainI *t is not at all to be doubted that such pra&ers are of profit to the deadC but for such of them as lived before their death in a .a& that ma(es it possible for these things to be useful to them after death+ $068) The man .ho perhaps has not cultivated the land and has allo.ed it to be overrun .ith brambles has in this life the curse of his land on all his .or(s- and after this life he .ill have either purgatorial fire or eternal punishment+ $069) Temporal punishments are suffered b& some in this life onl&- b& some after death- b& some both here and hereafterC but all of them before that last and strictest Audgment+ But not all .ho suffer temporal punishments after death .ill come to eternal punishments- .hich are to follo. after that Audgment+ $06;)

22 The pra&er + + + is heard on behalf of certain of the deadC but it is heard for those .hohaving been regenerated in Christ- did not for the rest of their life in the bod& do such .ic(edness that the& might be Audged un.orth& of such merc&- nor .ho &et lived so .ell that it might be supposed the& have no need of such merc&+ $01/) That there should be some such fire even after this life is not incredible- and it can be in?uired into and either be discovered or left hidden .hether some of the faithful ma& be saved- some more slo.l& and some more ?uic(l& in the greater or lesser degree in .hich the& loved the good things that perish- ' through a certain purgatorial fire+ $010) Thus undeniabl& taught the earl& Church- and the Catholic Church through the centuries has onl& developed $not invented) the belief .hich .as present in its essentials from the beginning- indeedthat .hich it authoritativel& received right from the mouths of Christ and the Apostle Paul- as has been illustrated above+ Protestantism reAected the beliefs in purgator& and pra&ers for the dead- .ith the exception of Anglicans- man& of .hom have retained some form of these tenets- especiall& since the 0;th centur&+ $013) C+ #+ .as one of these traditional Anglicans+ *n a late .or(- etters to ,alcolm= Chiefl& on Pra&er- $014) he stated that he pra&ed for the dead- among .hom .ere man& of his loved ones $he .as in his sixties at the time)- and that he believed in purgator&- comparing it to an intense rinsing of the mouth at the dentist:s office+ %e thought no one .ould .ant to enter heaven unclean- as this .ould be do.nright embarrassing+ <ohn Calvin- on the other hand- expresses- .ith characteristic vehemence- the much more prevalent Protestant antipath& to this ancient belief of the Church= Purgator& is constructed out of man& blasphemies + + + it .as devised apart from 7od:s Word in curious and bold rashness $015) + + + some passages of #cripture .ere ignorantl& distorted to confirm it + + + When expiation of sins is sought than in the blood of Christ- .hen satisfaction is transferred $016) silence is ver& dangerous + + + Purgator& is a deadl& fiction of #atan- .hich nullifies the cross of Christ- inflicts unbearable contempt upon 7od:s merc&and overturns and destro&s our faith $011) + + + When the notion of satisfaction is destro&ed- purgator& itself is straight.a& torn up b& the ver& roots+ But if it is perfectl& clear + + + that the blood of Christ is the sole satisfaction for the sins of believers- the sole expiation- the sole purgation- .hat remains but to sa& that purgator& is simpl& a dreadful blasphem& against ChristI $018) + + + + + #urel&- an& man endo.ed .ith a modicum of .isdom easil& recogni@es that .hatever he reads among the ancient .riters concerning this matter .as allo.ed because of public custom and common ignorance+ * admit that the fathers themselves .ere also carried off into error+ For heedless credulit& commonl& deprives men:s minds of Audgment $019) + + + Though * concede to the ancient .riters of the church that it seemed a pious act to help the dead- .e ought ever to (eep the rule that cannot deceive= that it is not la.ful to interAect an&thing of our o.n in our pra&ers+ But our re?uests ought to be subAected to the Word of 7od $01;) + + +

23 The ancients rarel& and onl& perfunctoril& commended their dead to 7od in the communion of the #acred #upper+ $08/) Eastern !rthodox& $broadl& spea(ing) concurs .ith Catholic Tradition on this matter- but it refrains from defining the exact nature of the intermediate state- preferring a more m&stical vie.+ A maAorit& faction holds that these departed do not suffer- .hile others believe that the& do in some undetermined sense+ A third group ta(es an agnostic position on suffering- .hile still accepting the intermediate state+ $080) FOOTNOTES (%ur&atory 137. EKamp#es *o/nd in <'&a**, "&i#ip, History of the Christian Church, vo#. 2, ;7n-e 8i'ene %&ris-iani-3: 7.2. 100 32+,; +-& ed., 8M: 1449! rep. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1976, '&ap-er 7, se'-ion 46, 303 301. <ee a#so The /0ford Dictionary of the Christian Church ,7n(#i'an0, %ross, 5..., and E.7. .ivin(s-one, eds., OK*ord )niversi-3 "ress, 2nd ed., 1943, 341. 134. Gibbons, $ames %ardina#, The Faith of /ur Fathers, 8M: ".$. ?ened3 > <ons, rev. ed., 1917, 179. <ee a#so %ross, ibid., 341! <'&a**, ibid., '&. 12, se'. 1+6, 601. 139. In O--, ./dAi(, Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, -r. "a-ri'k .3n'&, Ro'k*ord, I.: :78 9ooks and "/b#is&ers, 1971 ,ori(. 19+2 in German0, 321. 110. In $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 1, 74. 111. :&e <o/#, +4:1,4. $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 1, 111 11+. 112. :&e %roAn, 3:3. :&e ;bir-&da3 anniversar3; is a 'ommemora-ion o* -&e da-e o* -&eir dea-&, -&eir bir-&da3 in-o e-erna# #i*e. $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 1, 1+1. 113. Mono(am3, 10:1,1. 111. 8/mbers, Hom. 1+ ,Mi(ne, &ree# Fathers, vo#. 12, 169 **.0. 11+. <-roma-eis, 7,6. 116. Epis-#e ++,20. 5rom O--, ibid., 141. 117. Epis-#e 16. In %onAa3, 9er-rand .., The -uestion o0, 8M: "a/#is- "ress, 1929, 39+. 114. <'&a**, ibid., '&. 12, se'. 1+6, 601 606. 119. :&e 2ivine Ins-i-/-ions, 7,21,6. $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 1, 269. 1+0. .i*e o* %ons-an-ine, 1,71. <'&a**, ibid., 603. 1+1. In Gibbons, ibid., 177. 1+2. %a-e'&e-i'a# .e'-/res, 23:+,9 10. $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 1, 363. 1+3. <ermon on -&e 2ead. $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 2, +4. 1+1. "ana'ea 7(ains- 7## Heresies, 7+, 4. $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 2, 7+ 76. 1++. Obi-/ar3 *or :&eodosi/s, 36 7 ,2nd EK'erp-0. In Gibbons, ibid., 177. 1+6. Homi#ies on "&i#ippians, 3,1! a#so Hom. in 1 %or, 11, +. $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 2, 121 122. 1+7. <ermons: 172, 2. $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 3, 29 30. 1+4. Genesis 2e*ended 7(ains- -&e Mani'&eans, 2, 20, 30. $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#.3, 34. 1+9. City of &od, 21, 13. $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 3, 10+. 160. Ibid., 21, 21, 2. $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 3, 106. 161. Enchiridion of Faith* Hope 4 $ove, 14,69, $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 3, 119. <ee a#so ,in -&e same Aork0: 29,109 110! The Care That Should "e Ta#en of the Dead, 1,3. 162. <ee %ross, ibid., 341, 111+. 163. 8M: Har'o/r- 9ra'e $ovanovi'&, 1961, 107 109. 161. :Aen-3 *ive broad bib#i'a# ar(/men-s are presen-ed in -&is '&ap-er, mos- L/i-e m/#-i *a'e-ed and 'opio/s#3 'ross re*eren'ed. %a#vin dea#s Ai-& *ive in &is dia-ribe a(ains- p/r(a-or3. 16+. :&is is a *a#se di'&o-om3, A&i'& is eKp#i'i-#3 and adeL/a-e#3 rep/dia-ed in %a-&o#i' -&eo#o(3 and apo#o(e-i's. 166. One Aonders A&ere %a#vinEs ;*ai-&; Aas *or -&e 1+00 3ears be*ore -&e adven- o* "ro-es-an-ism. :&e &is-ori'a# -ask o* *indin( s/'& a ;*ai-&; is abso#/-e#3 impossib#e, sin'e s/'& a ,"ro-es-an-0 ;%&/r'&; simp#3 didnE- eKis- d/rin( -&e A&o#e o* -&is period, as mos- "ro-es-an &is-orians Ai## readi#3 admi-. 167. I- indeed Ao/#d be b#asp&emo/s i* i- reL/ired or en-ai#ed -&e *a#se di'&o-om3 -&a- %a#vin a--rib/-es -o i-, i.e., iso#a-in( o/r meri-orio/s a'-s *rom GodEs (ra'e A&i'& a#Aa3s and ne'essari#3 pre'edes and en(/#*s -&em. 164. %a#vinEs severe, C/d(men-a# verdi'- on -&e in-e##e'-/a# and -&eo#o(i'a# 'apabi#i-ies o* a## -&e %&/r'& 5a-&ers C/seKamined in o/r s/rve3, 'an on#3 be '&ara'-eri@ed ,b3 an3 reasonab#3 obCe'-ive 'ri-eria0 as eK'eedin(#3 arro(an-. One 'an see &oA -&e /s/a# -one o* 16-& 'en-/r3 po#emi's Aas no- 'ond/'ive -o -&eo#o(i'a# or e''#esias-i'a#

21 re'on'i#ia-ion ,%a-&o#i's, -oo, *e## pre3 -o s/'& in*#amma-or3 r&e-ori' i- bein( a (enera# -enden'30. Here, &oAever, %a#vinEs *a'-/a# errors are ineK'/sab#e *or a man o* &is #earnin( and er/di-ion, and amo/n- -o s#ander and misrepresen-a-ion o* -&e %a-&o#i' posi-ion. 169. In o-&er Aords, %a#vinEs in-erpre-a-ion o* i-, over a(ains- -&e /niversa# %&ris-ian :radi-ion /p -o &is oAn -ime. 170. %a#vin, $o&n, !nstitutes of the Christian %eligion ,1++9 ed.0, -r. 5ord .. 9a--#es ,ed. $o&n :. M'8ei##0, -Ao vo#/mes, "&i#ade#p&ia: 6es-mins-er "ress, 1960, 9ook 3, '&ap-er +, se'-ions 6, 10, vo#. 1, 676, 642 643. 171. 6are, :imo-&3 ,7r'&bis&op ?a##is-os0, The /rthodo0 Church, 8M: "en(/in 9ooks, rev. ed., 1940, 2+9. >***+ %istor& of the Doctrine of Penance The doctrine of penance .as indisputabl& believed and practiced b& the earl& Church- as reputable Protestant Church histor& reference .or(s admit+ $083) Even before the end of the first centur&#t+ Clement of Rome advised his follo.ers to 2be subAect to the presb&ters and + + + accept discipline to penance- bending the (nee of the heart+2 $084) *n the earl& second centur&- #t+ *gnatius of Antioch expresses the concept of the expiator& offering of himself- as in #t+ Paul:s teaching $Philippians 3=08- 3 Timoth& 5=1)= 2* am a humble sacrifice for &ou and * dedicate m&self to &ou Ephesians-2 $085) 2,a& * be a ransom on &our behalf in ever& respect- + + +2 $086) *n the middle of the centur&- #t+ <ustin ,art&r pleads= 2Whoever is convinced and believes that .hat the& are taught and told b& us is the truth- + + + is instructed to pra& and to beseech 7od in fasting for the remission of their former sins+2 $081) Around 0;/- #t+ *renaeus .rites of man& cases of lapsed Catholics being reconciled to their Church and communit& after public confession and acts of penance+ $088) *n the earl& third centur&- Tertullian states= *n regard to this second and single repentance- then= + + + *t is not conducted before the conscience alone- but it is to be carried out b& some external act + + + b& .hich .e confess our sin to the ord- not indeed as if %e did not (no. it- but because satisfaction is arranged b& confession- of confession is repentance born- and b& repentance is 7od appeased+ Tertullian goes on to spea( of various forms of penance- .hich he calls 2temporal mortification-2 such as fasting- pra&er- (neeling- and out.ard displa&s of mourning for one:s o.n sins- 2before the presb&ters+2 %e believed these acts .ould 2stand in place of 7od:s indignation2 and lessen punishments+ $089) About fort& &ears later- !rigen refers to= + + + the remission of sins through penance- .hen the sinner .ashes his pillo. in tears- .hen his tears are da& and night his nourishment- and .hen he does not shrin( from declaring his sin to a priest of the ord and from see(ing medicine+ $08;) *n the same period- #t+ C&prian rebu(es lapsed Catholics= The& spurn and despise all these .arningsC and before their sins are expiated- before the& have made a confession of their crime- before their conscience has been purged in the ceremon& and at the hand of the priest- before the offense against an angr& and threatening ord has been appeased- the& do violence to %is Bod& and Blood + + + Certainl& .e believe that the merits of the mart&rs and the .or(s of the Aust .ill be of great avail .ith the <udge+ $09/) he .rites- 2When once &ou have departed this life- there is no longer an& place for repentance- no .a& of ma(ing satisfaction-2 $090) and= !ur colleague Therapius had rashl& granted peace to him after an insufficient time and in headlong haste- before he had done full penance and before he had made satisfaction to the ord 7od- against .hom he had sinned+ $093)

2+ *n the fourth centur&- #t+ Ambrose ma(es t.o ver& clear and explicit statements on penance= %e is purged as if b& certain .or(s of the .hole people- and is .ashed in the tears of the multitudeC b& the pra&ers and tears of the multitude he is redeemed from sin- and is cleansed in the inner man+ For Christ granted to %is Church that one should be redeemed through all- Aust as %is Church .as found .orth& of the coming of the ord <esus so that all might be redeemed through one+ $094) <ust as those .ho pa& mone& absolve a debt- nor are the& free of the name of debtor until the .hole amount- even to the last penn&- is absolved b& some (ind of pa&ment- so too b& the compensation of love and of other virtuous actions- or b& some (ind of satisfaction- the penalt& of sin is removed+ $095) *n the late fourth and earl& fifth centuries- the brilliant #t+ Augustine elaborates= Those .hom &ou see doing penance have committed crimes- either adulter& or some other enormities= that is .h& the& are doing penance+ *f their sins .ere light- dail& pra&er .ould suffice to blot them out + + + *n the Church- therefore- there are three .a&s in .hich sins are forgiven= in Baptism- in pra&er- and in the greater humilit& of penance+ $096) After the& have been released from &our severe sentence .e separate from association at the altar those .hose crimes are public- so that b& repenting and b& punishing themselves the& ma& be able to placate %im for .hom- b& their sinning- the& sho.ed their contempt+ $091) A man is compelled to endure Gthis miserable lifeH even .hen his sins are forgiven- because the first sin .as the cause of his falling into such miser&+ For the penalt& is more protracted than the guilt- lest the guilt be thought of as being small- if the penalt& .ere to end .ith it+ And this is .h&- either to demonstrate the miser& he deserves- or for the amendment of his disgraceful life- or for the exercise of needful patience- a man is detained temporall& in punishment even .hen b& his guilt he is no longer held liable to eternal damnation+ $098) The doctrine of penance- then- .as essentiall& established in the earl& Church- and did not substantiall& change in the ,iddle Ages- but .as onl& developed- li(e all Catholic doctrines+ The theolog& of penance .as the subAect of much reasoned speculation and discussion among the #cholastics $such as #t+ Thomas A?uinas)- but it .as neither invented nor distorted at this time- as the above citations $and biblical evidence) prove conclusivel&+ Bet Protestantism discarded penance- in the mista(en belief that it detracted from the complete efficac& of the .or( of Christ on man(ind:s behalf $and also due to the denial of the necessit& of priestl& mediation)+ Protestant Reformer <ohn Calvin- for example- in his *nstitutes of the Christian Religion- rails at great length against the ver& possibilit& of penance- .ith liberal use of $often slanderous) insults and false dichotomies- then goes on to den& that- generall& spea(ing- the Fathers agreed .ith his Catholic opponents= 2*f .e must contend b& the authorit& of the fathers.hat fathers- good 7od- do these men thrust upon usI2 $099) The reader is left to pass Audgment on the merit and ade?uac& of the Catholic biblical and historical case- as presented above+ FOOTNOTES (%enance

26 172. %ross, 5... > E.7. .ivin(s-one, eds., The /0ford Dictionary of the Christian Church, OK*ord )niversi-3 "ress, 2nd ed., 1943, 10+9! 2o/(#as, $.2., ed., The Ne' !nternational Dictionary of the Christian Church , Grand Rapids, MI: Nondervan, rev. ed., 1974, 762. 173. .e--er -o -&e %orin-&ians, +7,1. In O--, ./dAi(, Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, -r. "a-ri'k .3n'&, Ro'k*ord, I.: :78 9ooks and "/b#is&ers, 1971 ,ori(. 19+2 in German0 , 119. 171. .e--er -o -&e Ep&esians, 4,1. In .i(&-*oo-, $osep& 9. > $.R. Harmer, -rs., The Apostolic Fathers, 2nd ed., ed. > rev. b3 Mi'&ae# 6. Ho#mes, Grand rapids, MI: 9aker 9ook Ho/se, 1949 ,1s- ed. 14910, 49. 17+. .e--er -o "o#3'arp, 2,3 and 6,1. .i(&-*oo-, ibid., 116 117. 176. 5irs- 7po#o(3, 61. 5rom $/r(ens, 6i##iam 7., ed. and -r., The Faith of the Early Fathers ,5E50, 3 vo#/mes, %o##e(evi##e, M8: .i-/r(i'a# "ress, 1970, vo#. 1, +1. 177. Against Heresies, I,6,3 B I,13,+ B I=,10,1. 5rom O--, ibid., 120. 174. Repen-an'e, 9,1 +. $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 1, 130 131. 179. Homi#ies on .evi-i'/s, 2,1. $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 1, 207. 140. :&e .apsed, 16 17. $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 1, 214. 141. .e--er -o 2eme-rian, 2+. $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 1, 223. 142. .e--er o* %3prian > His %o##ea(/es in %o/n'i# -o -&e 8/mber o* 66: :o 5id/s, 61 ,+90,1. $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 1, 233. 143. "enan'e, 1,1+,40. $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 2, 160 161. 141. %ommen-ar3 on ./ke, 7,1+6. $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 2, 163. 14+. <ermon -o %a-e'&/mens, On -&e %reed, 7,1+ B 4,16. $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 3, 3+. 146. .e--er -o Ma'edoni/s, Imperia# =i'ar o* 7*ri'a, 1+3,3,6. $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 3, 7. 147. Homi#ies on $o&n, 121,+. $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 3, 123. 144. %a#vin, $o&n, !nstitutes of the Christian %eligion ,1++9 ed.0, 9ook 3, '&ap-er 1, se'-ion 39. 5rom -r. o* 5ord .. 9a--#es ,ed. $o&n :. M'8ei##0, "&i#ade#p&ia: 6es-mins-er "ress, 2 vo#/mes, 1960, vo#. 1, 669 *K+ %istor& of ,ariolog& *n the second centur&- #t+ <ustin ,art&r is alread& expounding the 2"e. Eve2 teaching- .hich Cardinal " regards as a starting'point for much later ,arian dogmatic development= Christ became man b& the >irgin so that the disobedience .hich proceeded from the serpent might be destro&ed in the same .a& it originated+ For Eve- being a virgin and undefiled- having conceived the .ord from the serpent- brought forth disobedience and death+ The >irgin ,ar&- ho.ever- having received faith and Ao&- .hen the angel 7abriel announced to her the good tidings + + + ans.ered= Be it done to me according to th& .ord+ $09;) #t+ *renaeus- a little later- ta(es up the same theme= 2What the virgin Eve had tied up b& unbeliefthis the virgin ,ar& loosened b& faith+2 $0;/) %e also vie.s her as the preeminent intercessor for man(ind+ $0;0) *n the third centur&- !rigen taught the perpetual virginit& $0;3)- ,ar& as the second'Eve $0;4)- and .as the first Father to use the term Theoto(os+ $0;5) %e expressl& affirms the spiritual motherhood of ,ar&= 2"o one ma& understand the meaning of the 7ospel Gof <ohnH- if he has not rested on the breast of <esus and received ,ar& from <esus- to be his mother also+2 $0;6) B& the fourth centur&- the designation 2,other of 7od2 .as in general use- since the Roman emperor <ulian $the Apostate) taunted Christians-sa&ing= 2Bou never stop calling ,ar& Theoto(os+2 $0;1) Eusebius- the first Church historian- calls her panagia- or 2all'hol&+2 $0;8) #t+ Athanasius calls ,ar& 2ever'virgin-2 $0;9) arguing from the fact that <esus gave %is mother to #t+ <ohn:s care+ $0;;) #t+ %ilar& of Poitiers also affirmed the perpetual virginit&+ $3//) #t+ Ephraem is thought to be the first Father to hold to the *mmaculate Conception= 2Bou alone and &our ,other are good in ever& .a&C for there is no blemish in thee- m& ord- and no stain in th& ,other+2 $3/0) %e invo(es the Blessed >irgin in ver& 2Catholic2 fashion=

27 ! virgin lad&- immaculate ,other of 7od- m& lad& most glorious- most gracious- higher than heaven- much purer than the sun:s splendor- ra&s or light + + + &ou bore 7od and the Word according to the flesh- preserving &our virginit& before childbirth- a virgin after childbirth+ $3/3) #t+ 7regor& "a@ian@en- still in the same centur&- fre?uentl& refers to ,ar& as 2undefiled+2 $3/4) %e .arns that 2if an&one does not accept the hol& ,ar& as Theoto(os- he is .ithout the 7odhead+2 $3/5) This is an instance of ,ariological doctrine representing a test of orthodox&+ #t+ 7regor& cites an invocation of ,ar& b& a .oman tempted b& the devil- to 2the >irgin ,ar&- imploring her to help a virgin in danger+2 $3/6) #t+ 7regor& of "&ssa often refers to ,ar&:s perpetual virginit&- calls her 2undefiled-2 $3/1) and develops the ,ar&'Eve theme+ $3/8) %e infers a vo. of virginit& on ,ar&:s part- based on u(e 0=45+ $3/9) #t+ Epiphanius regards ,ar& as aeiparthenos- ever'virgin $3/;)- using the argument of <ohn:s care of ,ar& after the Crucifixion+ $30/)+ i(e all the Fathers- he places ,ariolog& under the categor& of Christolog&= 2%e .ho honours the ord honours also the hol& vesselC he .ho dishonours the hol& vessel- also dishonours his ord+2 $300) #t+ Epiphanius also teaches the parallelism of Eve and ,ar& $.hich .as the common belief of Eastern- 7ree( Christianit&- and concludes that ,ar& is 2the mother of the living+2 $303) %e identifies the Woman of Revelation 03 .ith ,ar& and suggests that she ma& have been assumed bodil& into heaven $304)- and ma(es a clear distinction bet.een veneration and .orship= %onour ,ar&- but let the Father- the #on and the %ol& #pirit be .orshipped+ et no one .orship ,ar& + + + even though ,ar& is most beautiful and hol& and venerable- &et she is not to be .orshipped+ $305) #t+ <ohn Chr&sostom upholds ,ar&:s perpetual virginit& $306) and calls her the "e. Eve+ $301) #t+ Ambrose contended that ,ar&:s virginit& before- during- and after the birth of Christ .as the authoritative doctrine of the Church from the beginning $308)- and that she .as sinless+ $309) %e spea(s of her role as ,ediatrix $30;) and 2t&pe of the Church+2 $33/) But he is also careful to distinguish bet.een veneration and adoration= 2,ar& .as the temple of 7od- not the 7od of the temple+ And therefore he alone is to be adored- .ho .or(ed in the temple+2 $330) #t+ <erome- in the late fourth and earl& fifth centur&- continued the #econd Eve motif- and vigorousl& defended ,ar&:s perpetual virginit&= The >irgin ,ar& + + + remained a virgin before as .ell as after the birth + + + after he .as born- she remained ever'virgin+ $333) We + + + ta(e the brethren of the ord to have been- not the sons of <oseph- but cousins of the #aviour- the children of ,ar&- the maternal aunt of the ord + + + For all #cripture sho.s that cousins are called brethren+ $334) #t+ Augustine- li(e other atin Fathers- avoids the title 2,other of 7od-2 on grounds that it might give rise to misunderstandings- but he clearl& holds the doctrine- .hich .as defined as dogma at the Council of Ephesus a &ear after his death+ %e often stresses ,ar&:s perpetual virginit& and assumes that ,ar& had made a vo. of celibac&+ $335) i(e #t+ Ambrose- he expounds the teaching of ,ar&:s role as ,ediatrix and #piritual ,other= %o. do &ou not also belong to the childbirth of the >irgin- .hen &ou are members of ChristI $336)

24 <ust as death comes to us through a .oman- ife is born to us through a .omanC that the devil- defeated- .ould be tormented b& each nature- feminine and masculine- since he had ta(en delight in the defection of both+ $331) #t+ Augustine affirms the sinlessness of the Blessed >irgin ,ar&= The hol& >irgin ,ar&- about .hom- for the honour of the ord- * .ant there to be no ?uestion .here sin is mentioned- for concerning her .e (no. that more grace for con?uering sin in ever& .a& .as given to her .ho merited to conceive and give birth to him- .ho certainl& had no sin .hatsoever ' this virgin excepted- if .e could + + + as( all saints- .hether the& .ere .ithout sin- .hat- do .e thin(- .ould the& ans.erI $338) The feast da& for ,ar&:s Conception .as celebrated in the east from the seventh centur& on.ardsand in the .est from the ninth centur&+ The B&@antine feast of the Assumption appears to have been introduced in the late seventh centur&- and b& the end of the next centur& it .as observed ever&.here in the .est on August 06th+ $339) *n the ,iddle Ages- the doctrine of the *mmaculate Conception under.ent much development- as ud.ig !tt and Cardinal " recount= Dnder the influence of #t+ Bernard- the leading theologians of the 03th and 04th centuries $Peter ombard- #t+ Alexander of %ales- #t+ Bonaventure- #t+ Albert the 7reat- #t+ Thomas A?uinas)- reAected the doctrine of the *mmaculate Conception+ Their difficult& .as that the& had not &et found the .a& to bring ,ar&:s freedom from original sin into consonance .ith the universalit& of original sin- and .ith the necessit& of all men for redemption+ The correct approach to the final solution of the problem .as first achieved b& the Franciscan theologian- William of Ware- and this .as perfected b& his great pupil <ohn Duns #cotus $d+ 04/9)+ The latter taught that the animation need not precede the sanctification in order of time but onl& in order of concept+ Through the introduction of the concept of preredemption- he succeeded in reconciling ,ar&:s freedom from original sin .ith her necessit& for redemption+ The preservation from original sin- is- according to #cotus- the most perfect (ind of redemption+ Thus- it .as fitting that Christ should redeem %is mother in this manner + + + The Council of Trent- in its Decree on original sin- ma(es the significant declaration 2that it .as not its intention to involve ,ar&- the Blessed and *mmaculate >irgin and ,other of 7od in this Decree+2 $33;) As to the doctrine of the *mmaculate Conception- it .as implied in earl& times- and never denied+ *n the ,iddle Ages it .as denied b& #t+ Thomas and b& #t+ Bernard- but the& too( the phrase in a different sense from that in .hich the Church no. ta(es it+ The& understood it .ith reference to our ad&:s mother- and thought it contradicted the text*n sin hath m& mother conceived me ' .hereas .e do not spea( of the *mmaculate Conception except as relating to ,ar&C and the other doctrine $.hich #t+ Thomas and #t+ Bernard did oppose) is reall& heretical+ $34/) Eastern Orthodo y The ,ariolog& of Eastern !rthodox& is in man& respects identical to that of the Catholic Church+ The !rthodox greatl& venerate the Blessed >irgin in the same sense as in Catholicism- call her

29 Theoto(os- Aeiparthenos- $Ever'>irgin)- and Panagia $All'%ol&)- regard her as the "e. Eve- and hold firml& to her bodil& Assumption+ Although the& maintain that ,ar& .as free from actual sin- the great maAorit& of !rthodox reAect the *mmaculate Conception+ #ome Catholic theologians- such as ouis Bou&er $340)- have argued that !rthodox theologians $li(e #t+ Thomas A?uinas himself) often misunderstand the precise meaning of this dogma- as clarified b& Duns #cotus and others- and finall& defined in 0965+ $343) "evertheless- the feast of the *mmaculate Conception first originated in the east- and individual !rthodox Christians are free to believe in this doctrine .ithout being deemed heretical++ !he "ounders of Protestantis# The Founders of Protestantism- or Reformers- as the& are (no.n- .ho believed in #cripture Alone as the highest Christian authorit&- nevertheless continued in the sixteenth centur& to retain a surprising number of ,arian dogmas $particularl& the perpetual virginit& and the use of Theoto(os)+ *n man& respects the& .ere closer in belief to their Catholic opponents than the& are to present' da& Protestants+ ,artin uther himself .as startlingl& 2Catholic2 in this regard+ The vie.s of these men are of considerable historical interest and deserve to be detailed at some length+ ,artin uther taught the traditional understanding of the title 2,other of 7od2 in the passage= 7od did not derive his divinit& from ,ar&C but it does not follo. that it is therefore .rong to sa& that 7od .as born of ,ar&- that 7od is ,ar&:s #on- and that ,ar& is 7od:s mother + + + #he is the true mother of 7od and bearer of 7od + + + ,ar& suc(led 7od- roc(ed 7od to sleep- prepared broth and soup for 7od- etc+ For 7od and man are one person- one Christone #on- one <esus- not t.o Christs + + + Aust as &our son is not t.o sons + + + even though he has t.o natures- bod& and soul- the bod& from &ou- the soul from 7od alone+ $344) uther also thought it altogether proper to venerate ,ar&= The veneration of ,ar& is inscribed in the ver& depths of the human heart+ $345) #he is nobilit&- .isdom- and holiness personified+ We can never honor her enough+ #till honor and praise must be given to her in such a .a& as to inAure neither Christ nor the #criptures+ $346) The perpetual virginit& of ,ar& is expressl& upheld= Christ- our #avior- .as the real and natural fruit of ,ar&:s virginal .omb + + + This .as .ithout the cooperation of a man- and she remained a virgin after that+ $341) Christ + + + .as the onl& #on of ,ar&- and the >irgin ,ar& bore no children besides %im + + + * am inclined to agree .ith those .ho declare that 2brothers2 reall& mean 2cousins2 here- for %ol& Writ and the <e.s al.a&s call cousins brothers+ $348) ,ost remar(abl&- uther even accepted the *mmaculate Conception= *t is a s.eet and pious belief that the infusion of ,ar&:s soul .as effected .ithout original sinC so that in the ver& infusion of her soul she .as also purified from original sin and adorned .ith 7od:s gifts- receiving a pure soul infused b& 7odC thus from the first moment she began to live she .as free from all sin+ $349)

30 #he is full of graceC so that she ma& be recogni@ed as .ithout an& sin+ That is a high and great thing- for 7od:s grace fills her .ith all gifts and frees her from all evil+ $34;) The utheran scholar Arthur Carl Piep(orn $0;/8'84)- of Concordia #eminar& in #t+ ouis- after intense stud&- confirmed uther:s lifelong $barring t.o 2lapses2) acceptance of the *mmaculate Conception+ $35/) Though he made no une?uivocal statements concerning it- uther never denied the Assumption+ $350) Additionall&- he upheld the spiritual motherhood of ,ar&- the usefulness of the Rosar&- and the propriet& of the phrase 2Lueen of %eaven+2= ,ar& is the ,other of <esus and the ,other of all of us + + + *f he is ours- .e ought to be in his situationC there .here he is- .e ought also to be and all that he has ought to be oursand his mother is also our mother+ $353) !ur pra&er should include the ,other of 7od + + + What the %ail ,ar& sa&s is that all glor& should be given to 7od- using these .ords= %ail ,ar&- full of grace+ The ord is .ith theeC blessed art thou among .omen and blessed is the fruit of th& .omb- <esus Christ+ AmenE $354) Bou see that these .ords are not concerned .ith pra&er but purel& .ith giving praise and honor + + + We can use the %ail ,ar& as a meditation in .hich .e recite .hat grace 7od has given her+ #econd- .e should add a .ish that ever&one ma& (no. and respect her + + + %e .ho has no faith is advised to refrain from sa&ing the %ail ,ar& + + + $355) Though she .as .ithout sin- &et that grace .as far too great for her to deserve it in an& .a&+ %o. should a creature deserve to become the ,other of 7odI + + + *t is necessar& also to (eep .ithin bounds and not to ma(e too much of calling her 2Lueen of %eaven-2 .hich is a true'enough name + + + $356) Even <ohn Calvin- much less traditional than uther in man& .a&s- ma(es several 2Catholic'sounding2 comments about ,ar&= We cannot give praise for the blessing .hich Christ has given to us .ithout remembering at the same time the glorious privilege .hich 7od besto.ed on ,ar& b& choosing her to be the mother of his onl& #on + + + "o. she is called Blessed because- receiving b& faith the blessing .hich is offered to her- she opened the .a& for 7od to accomplish his .or(+ $351) et us learn to praise the hol& >irgin+ When .e confess .ith her that .e are nothing + + + and that .e o.e all to the pure goodness of 7od- see ho. .e .ill be disciples of the >irgin ,ar&I $358) There has been some ignorance in that the& have reproved this fashion of spea(ing of the >irgin ,ar& as the mother of 7od+ $359) %elvidius displa&ed excessive ignorance in concluding that ,ar& must have had man& sonsbecause Christ:s 2brothers2 are sometimes mentioned+ $35;) G!n ,atthe. 0=36=H The inference he G%elvidiusH dre. from it .as- that ,ar& remained a virgin no longer than till her first birth- and that after.ards she had other children b& her husband + + + "o Aust and .ell'grounded inference can be dra.n from these .ords + + + as to .hat too( place after the birth of Christ+ %e is called 2first'born2C but it is for the sole purpose of informing us that he .as born of a virgin + + + What too( place after.ards the

31 historian does not inform us + + + "o man .ill obstinatel& (eep up the argument- except from an extreme fondness for disputation+ $36/) %einrich Bullinger- another historicall& significant Protestant Reformer- made an extraordinar& proclamation .hich appears to uphold virtuall& all of the Catholic ,arian dogmas= EliAah .as transported bod& and soul in a chariot of fireC he .as not buried in an& Church bearing his name- but mounted up to heaven- so that + + + .e might (no. .hat immortalit& and recompense 7od prepares for his faithful prophets and for his most outstanding and incomparable creatures + + + *t is for this reason- .e believe- that the pure and immaculate embodiment of the ,other of 7od- the >irgin ,ar&- the Temple of the %ol& #pirit- that is to sa& her saintl& bod&- .as carried up to heaven b& the angels+ $360) Within Anglicanism- man& of the 2high'church2 or 2Anglo'Catholic2 faction believe in a ,ariolog& not unli(e that of the Catholic Church- both doctrinall& and devotionall&+ $363) FOOTNOTES ($ary 149. 2ia#o(/e Ai-& :r3p&o, 100:+, in Grae*, Hi#da, Mary1 A History of Doctrine and Devotion* 'ombined ed. o* vo#s. 1 > 2, .ondon: <&eed > 6ard, 196+ as are a## pa-ris-i' L/o-es *o##oAin( /n#ess o-&erAise no-ed. 190. Against Heresies, 3,21,10. 191. Ibid., 1,33,11. 192. Homi#3 7 on ./ke. 193. Homi#3 1 on Ma--&eA +. 191. :Ao 5ra(men-s on ./ke, nos. 11 and 40 in -&e 9er#in ed. 19+. In $o&n, 1,6. 196. D/o-ed b3 %3ri# in &is Aork a(ains- $/#ian. 197. Ecclesiastica Theologia. 194. 2is'o/rse 7(ains- -&e 7rians, 2,70. 199. .e--er -o -&e =ir(ins. 200. %ommen-ar3 on Ma--&eA, 1,1 B 1,20. 201. 8isibene H3mns, 27,4. 202. ;"ra3er -o -&e Mos- Ho#3 Mo-&er o* God;. 203. %armina, 1,2,1. 201. :o %#edoni/s -&e "ries-, 7(ains- 7po##inaris, 101. 20+. Ora-io, 21,11. 206. E.(., 7(ains- 7ppo#inaris, 6. 207. Homi#3 13 on -&e %an-i'#e B On -&e 9ir-& o* %&ris-. 204. Ibid. 209. "anarion, 74,1 B 74,+. 210. Ibid., 74,10. 211. Ibid., 74,21. 212. Ibid., 74,14. 213. Ibid., 74,11. 211. Ibid., 79,7. 21+. Homi#ies on Ma--&eA. 216. %ommen-ar3 7 in "sa#ms 11. 217. Epis-#e 12, 1 6. 214. %ommen-ar3 on ./ke, 2,17 B %ommen-ar3 on "sa#ms 114, 22,30. 219. Epis-#e 63,33 B Epis-#e 19,2. 220. %ommen-ar3 on ./ke, 2,7. 221. :&e Ho#3 <piri-, 3,79 **. 222. %ommen-ar3 on E@ekie#, 13,11,1 **. 223. %omm. on Ma--., 12.+0. 221. <ee Grae*, ibid., 9+ 100 B Heresies, +6. 22+. <ermon 144,1.

32 226. %&ris-ian %omba-, 22,21. 5rom $/r(ens, 6i##iam 7., ed. and -r., The Faith of the Early Fathers, 3 vo#/mes, %o##e(evi##e, M8: .i-/r(i'a# "ress, 1970, vo#. 3, +0. 227. 8a-/re and Gra'e, 36,12 224. %ross, 5... > E.7. .ivin(s-one, eds., The /0ford Dictionary of the Christian Church, 2nd ed., OK*ord: OK*ord )niv. "ress, 1943, 692,99. 229. O--, ./dAi(, Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, -r. "a-ri'k .3n'&, Ro'k*ord, I.: :78 9ooks > "/b#is&ers, 1971 ,ori(. 19+2 in German0, 201 202. 230. 8eAman, Meditations and Devotions, Harrison, 8M: Roman %a-&o#i' 9ooks, n.d. ,ori(. 14930, 1+3. 231. 9o/3er, .o/is, The Seat of (isdom, -r. 7.=. .i--#eda#e, %&i'a(o: Henr3 Re(ner3 %o., 196+ ,ori(. 19600, 101. 232. 6are, :imo-&3 ,7r'&bis&op ?a##is-os0, The /rthodo0 Church, 8M: "en(/in 9ooks, Rev. ed., 1940, 261 1. 233. /n the Councils and the Church ,1+390. 5rom "e#ikan, $aros#av > He#m/- :. .e&mann, eds., $uther+s (or#s, <-. .o/is: %on'ordia "/b. Ho/se ,vo#s. 1 300, "&i#ade#p&ia: 5or-ress "ress ,vo#s. 31 ++0: 19++, vo#. 11, 99 100. 231. 5rom %o#e, 6i##iam $., ;6as ./-&er a 2evo-ee o* Mar3H;, Marian Studies, vo#. 21, 1970, 91 202! L/o-e *rom 131 B <ermon, <ep. 1, 1+22. 23+. Ibid., 131 B %&ris-mas sermon, 1+31. 236. ;<ermons on $o&n, '&aps. 1 1; ,1+37 390. In "e#ikan, ibid., vo#. 22, 23. 237. ./-&er, ibid. In "e#ikan, ibid., $uther+s (or#s, vo#. 22, 211 21+. "e#ikan asser-s -&a- -&is Aas ./-&erEs #i*e#on( be#ie* ,vo#. 22, 211 21+0. 234. <ermon: ;On -&e 2a3 o* -&e %on'ep-ion o* Mar3 -&e Mo-&er o* God; ,2e'. 4H, 1+270. 5rom Grisar, Har-mann, $uther, -r. E.M. .amond, ed. ./i(i %appade#-a, 6 vo#/mes, .ondon: ?e(an "a/#, :ren'&, :r/bner > %o., 1917, vo#. 1, 234 ,emp&asis added0. <ee a#so e.(., Ho/se sermon *or %&ris-mas, 1+33! A"out the )e's and Their $ies, 1+13! The Papacy5 an !nstitution of the Devil* 1+1+. 239. %o#e, ibid., 14+ B .i--#e "ra3er 9ook ,1+220. 210. ;Mar3Es "#a'e 6i-&in -&e "eop#e o* God 7''ordin( -o 8on Roman %a-&o#i's,; Marian Studies, vo#. 14, 1967, 16 43 ,see p. 760. 211. %o#e, ibid., 123 121. 212. Ibid., 124 B <ermon, %&ris-mas, 1+29. Emp&asis added. 213. I.e., -&e *irs- par- o* -&e ;Hai# Mar3;, as i- is said -oda3, par-i'/#ar#3 in -&e Rosar3. :&e #as- par- 'on-in/es: ;Ho#3 Mar3, Mo-&er o* God, pra3 *or /s sinners noA and a- -&e &o/r o* o/r dea-&. 7men;. 211. .i--#e "ra3er 9ook ,1+220. In "e#ikan, ibid., vo#. 13, 39 11. 21+. ;Ma(ni*i'a-; ,1+210. In "e#ikan, ibid., vo#. 21, 327. Emp&asis added. 216. %ommen-ar3 on ./ke 1:12,1+. In :&/rian, MaK, Mary1 Mother of all Christians, -r. 8evi##e 9. %r3er, 8M: Herder > Herder, 1963 ,ori(. 19620, 146. 217. Ma'?en@ie, Ross, ;Mario#o(3 as an E'/meni'a# "rob#em;, Marian Studies, vo#.26, 197+, 201 20! L/o-e *rom pp. 206 207 B Harmony of Matthe'* Mar# 4 $u#e, se'. 39 ,Geneva, 1+620. 214. .e--er -o 5ren'& 'omm/ni-3 in .ondon, <ep. 27, 1++2 B In :&/rian, ibid., 77. 219. %a#vin, Harmony* vo#.2 B 5rom Calvin+s Commentaries* -r. 6i##iam "rin(#e, Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1919, 21+! on Ma--&eA 13:++. 2+0. Ibid., ,"rin(#e0, vo#. I, 107. %a#vin, in &is 'ommen-ar3 on ./ke 1:31 in &is Harmony, a**irms -&e perpe-/a# vir(ini-3 o* Mar3, A&i#e a- -&e same -ime den3in( -&a- Mar3 &ad made a voA o* 'e#iba'3. 2+1. 5rom :&/rian, ibid., 197 4 B Ari--en in 1+64, 2e Ori(ine Erroris, 16. 2+2. %ross, ibid., 443, 99. K+ The Earl& Church and the Bishop of Rome St$ Peter in %o#e The final residence of #t+ Peter in Rome has been ?uestioned- but on inade?uate grounds+ Bab&lonas used in 0 Peter 6=04- is regarded b& the earl& Church and the maAorit& of biblical scholars as a code name $in light of the political situation) for Rome itself- from .hich this epistle .as almost certainl& .ritten+ #ome have also thought that Romans 06=3/'33 indicates the presence of another Apostle in Rome before #t+ Paul .rote to that church+ The Apostolic .riting 0 Clement $6)- .ritten around ;1 A+D+ b& #t+ Clement of Rome- implied that #t+ Peter- li(e #t+ Paul- .as executed in the "eronian persecution in Rome+ #t+ *gnatius of Antiochin .riting to the Romans around 00/ A+D+- states- 2* do not give &ou orders li(e Peter and Paul + + +2

33 $ etter to the Romans- 5-4)- and #t+ *renaeus- in his Against %eresies $c+0;; ' 4=0=3- 4=4=0)expressl& affirms that these t.o Apostles founded the Roman church and commenced its apostolic succession+ Finall&- the existence and location of the actual tomb of #t+ Peter and his bones ' under the present #t+ Peter:s cathedral in the >atican ' have been strongl& confirmed b& archaeological excavation+ $364) St$ Peter as &ishop of %o#e and "irst Pope *t .ould seem to follo. as a matter of course that #t+ Peter .as the first bishop of Rome- but this particular is not as .ell attested in ancient documents as the fact that he .as simpl& there- hence it is not as .idel& ac(no.ledged b& Protestants+ "evertheless- .e possess fairl& earl& and ?uite reliable evidence of Peter:s bishopric at Rome- from #t+ *renaeus $alread& cited)- #t+ C&prianc+363- .ho calls Rome 2the Chair of Peter2 $ etter to Pope Cornelius- 66)- and the first Church historian- Eusebius- c+406- .ho .rites in his %istor& $5=0) that 2 inus .as the first after Peter that obtained the Episcopate of the Church of the Romans+2 ,oreover- the ver& fact of the later strong traditions of apostolic succession and the papac& arising out of Rome- and the earl& cultus of veneration of Peter and Paul there- provide further ?uite strong proofs of .hat is no. the Catholic position- held as dogma+ For historical traditions- as a rule- do not arise out of sheer m&ths or hearsa&- but as a result of actual historical eventsconsidered unassailable b& the earl& proponents $for example- ,oses receiving the Commandments and <esus: Resurrection)+ 7iven the accepted fact that Peter .as in Rome- and granting his general extraordinar& preeminence in the earl& Church- it does not re?uire too great of a leap to deduce Peter:s bishopric in Rome $that is- a primitive papac& .hich later developed .ith his successors)+ #o certain .as the earl& Church on this score that no one denied Peter:s Episcopate in Rome until the heretical Waldenses in the fourteenth centur& $a strong proof in and of itself)+ "one of the Eastern !rthodox churches or various heretical groups such as the "estorians and ,onoph&sites- .hich seceded from Rome up through the eleventh centur& ever denied it $doing so .ould have provided a feasible theological Austification for their separation- but the& (ne. it .as an impossible argument to carr& off)+ !he 'eneral (otion of the Pri#acy of the Church of %o#e Rome almost immediatel& ac?uired a leading position among the first churches at the da.n of Christianit&- especiall& after the destruction of <erusalem b& the Roman arm& in 8/ A+D+ *t .as the onl& .estern church to receive a letter from an Apostle $#t+ Paul)- and both Peter and Paul .ere mart&red there- thus bringing about shrines and pilgrimages- and the perception of Rome as 2hol& ground+2 ,ost of the earliest prominent Christians .ent there $Pol&carp- *gnatius- <ustin ,art&r*renaeus- Tertullian- !rigen- etc+)+ Christians ever&.here soon came to believe that the apostolic tradition preserved at Rome .as particularl& trust.orth&- and could not be disagreed .ith b& conflicting traditions+ Rome had far and a.a& the best record of avoiding the numerous heresies .hich constantl& arose $especiall& .ith hindsight)- and eventuall& it came to be .idel& ac(no.ledged that Rome:s singular orthodox& .as the result of a divine protection accorded the pope and his see- as derived from <esus: commission to #t+ Peter+ $365) *t .as also probabl& the largest Christian congregation b& the &ear 0//- and .as reno.ned for its generosit& $see Romans 0=9)+ *t soon became customar& to refer to Rome as the 2apostolic see+2

31 Adolf von %arnac( $0960'0;4/)- the theologicall& liberal Church historian and theologian- regarded b& some as the most outstanding authorit& of his generation on the Church Fathers and earl& Christian literature $366)- .rote in his famous treatise %istor& of Dogma- concerning the first letter of #t+ Clement- bishop of Rome- .ritten to the Corinthians- that it= + + + proves that- b& the end of the first centur&- the Roman Church had alread& dra.n up fixed rules for her o.n guidance- that she .atched .ith motherl& care over outl&ing communities- and that she then (ne. ho. to use language that .as at once an expression of dut&- love- and authorit&+ $361) #t+ Francis de #ales- .ho .as vigorousl& engaged in an effort to .in bac( the Calvinists and other Protestants to the Catholic faith at the end of the 01th centur&- summari@ed the evidences for the primac& of the pope and Rome in earl& Christianit&= #t+ Peter died Bishop of Rome ' therefore the diocese of Rome .as the last seat of the head of the Church= therefore the Bishop of Rome .ho came after the death of #t+ Petersucceeded to the head of the Church- and conse?uentl& .as head of the Church+ #ome one might sa& that he succeeded the head of the Church as to the bishopric of Rome- but not as to the (ingship of the .orld+ But such a one must sho. that #t+ Peter had t.o sees- of .hich one .as for Rome- the other for the universe- .hich .as not the case + + + %ence- the Bishop of Rome remained general lieutenant in the Church- and successor of #t+ Peter + + + At the Council of "icea- at those of Constantinople and Chalcedon- it is not seen that an& bishop usurps the primac& for himself= it is attributed- according to ancient custom- to the PopeC no other is named in e?ual degree+ *n short- never .as it said- either certainl& or doubtfull&- of an& bishop in the first five hundred &ears that he .as head or superior over the rest- except of the Bishop of RomeC about him indeed it .as never doubted- but .as held as settled that he .as such+ !n .hat ground- then- after fifteen hundred &ears passed.ould one cast doubt on this ancient traditionI * should never end .ere * to tr& to catalogue all the assurances and repetitions of this truth .hich .e have in the Ancients: .ritings+ $368) Finall&- <ames Cardinal 7ibbons catalogues the impressive and undeniabl& preeminent record of Rome and the popes in the earl& centuries of the Catholic Church= The Popes have al.a&s- from the da&s of the Apostles- continued to exercise supreme Aurisdiction not onl& in the Western Church till the Reformation- but also throughout the Eastern Church till the great schism of the ninth centur&+ First ' Ta(e the ?uestion of appeals+ An appeal is never made from a superior to an inferior court + + + "o.- if .e find the #ee of Rome from the foundation of Christianit& entertaining and deciding cases of appeal from the !riental churchesC if .e find that her decision .as final and irrevocable- .e must conclude that the supremac& of Rome over all the churches is an undeniable fact+ et me give &ou a fe. illustrations= + + + About the &ear 0;/ the ?uestion regarding the proper da& for celebrating Easter .as agitated in the East- and referred to Pope #t+ >ictor * + + + #t+ >ictor directs the Eastern

3+ churches- for the sa(e of uniformit&- to conform to the practice of the West- and his instructions are universall& follo.ed + + + Dion&sius- Bishop of Rome- about the middle of the third centur&- having heard that the Patriarch of Alexandria erred on some points of faith- demands an explanation of the suspected Prelate- .ho- in obedience to his superior- promptl& vindicates his o.n orthodox&+ #t+ Athanasius- the great patriarch of Alexandria- appeals in the fourth centur& to Pope <ulius *- from an unAust decision rendered against him b& the !riental Bishops- and the Pope reverses the sentence of the Eastern Council+ #t+ Basil- Archbishop of Caesarea- in the same centur& has recourse in his afflictions to the protection of Pope Damasus+ #t+ <ohn Chr&sostom- Patriarch of Constantinople- appeals in the beginning of the fifth centur& to Pope *nnocent * for a redress of grievances inflicted on him b& several Eastern Prelates- and b& the Empress Eudoxia of Constantinople+ #t+ C&ril appeals to Pope Celestine against "estoriusC "estorius- also- appeals to the same Pontiff- .ho ta(es the side of C&ril + + + We see Prelates most eminent for their sanctit& and learning occup&ing the highest position in the Eastern Church- and conse?uentl& far removed from the local influences of Romeappealing in ever& period of the earl& Church from the decisions of their o.n Bishops and their Councils to the supreme arbitration of the %ol& #ee+ *f this does not constitute superior Aurisdiction- * have &et to learn .hat superior authorit& means + + + GFinall&H * shall refer to one more historical point in support of the Pope:s Aurisdiction over the .hole Church+ *t is a most remar(able fact that ever& nation hitherto converted from Paganism to Christianit& since the da&s of the Apostles- has received the light of faith from missionaries .ho .ere either especiall& commissioned b& the #ee of Rome- or sent b& Bishops in open communion .ith that #ee+ This historical fact admits of no exception+ et me particulari@e+ *reland:s Apostle is #t+ Patric(+ Who commissioned himI Pope #t+ Celestine- in the fifth centur&+ #t+ Palladius is the Apostle of #cotland+ Who sent himI The same Pontiff- Celestine+ The Anglo'#axons received the faith from #t+ Augustine- a Benedictine mon(- as all historians- Catholic and non'Catholic- testif&+ Who empo.ered Augustine to preachI Pope 7regor& *- at the end of the sixth centur&+ #t+ Remigius established the faith in France- at the close of the fifth centur&+ %e .as in active communion .ith the #ee of Peter+ Flanders received the 7ospel in the seventh centur& from #t+ Eligius- .ho ac(no.ledged the supremac& of the reigning Pope+

36 7erman& and Bavaria venerate as their Apostle #t+ Boniface- .ho is popularl& (no.n in his native England b& his baptismal name of Winfrid+ %e .as commissioned b& Pope 7regor& **in the beginning of the eighth centur&- and .as consecrated Bishop b& the same Pontiff+ *n the ninth centur& t.o saintl& brothers- C&ril and ,ethodius- evangeli@ed Russia#clavonia- ,oravia and other parts of "orthern Europe+ The& recogni@ed the supreme authorit& of Pope "icholas * and of his successors- Adrian ** and <ohn >***+ All the other nations of Europe- having been converted before the Reformation- received li(e.ise the light of faith from Roman Catholic ,issionaries - because Europe then recogni@ed onl& one Christian Chief + + + $369) )estern Church "athers *'enerally Latin+Spea,ing- and the Papacy #t+ Clement of Rome- in his etter to the Corinthians- dated at about 9/ A+D+ma(es a remar(abl& 2authoritative2 statement= We have been some.hat tard& in turning our attention to the matters in dispute among &ou + + + *f an&one disobe& the things .hich have been said b& %im through us- let them (no. that the& .ill involve themselves in transgression and in no small danger+ $36;) ,ax ac(mann- a utheran- comments on this letter of #t+ Clement= Clement- as the spo(esman of the .hole People of 7od + + + admonishes the Church of Corinth in serious- authoritative and brotherl& tones to correct the internal abuses of their ecclesiastical communit&+ %e censures- exhorts- cautions- entreats + + + The use of the expression send bac( in the statement= #end bac( speedil& unto us our messengers $0 Clement 16-0)- is not merel& a special (ind of biblical phrase but also a form of Roman imperial command+ The Roman Audge in a province of the empire sent bac( a messenger or a pac(et of documents to the imperial capital or to the court of the emperor $Acts 36=30)+ Clement of Rome doubtless also (ne. this administrative terminolog& of the imperial government and used it effectivel&+ $31/) #t+ *renaeus- .riting bet.een 09/ and 0;;- ma(es a ver& influential and .ell'(no.n proclamation= + + + Peter and Paul .ere evangeli@ing in Rome and la&ing the foundation of the Church + + + the greatest and most ancient Church (no.n to all- founded and organi@ed at Rome b& the t.o most glorious Apostles- Peter and Paul- that Church .hich has the tradition and the faith .hich comes do.n to us after having been announced to men b& the Apostles+ For .ith this Church- because of its superior origin- all Churches must agree- that is- all the faithful in the .hole .orldC and it is in her that the faithful ever&.here have maintained the Apostolic tradition+ The blessed Apostles- having founded and built up the Church- the& handed over the office of the episcopate to inus+ Paul ma(es mention of this inus in the Epistle to Timoth& G3 Timoth& 5=30H+ To him succeeded AnencletusC and after him- in the third place from the Apostles- Clement .as chosen for the episcopate + + +

37 *n the time of Clement- no small dissension having arisen among the brethren in Corinth- the Church in Rome sent a ver& strong letter to the Corinthians- exhorting them to peace and their faith+ $310) #t+ C&prian- .riting in the middle of the third centur&- strongl& affirms the papac& and Roman primac&= *t is on one man that %e builds the Church + + + *n order that unit& might be clearl& sho.n%e established b& %is o.n authorit& a source for that unit&- .hich ta(es its beginning from one man alone+ *ndeed- the other Apostles .ere that also .hich Peter .as- being endo.ed .ith an e?ual portion of dignit& and po.erC but the origin is grounded in unit&- so that it ma& be made clear that there is but one Church of Christ+ $313) With a false bishop appointed for themselves b& heretics- the& dare even to set sail and carr& letters from schismatics and blasphemers to the chair of Peter and to the principal Church- in .hich sacerdotal unit& has its sourceC nor did the& ta(e thought that these are Romans- .hose faith .as praised b& the preaching Apostle- and among .hom it is not possible for perfid& Gthat is- faithlessnessH to have entrance+ $314) *n the fourth centur&- still up to a hundred &ears before man& Protestants contend that the papac& even existed- Pope #t+ <ulius * and Pope #t+ Damasus * express themselves in the eminentl& 2papal2 terms= *f- then- an& such suspicion rested upon the bishop there Gthat is- #t+ Athanasius- in AlexandriaH- notice of it ought to have been .ritten to the Church here+ But no.- after the& have done as the& pleased- the& .ant to obtain our concurrence- although .e never condemned him+ "ot thus are the constitutions of Paul- not thus the traditions of the Fathers+ This is another form of procedure- and a novel practice+ * beseech &ou- bear .ith me .illingl&= .hat * .rite about this is for the common good+ For .hat .e have received from the blessed Apostle Peter- these things * signif& to &ou+ $315) The hol& Roman Church has been placed at the forefront not b& the conciliar decisions of other Churches- but has received the primac& b& the evangelic voice of our ord and #avior.ho sa&s= Bou are Peter- and upon this roc( * .ill build ,& Church + + + $316) *n the same centur&- #t+ !ptatus of ,ilevis testifies= Bou cannot den& that &ou are a.are that in the cit& of Rome the episcopal chair .as given first to PeterC the chair in .hich Peter sat- the same .ho .as head + + + of all the ApostlesC the one chair in .hich unit& is maintained b& all+ "either do other Apostles proceed individuall& on their o.nC and an&one .ho .ould set up another chair in opposition to that single chair .ould- b& that ver& fact- be a schismatic and a sinner+ $311) #t+ Ambrose li(e.ise approves of this state of affairs= We recogni@ed in the letter of &our holiness the vigilance of the good shepherd+ Bou faithfull& .atch over the gate entrusted to &ou- and .ith pious solicitude &ou guard Christ:s sheepfold- &ou that are .orth& to have the ord:s sheep hear and follo. &ou+ #ince &ou (no. the sheep of Christ &ou .ill easil& catch the .olves and confront them li(e a .ar& shepherd+ $318)

34 Where Peter is- there is the Church+ And .here the Church- no death is there- but life eternal+ $319) #t+ <erome- the greatest biblical scholar of his time- concurs also= The Church depends e?uall& on all Gthe ApostlesH + + + but one among the t.elve is chosen to be their head in order to remove an& occasion for division+ $31;) #ince the East tears into pieces the ord:s coat + + + therefore b& me is the chair of Peter to be consulted- and that faith .hich is praised b& the Apostle:s mouth + + + From the Priest * as( the salvation of the victim- from the #hepherd the protection of the sheep + + + * court not the Roman height= * spea( .ith the succesor of the Fisherman and the disciple of the Cross+ *- .ho follo. none as m& chief but Christ- am associated in communion .ith th& blessedness- that is- .ith the #ee of Peter+ !n that roc( the Church is built- * (no.+ $38/) *f an& be Aoined to Peter:s chair he is mine+ $380) #t+ Augustine- generall& regarded b& Catholics and Protestants ali(e as the greatest Church Father.riting in the late fourth and earl& fifth centur&- leaves no doubt as to his position on this matter= *f the ver& order of episcopal succession is to be considered- ho. much more surel&- trul&and safel& do .e number them from Peter himself- to .hom- as to one representing the .hole Church- the ord said= Dpon this roc( * .ill build ,& Church- and the gates of hell shall not con?uer it+ Peter .as succeeded b& inus- inus b& Clement- Clement b& AnacletusAnacletus b& Evaristus + + + $383) G!n this matter of the PelagiansH t.o Councils have alread& been sent to the Apostolic #ee GRomeHC and from there rescripts too have come+ The matter is at an endC .ould that the error too might sometime be at an end+ $384) The succession of priests- from the ver& see of the Apostle Peter- to .hom our ord- after %is resurrection- gave the charge of feeding %is sheep- up to the present episcopate- (eeps me here Gin the Catholic ChurchH+ And at last- the ver& name of Catholic- .hich- not .ithout reason- belongs to this Church alone- in the face of so man& heretics- so much so thatalthough all heretics .ant to be called Catholic- .hen a stranger in?uires .here the Catholic Church meets- none of the heretics .ould dare to point out his o.n basilica or house+ $385) *n the fifth centur&- Pope #t+ *nnocent * decrees= the examples of ancient tradition- + + + &ou have ac(no.ledged that Audgment is to be referred to us- and have sho.n that &ou (no. .hat is o.ed to the Apostolic #ee + + +The Fathers + + + did not regard an&thing as finished- even though it .as the concern of distant and remote provinces- until it had come to the notice of this #ee- so that .hat .as a Aust pronouncement might be confirmed b& the total authorit& of this #ee- and thence other Churches ' Aust as all .aters proceed from their o.n natal source and + + + remain pure li?uids of an incorrupted head ' might ta(e up .hat the& ought to teach+ $386) Pope #t+ Celestine *- .riting in 540 to his legates $representatives or ambassadors) at the ecumenical Council of Ephesus held that &ear- commands them=

39 We enAoin upon &ou the necessar& tas( of guarding the authorit& of the Apostolic #ee+ And if the instructions handed &ou have to mention this and if &ou have to be present in the assembl&- if it comes to controvers&- it is not &ours to Aoin the fight- but to Audge of their opinions+ $381) *n his Third etter to *ll&rian Bishops- he declares= We have special anxiet& about all persons because on us- in the hol& apostle Peter- Christ conferred the necessit& of ma(ing all men our care- .hen he gave him the (e&s of opening and shutting+ $388) Finall&- Pope #t+ eo the 7reat- .ho reigned from 55/ to 510- considered b& man& Protestant and secular historians as the first pope- spo(e perhaps more clearl& than an&one up to that time concerning Roman primac& and papal duties- prerogatives- and supremac&- &et ' as .e have seen ' his vie.s .ere merel& the culmination and more advanced development of .hat had been the essential beliefs of the universal $that is- Catholic) Church from the beginning= The ord + + + .anted %is gifts to flo. into the entire bod& from Peter himself- as if from the head- in such a .a& that an&one .ho had dared to separate himself from the solidarit& of Peter .ould reali@e that he .as himself no longer a sharer in the divine m&ster& + + + The Apostolic #ee + + + has on countless occasions been reported to in consultation b& bishops + + + And through the appeal of various cases to this see- decisions alread& made have been either revo(ed or confirmed- as dictated b& longstanding custom+ $389) Although bishops have a common dignit&- the& are not all of the same ran(+ Even among the most blessed Apostles- though the& .ere ali(e in honor- there .as a certain distinction of All .ere e?ual in being chosen- but it .as given to one to be preeminent over the others + + + The care of the universal Church .ould converge one #ee of Peter- and nothing should ever be at odds .ith this head+ $38;) From the .hole .orld onl& one- Peter- is chosen to preside over the calling of all nations- and over all the other Apostles- and over the Fathers of the Church + + + Peter + + + rules them allof .hom- too- it is Christ .ho is their chief ruler+ $39/) Eastern Church "athers *'enerally 'ree,+Spea,ing- and the Papacy #t+ *gnatius of Antioch- .riting to the Roman church around 00/ A+D+- asserts= Bou have envied no oneC but others &ou have taught+ * desire onl& that .hat &ou have enAoined in &our instructions ma& remain in force+ $390) !rigen- .riting in the first half of the third centur&- also ac(no.ledges the preeminence of #t+ Peter= Peter- upon .hom is built the Church of Christ + + + $393) oo( at the great foundation of the Church- that most solid of roc(s- upon .hom Christ built the ChurchE $394) *n the fourth centur&- #t+ Ephraim exclaims=

10 #imon- ,& * have made &ou the foundation of the hol& Church+ * betimes called &ou Peter- because &ou .ill support all its buildings+ Bou are the inspector of those .ho .ill build on earth a Church for ,e+ *f the& should .ish to build .hat is false- &ou- the foundation.ill condemn them+ Bou are the head of the fountain from .hich ,& teaching flo.s- &ou are the chief of ,& disciples+ Through &ou * .ill give drin( to all peoples + + + * have chosen &ou to be- as it .ere- the first'born in ,& institution- and so that- as the heir- &ou ma& be executor of m& treasures+ * have given &ou the (e&s of m& (ingdom+ Behold- * have given &ou authorit& over all m& treasuresE $395) Fephas + + + the head of the Apostles .ho received the of the (e&s and is ta(en for the shepherd of the floc( + + + $396) #t+ Basil the 7reat- one of the most revered Fathers in the east among the Eastern !rthodoxas(ed Pope Damasus * $reigned 411'495) to arbitrate bet.een the churches in present'da& Tur(e& $Asia ,inor)- and decide .hich side .ould be in communion .ith the pope= We are in no .ise as(ing an&thing ne.- but .hat .as customar& .ith blessed and religious men of former times- and especiall& .ith &ourself+ For .e (no.- b& tradition of our fathers + + + that Dion&sius Ga pope .ho reigned from 36;'31;H- that most blessed Bishop- .hile he .as eminent among &ou for orthodox& and other virtues- sent letters of visitation to our Church at Caesarea- and of consolation to our fathers- .ith ransomers of our brethren from captivit&+ $391) #t+ 7regor& "a@ian@en affirms= The faith Gof RomeH .as of old- and still is no.- right- binding the .hole West b& the saving .ord= as is Aust in her .ho presides over all- reverencing the .hole harmon& of 7od+ $398) #t+ Epiphanius has full confidence in the primac& of #t+ Peter and the popes= G*t is m&H pra&er to unite m&self to &ou Gthe popeH and to embrace the divine dogmas that had been handed do.n b& tradition from the blessed and hol& disciples and apostles of 7odespeciall& from Peter the chief of the apostles- to &our hol& see+ $399) *n 453 and 454- the Council of #ardica $#ofia- Bulgaria) .as held in order to solve disputes bet.een east and .est- such as that concerning #t+ Athanasius+ About ;/ .estern bishops and 9/ eastern bishops .ere present+ *n its Canons 4- 5- and 6- it expressl& sanctioned the right to appeal to Rome and the pope for Audgment+ Canon 5 reads in part= *f some bishop be deposed b& the Audgment of the bishops sitting in the neighborhood- and if he declare that he .ill see( further redress- another should not be appointed to his see until the bishop of Rome can be ac?uainted .ith the case and render a Audgment+ $39;) #t+ <ohn Chr&sostom $c+455'5/8) .as not onl& the greatest preacher in the histor& of eastern Christianit&- and perhaps revered above an& other Church Father b& the Eastern !rthodox- .ho utili@e exclusivel& his liturg& in their .orship- but also the most elo?uent and vociferous .itness in the east for the divinel&'ordained papac&+ %e called #t+ Peter the 2mouth of the apostles-2 the 2conductor of the apostolic choir-2 and the 2ruler of the entire .orld+2 #t+ Peter .as designated b& Christ to preside over 2the see of the .orld because he entrusted him .ith the care of the .hole .orld+2 Peter .as to 2receive the government of the .orld+2 As to .h& <esus ?uestioned Peter

11 three times .hether he loved %im- and commanded him to feed and tend %is sheep $<ohn 30=06'08)Chr&sostom states= The master as(ed those ?uestions so that he might teach us ho. much at heart he has the headship over these sheep+ $3;/) *n the fifth centur&- #ocrates- a 7ree( Church historian from Constantinople- gives the telling testimon& in his Church %istor&= The ecclesiastical canon forbids the churches to ma(e ordinances against the mind of the bishop of Rome+ $3;0) i(e.ise- fello. eastern Church historian #o@omen - .ho .as from Palestine and later settled in Constantinople- .rote about Pope <ulius *- that 2+ + +he has the solicitude for all because of the dignit& of his see-2 and cites 2a priestl& la.- annulling .hatever is done against the mind of the bishop of Rome+2 $3;3) Theodoret of C&rrhus confesses= For that hol& see has precedence of all churches in the .orld for man& reasonsC and above all for this- that it is free of all taint of heres&- and that no bishop of false opinions has ever sat upon its throne- but it has (ept the grace of the apostles undefiled+ $3;4) *n the seventh centur&- #t+ ,aximus the Confessor $c+69/'113)- arguabl& the greatest m&stical and ascetic theologian of the eastern Christian tradition $and venerated as such b& the !rthodox)echoes the same beliefs about papal and Roman supremac&= All in ever& part + + + .ho purel& and rightl& confess the ord- loo( directl& to.ards the most hol& Roman Church and its confession and faith- as it .ere to a sun of unfailing lighta.aiting from it the bright radiance of our fathers + + + For from the coming do.n of the *ncarnate Word among us- all the churches in ever& part of the .orld have possessed that greatest church alone as their base and foundation- seeing that- according to the promise of Christ !ur #avior- the gates of hell do never prevail against it- that it possesses the Fe&s of right confession and faith in %im- that it opens the true and onl& religion to such as approach .ith piet&- and shuts up and loc(s ever& heretical mouth that spea(s inAustice against the ,ost %igh+ $3;5) #t+ Theodore of #tudios $86;'931)- one of the most influential and highl&'regarded monastic reformers in the east- entirel& concurs .ith #t+ ,aximus= * .itness before 7od and men that the iconoclasts departed from the bod& of Christ and from the supreme heaven.ard throne in .hich Christ placed the (e&s of the faith- against .hich the gates of hell- that is- the mouths of heretics- have not so far prevailed and shall not prevail because the promise .as made b& the !ne .ho does not deceive+ et therefore the most blessed and apostolic GPopeH Paschal- .orth& of his name- reAoice because he had fulfilled the function of the office of Peter+ $3;6) Despite all of this over.helming- compelling evidence of the Fathers: and the Christian Church:s vie.s on the nature and function of the papac& $east and .est ali(e)- Eastern !rthodox& continues to maintain that the pope possesses onl& a 2primac& of honor-2 as opposed to supremac& and headship over the Church universal $not to mention infallibilit&)+ $3;1) And- of courseProtestantism- .ith fe. exceptions- denies even papal primac&+ That this .as not the vie. of the earl& Church $nor of the Bible itself) has been ampl& demonstrated+ Therefore- it must be

12 respectfull& maintained that Eastern !rthodox& and Protestantism ' not Catholicism ' have departed from ancient- apostolic Tradition in this matter+ Bet more corroboration of Catholic papal claims is to be found in the record of the ecumenical Councils of the Church- the first seven of .hich are full& accepted b& the Eastern !rthodox as authoritative- indeed 2infallible+2 $3;8) ,an& Protestants $especiall& Anglicans and utherans) ac(no.ledge at least the first four as having some sort of authorit& or importance for the development of Christian theolog&+ *t is to these Councils .hich .e no. turn in our historical surve&= Ecu#enical Councils and the Papacy <ames Cardinal 7ibbons and the eminent British Church historian Philip %ughes summari@e the relationship of popes to ecumenical Councils= Ecumenical Councils afford another elo?uent vindication of Papal supremac&+ An Ecumenical or 7eneral Council is an assemblage of Prelates representing the .hole Catholic Church + + + * shall spea( briefl& of the important influence .hich the %ol& #ee exercised in the eight !riental Councils Gthat is- the first eightH + + + The Bishops of Rome convo(ed these assemblages- or at least consented to their convocationC the& presided b& their legates over all of them- except the first and second Councils of Constantinople- and the& confirmed all these eight b& their authorit&+ Before becoming a la. the Acts of the Councils re?uired the Pope:s signature + + + *s not this a stri(ing illustration of the Primac&I The Pope convenes- rules and sanctions the #&nods- not b& courtes&- but b& right+ A dignitar& .ho calls an assembl& together- .ho presides over its deliberations- .hose signature is essential for confirming its Acts has surel& a higher authorit& than the other members+ $3;9) *n no council has it been moved that the bishop of K be promoted to the place of the Bishop of Rome- or that the Bishop of Rome:s vie.s be disregarded- and held of no more account than those of the bishop of an& other maAor see + + + The mist of anti?uit&- at times- no doubt obscures our vie.- but through the mist at its .orst the general shape is ever discernible of a Roman Primac& universall& recognised- and submitted to- albeit $at times) un.illingl& ' recognised and submitted to because- so the bishops believed- it .as set up b& 7od %imself + + + The suggestion that an emperor has- or ever had- a role to pla& is incredible- save to the ecclesiastical archaeologist+ But the pope .as al.a&s all'important in the 7eneral Councilfrom the beginning+ From the time of the first council .hose histor& is at all reall& (no.n to us in detail ' Ephesus ' although the emperor ma& call the council- and the pope assent to and support his initiative- it is the pope .ho- before the council meets- decides the point of belief- .ho directs the bishops of the council that this is the truth- and that it is not to be called into ?uestion= Celestine * in 540- eo * in 560- Agatho in 19/+ $3;;) Council of "icaea $436) Canon #ix of this Council suggests a papal primac&- since Roman 2custom2 appears to be regarded as normative for the Church as a .hole=

13 et the ancient custom .hich is follo.ed in Eg&pt and ib&a and the Pentapolis remain in force- b& .hich the Bishop of Alexandria has the supervision of all those places- since this is also the custom of the Bishop of Rome+ $4//) Council of Constantinople $490) This Council .as neither originall& planned as- nor regarded as- an ecumenical Council- since it consisted of 06/ eastern bishops and no atin bishops- and .as intended to straighten out problems in the east+ *n its Canon 5- the Council proclaimed= 2The Bishop of Constantinople shall have the primac& of honor after the Bishop of Rome- because his cit& is "e. Rome+2 $4/0) Pope eo the 7reat later reAected this Canon $after it .as confirmed illegitimatel& b& eastern Fathers at the Council of Chalcedon in 560) on grounds that it .as contrar& to the 2principle of apostolicit&2 $as Constantinople had no apostolic bac(ground .hatsoever)- and .as compromised b& the 2principle of accommodation2 $.hereb& political happenstance and expedience .ere placed in an inordinatel& loft& position vis'a'vis the Church ' a tendenc& often (no.n as 2caesaropapism-2 under the spell of .hich eastern Christianit& has constantl& fallen pre&)+ Constantinople .as the seat of the B&@antine Emperor- but this- reasoned eo and the Catholic Church- had little to do .ith apostolic or ecclesiastical preeminence+ "evertheless- at least this all'eastern Council still ac(no.ledged the 2primac&2 of the pope+ *t .as later ac(no.ledged as an ecumenical Council b& Pope 7regor& the 7reat $.ho reigned from 6;/'1/5)- although the Canons continued to be reAected b& Rome+ Council of Ephesus $540) #t+ C&ril of Alexandria- as noted in the Council records- .as 2ta(ing the place of Celestine- the most hol& and most reverend chief'bishop of the church of the Romans+2 $4/3) The other bishops are merel& mentioned b& name and see $Celestine M C&ril .as at the head of the list)+ C&ril had alread& consulted the pope for his verdict on the "estorian heres&+ Pope Celestine:s legates declared at the Council .ithout opposition= There is no doubt- it has been (no.n to all centuries- that the hol& and blessed Apostle Peter- the prince and head and pillar of the faith and foundation of the Catholic Churchreceived the (e&s of the (ingdom from our ord <esus Christ + + + %e GPeterH lives even to this time- and al.a&s in his successors gives Audgment+ $4/4) The Council of Ephesus- in its sentence of deposition against the heresiarch "estorius- declares= Whereas + + + .e being necessaril& compelled b& the sacred canons and b& the letter of our most hol& Father and colleague- Bishop Celestine- Bishop of the Roman Church- .ith man& tears- have arrived at this sad sentence against him+ $4/5) The Council Fathers then proclaimed= Celestine is the ne. Paul+ C&ril is the ne. Paul+ Celestine is the guardian of the faith+ Celestine agrees .ith the council+ There is one Celestine- one C&ril- one faith of the councilone faith of the .orld'.ide church+ $4/6) Council of Chalcedon $560) *n this Council- it has been said that the east gave its greatest recognition ever to papal supremac&for Pope eo the 7reat .as ac(no.ledged b& all parties as the 2pillar of orthodox&2 and upholder of the true Christian faith+ <ohn %enr& Cardinal " gives an overvie. of its proceedings=

11 The Council + + + .as attended b& the largest number of Bishops of an& Council before or sinceC some sa& as man& as six hundred and thirt&+ !f these- onl& four came from the Westt.o Roman egates and t.o Africans+ *ts proceedings .ere opened b& the Pope:s egates- .ho said that the& had it in charge from the Bishop of Rome- .hich is the head of all the Churches- to demand that Dioscorus should not sit- on the ground that he had presumed to hold a Council .ithout the authorit& of the Apostolic #ee- .hich had never been done nor .as la.ful to do+ This .as immediatel& allo.ed them+ The next act of the Council .as to give admission to Theodoret- .ho had been deposed at the atrocinium+ The *mperial officers present urged his admission- on the ground that the most hol& Archbishop eo hath restored him to the Episcopal office- and the most pious Emperor hath ordered that he should assist at the hol& Council + + + *n the second #ession + + + the Creed of "icaea and Constantinople .as readC then some of the Epistles of #t+ C&rilC lastl&- #t+ eo:s Tome + + + At length the Bishops cried out- This is the faith of the FathersC this is the faith of the Apostles= .e all believe thusC the orthodox believe thusC anathema to him .ho does not believe thus+ Peter has spo(en through eoC the Apostles taught thus+ + + Dioscorus .as tried and condemnedC sentence .as pronounced against him b& the Pope:s egates- and ran thus= The most hol& Archbishop of Rome- eo- through us and this present Council- .ith the Apostle #t+ Peter- .ho is the roc( and foundation of the Catholic Church and of the orthodox faith- deprives him of the Episcopal dignit& and ever& sacerdotal ministr& + + + The Council- after its termination- addressed a letter to #t+ eoC in it the Fathers ac(no.ledge him as constituted interpreter of the voice of Blessed Peter- $.ith an allusion to #t+ Peter:s Confession in ,atthe. 01) and spea( of him as the ver& one commissioned .ith the guardianship of the >ine b& the #aviour+ $4/1) After the Council had completed its .or(- Pope eo received t.o extraordinar& letters= The etter of the Patriarchs to Pope eo the 7reat reads in part= Bou have indeed preserved the faith- .hich has come do.n to us li(e a golden stream at the command of our divine Teacher + + + Bou have poured forth upon the universe the blessings he GPeterH elicited b& his faith+ %ence .e have loo(ed to &ou as to the leader of our religion to our great advantage+ Bou indeed- as the head among the memberspresided here in the person of &our representatives- .ho led the .a& b& their correct counsel+ $4/8) i(e.ise- the etter of Anatolius- Patriarch of Constantinople- to eo= This decree the hol& s&nod and .e have referred to &our %oliness in order to obtain from &ou approval and confirmation + + + For the throne of Constantinople has &our apostolic throne as its father+ $4/9) Third Council of Constantinople $19/'190) %istorian Philip %ughes describes the proceedings of this Council=

1+ *t .as the GpapalH legates .ho opened the proceedings+ Beginning .ith a reference to the dissensions of the last fort&'six &ears Gthe ,onothelite heres&H + + +- all these- the& saidhad been due to the acts of various patriarchs of Constantinople G#ergius- P&rrhus- Paul and PeterC also C&rus of AlexandriaH + + + At + + + the fourth session G"ovember 06- 19/H the patriarch of Constantinople as(ed that the letter of Pope Agatho to the emperor be read- and the profession of faith .hich the 036 bishops had signed+ This .as assented to- these bul(& treatises .ere read out- and Agatho:s authoritative statement of the traditional faith- modelled on the Tome of #t+ greeted .ith shouts that recall the triumphs of 560= *t is Peter .ho is spea(ing through Agatho + + + G*n theH eighth session- ,arch 8 G190H- The emperor put the ?uestion point'blan( to the patriarch of Constantinople- .hether the doctrine of the passages- as actuall& found in the Fathers and in the 7eneral Councils Gconcerning the .ills of ChristH- tallied .ith the letter of Agatho and the profession of faith of the .estern bishops+ The patriarch ans.ered that all this mass of testimon& did indeed bear out that .hat Agatho taught .as the truth of the matter- and so * profess and believe- he said+ And all the bishops present- save a handfulassented li(e.ise + + + The schism of recent &ears + + + .as ended+ $4/;) *n a letter to Emperor Constantine *> after.ards- the bishops described Pope Agatho in man& .a&s .hich suggest that the& believed in his supremac&- using terms li(e 2our most blessed father- and most high pope- the Prince of the Apostles + + + his imitator and the successor to his chair+2 The& concluded that 2through Agatho it .as Peter .ho .as spea(ing+2 $40/) The& also .rote to the pope himself- addressing him as occup&ing 2the first see of the universal Church-2 and 2the chiefest head of the Apostles+2 $400) The emperor- in his edict to the people- declared that the true faith had 2been preserved untainted b& Peter- the roc( of the faith- the head of the ApostlesC in this faith .e live and reign+2 $403) astl&- the emperor .rote to Pope eo **- Agatho:s sucessor= With the e&es of our understanding .e sa. it as if it .ere the ver& ruler of the Apostolic choir- the first chair- Peter himself- declaring the m&ster& of the .hole dispensation- and addressing Christ b& this letter + + + for his hol& letter described in .ord for us the .hole Christ+ We all received it .illingl& and sincerel&- and embraced it- as though the letter .ere Peter himself + + + 7lor& be to 7od- .ho does .ondrous things- Who has (ept safe the faith among &ou unharmed+ For ho. should %e not do so G.ith regard toH that roc( on .hich %e founded %is church- and prophesied that the gates of hell- all the ambushes of hereticsshould not prevail against itI From it- as from the vault of heaven- the .ord of the true confession flashed forth- and + + + brought .armth to fro@en orthodox& + + + $404) Fourth Council of Constantinople $91;'8/) This Council adopted- almost verbatim- the Formula of Pope %ormisdas- a statement .hich had been signed b& some 36/ Eastern bishops in 60;- thus putting to an end the Acacian schism $595'60;)+ The Formula states- among other things= #ince .e cannot pass over the .ords of our ord <esus Christ- .ho sa&s- Thou art Peterand on this roc( * .ill build ,& Church- .hat .as said is confirmed b& facts- because in the Apostolic #ee the Catholic religion has al.a&s been preserved immaculate- and hol& doctrine has been proclaimed+ "ot .ishing- then- to be separated from this faith and doctrine- .e

16 hope to merit to be in the one communion .hich the Apostolic #ee preaches- in .hich #ee is the full and true solidit& of the Christian religion+ $405) !houghts on the .yth of .ass Patristic /0postasy/ The virtual universalit& of patristic vie.s on doctrines li(e infused Austification- regenerative baptism and an 2ultra'realistic2 or literal Eucharist .ould suggest- * thin(- that perhaps the so' called 2Catholic2't&pe vie.s .ere present in (ernel or explicitl& in the apostolic deposit itself- so that there .ould then not be a scenario of biblical M apostolic doctrines out the .indo.+2 The Protestant habituall& assumes $oftentimes .ithout having examined both sides of a debate) that certain things are 2not biblical2C therefore not 2apostolic2 '' .hich supposedl& 2proves2 that the& .ere much later additions $corruptions)+ #o .hen the& see 2Catholic2 notions held en masse b& Fathers- the& immediatel& conclude- based on their erroneous premise- that the Fathers committed mass $albeit m&sterious and inexplicable) apostas& from the original pure apostolic teaching+ %ence the existence of 2mass apostas& m&ths2 in groups such as the anti'Catholic .ings of the Reformed and Anglicanism- Church of Christ- andmar( Baptists- 8th'Da& Adventists- etc+ $as .ell as in cults li(e the ,ormons and <ehovah:s Witnesses)+ The Catholic response is development- development- and development- in that order+ #ome things are present implicitl& in #cripture onl&- but the& are there- and .e don:t totall& (no. all the oral parts of the Tradition .hich .ere passed do.n+ But .e (no. there .as a lot- based on biblical verses such as ,ar( 1=45 $.here the 2man& things2 <esus taught .ere not recorded)- <ohn 01=03<ohn 3/=4/- and 30=36+ *n Aust one da&- the amount of teaching one could have heard from <esus or Paul .ould have been enormous- sometimes perhaps more length& in number of .ords than the entire "e. Testament+ * thin( of- e+g+- <esus: tal( .ith the disciples on the road to Emmaus '' see esp+ u(e 35=38 '' oh- to have been thereE #o there could have been much teaching of that sort .hich .as part of the apostolic deposit- .hich could later be developed along .ith ever&thing else in Christianit&- and could easil& account for 2Catholic stuff2 appearing seemingl& full'blo.n in the earl& Fathers- .hile not so explicit in %ol& #cripture+ Those .ho believe in the Big Apostas& either right after the Bible or in 404 or .ith eo the 7reat in 55/ $or .hatever arbitrar& date the& choose) have to come up .ith some scenario to explain ho. the Fathers thought and vie.ed things and became so rapidl& 2unbiblical2 and 2unProtestant2 $Protestantism being identical to 2biblical-2 of course)+ "one of these scenarios are ver& plausible at all+ FOOTNOTES (The %apacy 2+3. <ee 6a#s&, $o&n Evan(e#is-, The ones of St. Peter, Garden %i-3, 8M: 2o/b#eda3 Ima(e, 194+. 2+1. $aros#av "e#ikan, a prominen- ./-&eran &is-orian o* %&ris-ian do'-rine, 'a##s RomeEs re'ord o* or-&odoK3 ;spo-#ess ,or near#3 spo-#ess0; ,in The Spirit of Eastern Christendom 67889:;88<, %&i'a(o: )niv. o* %&i'a(o "ress, 1971, 1140. 2++. %ross, 5... > E.7. .ivin(s-one, eds., The /0ford Dictionary of the Christian Church ,O2%0, OK*ord: OK*ord )niv. "ress, 2nd ed., 1943, 620. 2+6. von Harna'k, 7do#*, History of Dogma, -r. 8. 9/'&anan, .ondon: 6i##iams > 8or(a-e, 1496, 2nd ed., vo#.2, 1++6. 2+7. <-. 5ran'is de <a#es, The Catholic Controversy, -r. Henr3 9. Ma'ke3, Ro'k*ord, I.: :78 9ooks, 1949 ,ori(. 1+960, 279,241. 2+4. Gibbons, $ames %ardina#, The Faith of /ur Fathers, 8M: ". $. ?ened3 > <ons, rev. ed., 1917, 90 91,93 9+. 2+9. .e--er -o %orin-&ians, 1,1! +9,1. 5rom: $/r(ens, 6i##iam 7., ed. and -r., The Faith of the Early Fathers ,5E50, 3 vo#/mes, %o##e(evi##e, M8: .i-/r(i'a# "ress, 1970, vo#. 1, 7,12. 260. In 7sm/ssen, Hans, e- a#, The =nfinished %eformation, -r. Rober- $. O#sen, 8o-re 2ame, I8: 5ides "/b#is&ers 7sso'., 1961, 41 4+.

17 261. Against Heresies, 3,1,1! 3,3,2 3! $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 1, 49 90. 262. :&e )ni-3 o* -&e %a-&o#i' %&/r'&, 1! $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 1, 220 221. 263. .e--er -o "ope %orne#i/s, +9 ,++0, 11! $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 1, 232. 261. .e--er -o E/sebian 9is&ops o* 7n-io'&, 22! $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 1, 316. 26+. 2e'ree o* 2amas/s, ,5rom %o/n'i# o* Rome in 3420, 3! $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 1, 106. 266. :&e <'&ism o* -&e 2ona-is-s, 2,2! $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 2, 110. 267. <3noda# .e--er o* 7mbrose, <abin/s, 9assian > O-&ers -o "ope <iri'i/s, 12,1! $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 2, 114. 264. %ommen-aries on :Ae#ve o* 2avidEs "sa#ms, 10,30! $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 2, 1+0. 269. 7(ains- $ovinian, 1,26! $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 2, 199. 270. Epis-#e 1+ ,Ari-in( -o "ope 2amas/s0! 'i-ed *rom 8eAman, $o&n Henr3, An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine ,141+! rev. 14740, "ar- 2, '&. 6, se'. 3, no. 4. 271. Epis-#e 16! 8eAman, ibid. 272. .e--er -o Generos/s, +3,1,2 ,'.1000! $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 3, 2. 273. <ermon 131,10! $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 3, 24 ,emp&asis added0. :&e -Ao %o/n'i#s Aere &e#d a- %ar-&a(e and Mi#evis. :&e res'rip-s 'ame *rom "ope Inno'en- I. 271. 7(ains- -&e .e--er o* Mani %a##ed :&e 5o/nda-ion, 1,+ ,Ari--en in 3970! $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 3, +1. 27+. .e--er -o -&e %o/n'i# o* %ar-&a(e, 29,1! $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 3, 141 142. 276. .e--er -o -&e "apa# .e(a-es, 17! $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 3, 141. 277. :&ird .e--er -o I##3rian 9is&ops, in Mi(ne, .a-in 5a-&ers, +0:124! 'i-ed in $aki, <-an#e3, The 2eys of the 2ingdom, %&i'a(o: 5ran'is'an Hera#d "ress, 1946, 190. 274. .e--er -o -&e 9is&ops o* =ienne, 10,1 2! $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 3, 269. 279. .e--er -o 9is&op 7nas-asi/s o* :&essa#oni'a, 11,11! $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 3, 270. 240. <ermons, 1,2! $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 3, 27+. 241. .e--er -o -&e Romans, 3,1! $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 1, 21. 242. %ommen-aries on $o&n, +,3! $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 1, 202. 243. Homi#ies on EKod/s, +,1! $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 1, 20+. 241. Homi#ies, 1,1! $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 1, 311. 24+. Against Heresies, <ermo +6! in $aki, ibid., 4+. 246. %i-ed in 8eAman, ibid., "ar- 1, '&. 1, se'. 3, no. 12. 247. %armen de vi-a s/a, +64 72! 'i-ed in 9enson, Rober- H/(&, The %eligion of the Plain Man, .on( "rairie, M8: 8e/mann "ress, 1906, 113. 244. 7ve##an %o##e'-ion, 19+,3! 'i-ed in "e#ikan, ibid., =o#. 2 o* +: The Emergence of the Catholic Tradition, I./-&eranJ, 1+0. 249. In $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 1, 304. 290. 7## %&r3sos-om L/o-es and in*orma-ion *rom: %&apman, 2om $o&n, Studies on the Early Papacy, .ondon: <&eed > 6ard, 1924, '&. 1: ;<-. %&r3sos-om on <-. "e-er.; 291. <o'ra-esE Church History, *rom Mi(ne, &ree# Fathers, 67:196. <o'ra-es Aas des'ribin( -&e <3nod o* 7n-io'& in 311, and no-ed -&a- i- &ad no represen-a-ives o* -&e Roman see. %i-ed in Empie, "a/# %. > :. 7/s-in M/rp&3, Papal Primacy 4 the =niversal Church, Minneapo#is: 7/(sb/r( "/b. Ho/se, 1971, 236. :&is book is -&e res/#- o* a Coin- o**i'ia# proCe'- o* ./-&eran and %a-&o#i' s'&o#ars. 292. <o@omenEs Church History ,3,100! *rom Empie, ibid., 236. 293. Epis-#e 116 o* :&eodore-, *rom Mi(ne, &ree# Fathers, 43:1321 +! 'i-ed in Empie, "a/# %., :. 7/s-in M/rp&3 > $osep& 7. 9/r(ess, Teaching Authority and !nfalli"ility in the Church, Minneapo#is: 7/(sb/r( "/b. Ho/se, 1940, 319 ,ano-&er o* -&e series o* *r/i-*/# ./-&eran %a-&o#i' dia#o(/es0. 291. %i-ed b3 $ames .iko/dis in 9aram, Rober-, Spiritual )ourneys, 9os-on: <-. "a/# 9ooks > Media, rev. ed., 1944, 206 207! primar3 so/r'e *rom Mi(ne, &ree# Fathers, 91,137 **. 29+. .e--er -o 8avera-i/s ,Ep. 630, *rom Mi(ne, &ree# Fathers, 94:1241! 'i-ed in $aki, ibid., 171. 296. <ee, e.(., 6are, :imo-&3 ,7r'&bis&op ?a##is-os0, The /rthodo0 Church, 8M: "en(/in 9ooks, rev. ed., 1940, 3+ 36,++,+7. "er&aps -&e bes- Or-&odoK -rea-men- o* <-. "e-er and -&e papa'3 is The Primacy of Peter, ed. $o&n Me3endor**, %res-Aood, 8M: <-. =#adimirEs <eminar3 "ress, rev. ed., 1992. Me- -&e &is-ori'a# da-a &ere o/-#ined is s'ar'e#3 -aken in-o a''o/n- in -&is book. 297. 6are, ibid., 13, 210. 294. Gibbons, ibid., 93 91. 299. H/(&es, "&i#ip, The Church ln Crisis1 A History of the &eneral Councils1 >?@9:A;8 ,HG%0, Garden %i-3, 8M: 2o/b#eda3 Ima(e, 1961, 16 17, 1+1.

14 300. $/r(ens, 5E5, vo#. 1, 243. 301. Ibid., 100. 302. H/(&es, HG%, 70. 303. In Mos-, 6i##iam G., Catholic Apologetics Today, Ro'k*ord, I.: :78 9ooks, 1946, 92. 301. %i-ed in 9enson, ibid. , 116! *rom Mansi, 1, 1212. 30+. H/(&es, HG%, 71. 306. 8eAman, ibid., "ar- 2, '&. 6, se'. 3, nos. 11 12,11. 307. In En(#er-, %#emen- %., Catholics and /rthodo01 Can They =niteB, 8M: "a/#is- "ress, 1961, 99. 304. 6orks o* <-. .eo, Ep.101,+! 'i-ed in 9enson, ibid., 117. 309. H/(&es, HG%, 114 1+0. 310. Ibid., 1+1 1++. 311. Ibid., 1++. 312. Ibid., 1+6. 313. Ibid., 1+6. 311. In Gibbons, ibid., 101. ,ain *ndex N #uper' in( #earch Page N ,& Boo(s Page N ,a(e a Tax'Deductible Donation N Church Fathers N Protestantism N #cripture and Tradition Edited and very sli htly revised and e$panded on % June &''() from research ori inally completed *y May (++, -intended for my *oo. A Biblical Defense of Catholicism