tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post8364185975548491377..comments2024-03-27T17:15:37.606-04:00Comments on Triablogue: Newman, “The Roman Catholic Hermeneutic”, and Rome’s Foundational AssumptionRyanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17809283662428917799noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-52353633961732175032011-12-02T12:52:15.974-05:002011-12-02T12:52:15.974-05:00Episcopacy established in second century. But acco...Episcopacy established in second century. But according to Jerome not of "veritate dominicae dispositionis."<br />http://www.stempublishing.com/authors/darby/ECCLESIA/20024E.html<br /><br />Re: Newman on development:<br />"What finally led Dr. Newman to be satisfied with Romanism, which has confessedly a multitude of doctrines unknown to the primitive church, was the principle of development. He was far down the hill, no doubt, long before; but that plunged him into its waters. Now in the Person of Christ, and the value of His work before God, there can be no development. He is the same — and so is the efficacy of His work — yesterday, to-day, and for ever. I or Dr. Newman may grow in the knowledge of Christ. Faithful zeal may resist and dispel errors which arise, and by which Satan seeks to cloud the truth and overthrow faith; but there cannot be a development of the infinitely perfect and completely revealed Person of the Son of God, in whom dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. Dr. Newman may find (in spite of Bishop Bull, and as Pettau has admitted) that: the ante-Nicene fathers were worse than obscure as to the divinity of the blessed Lord; but Paul is not, who declares that the fulness of the Godhead (theotes not theiotes, that is, proper Deity, not divine character simply) dwells in Him bodily; John is not, who declares, He is the true God, was with God, and was God; and the New Testament, so plainly and blessedly making Christ known to us, is not. There He is Immanuel, Jesus — Jehovah the Saviour. He may rejoice that the Nicene Council re-affirmed this truth. But to say that this was development, and that the church of God for three centuries did not know the true divinity of Christ is high treason against Christ and the truth. It is the folly of a mind who, to excuse itself and make out a point, gives up all fundamental truth — does not possess it. It may lead to Romanism — I dare say it does; I am sure it does not lead to God. The apostle tells us, on this very head, "Let that therefore abide in you, which ye have heard from the beginning. If that therefore which ye have heard from the beginning shall remain in you, ye also shall continue in the Son, and in the Father." There might be the rejection of heresies, as Arianism, whose source was in Platonism and philosophy, or of other similar evil doctrines; but it was not to develop but to maintain what was from the beginning. So the apostle Paul, "But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned, . . . knowing of whom thou hast learned them." I admit no development: that is popery."<br />From: http://www.archive.org/stream/a567237300darbuoft#page/n33/mode/2upHoldonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17729300396532472073noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-31509655102766835782011-12-02T12:47:09.116-05:002011-12-02T12:47:09.116-05:00"Newman, “The Roman Catholic Hermeneutic”, an...<b>"Newman, “The Roman Catholic Hermeneutic”, and Rome’s Foundational Assumption"</b><br /><br />The force of the arguments, while more than sufficient for many, simply do not penetrate the heads and hearts of the Called to Communion Crowd, Dave Armstrong, and other Catholic epologists.Truth Unites... and Divideshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08891402278361538353noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-62970342184723905502011-12-02T10:39:31.839-05:002011-12-02T10:39:31.839-05:00"Peter - whom the Lord chose first and upon w..."Peter - whom the Lord chose first and upon whom He built His church - did not insolently claim anything to himself. Nor did he arrogantly assume anything when Paul later disputed with him about circumcision. <b> He did not say that he held the primacy and that he needed to be obeyed by novices and those lately come!"</b> (emphasis added.)<br /><br />St. Cyprian.Paulhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00759432774174066023noreply@blogger.com