One Fold
One Shepherd; One Truth!
Augustine on the Eucharist
May 16th
By Dr Joseph Mizzi
After writing a few sentences about death on my facebook page, someone responded that she did not like what I said. ‘There is nothing to like about it,’ I assured her, ‘except for the glimmer of hope at the end of my entry, namely, that death is not the final word.’ ‘But,’ she replied, ‘that is not what you meant.’ I smiled. Of all people, I should know what I meant.
It is so easy to misunderstand or to misinterpret what others say. This applies to the Bible as well as other writings and speeches. The following quotation from Augustine, and a few similar ones, are often used to prove that the doctrine of transubstantiation was already accepted in the early church. More >
The Brethren of the Lord: Brothers or Cousins?
Apr 20th
I was recently asked if I would write an article about why Jesus placed His mother in the care of the apostle John rather than one of His biological brothers. I thought since the question is centered around the Catholic doctrine of Mary being a perpetual virgin, I would write this as a response to John Martignoni’s Two-Minute Apologetics on the topic.
For those who don’t know, John Martignoni is the author of The Bible Christian Society. He is a Catholic apologist who seems to be somewhat popular with Catholics who have commented on articles I have written here and on an older blog. I like to respond to his material because I think it is fairly through and trustworthy with regards to Catholic doctrinal defense. John addressed four points in his defense of Mary being a perpetual virgin and I will address each one. More >
Historical Repudiation of Roman Papal Authority – Part 3
Apr 10th
Catholic apologist, Steven Ray, published a book in 1999 entitled, “Upon This Rock: St. Peter and the Primacy of Rome in Scripture and the Early Church.” In it, Ray defends the primes that the church in Rome has always held the highest position of authority in the Christian church. To help make his point, Ray summons the help of Ignatius of Antioch for proof that Rome reigned supreme in the church.
Ray focuses on Ignatius’ letter to the church in Rome. After attempting to draw support for Roman supremacy from Ignatius’ salutation, which is absent of any proofs whatsoever and perfectly in line with all his other salutations, Ray highlights this passage from the letter.
“Remember in your prayers the Church in Syria, which now has God for its shepherd, instead of me. Jesus Christ alone will oversee it, and your love [will also regard it].” (Ignatius, letter to the Romans 9)
Regarding this Ray comments in the footnotes as follows:
“He appeals to the Roman church, not only to pray for his Syrian church, but also to preside over her in love…the Roman church alone, among those addressed in Ignatius’ extant letters, is expected to have ‘over-sight’ or ‘care’ for the distant church of Antioch.” (pp138 Note 50)
Amazing, isn’t it? Ray is so polarized in his beliefs that even clear statements are twisted and manipulated to fit his theology. Ignatius clearly said that Christ alone will oversee his church in Antioch, but Ray and other Catholic apologists simply cannot accept that because it destroys their claims of universal Roman authority.
Historical Repudiation of Roman Papal Authority – Part 2
Mar 11th
Did the church acquire the authority of the Apostle Peter, and was Peter the founder of the church in Rome?
I snagged a quote from Catholic apologist, John Martignoni, where he used it in a debate on the primacy of Peter. The quote was taken from here. I am using this quote not so much for what is says, but for what Mr. Martignoni was attempting to use it for. Here’s the quote:
” Tertullian (ca 213 A.D.), “Peter alone [among the Apostles] do I find married, and through mention of his mother-in-law. I presume he was a monogamist; for the Church, built upon him…” The Church is built upon Peter.” (no citation given)
This quote is from Tertullian’s exposition on monogamy, chapter eight, which he wrote after his conversion to Montanism, which happened around 207 A.D. This is important because Martignoni was trying to use Tertullian’s words, “the church is built upon him [Peter]” as evidence that the bishop of Rome was a successor of Peter’s apostolic authority at a time when Tertullian was vehemently opposed to the up-rise in hierarchal authority in the church.
In another work from the same time period, Tertullian lashed out at what he considered the church’s attempts to usurp the authority of Christ. He firmly believed that the authority of all bishops is ministerial not imperial, and that the authority they did possess was contingent upon their character. Specifically Tertullian was upset with the church leadership’s granting pardon of capital sins simply based on the power of the office they held. As a Montanist, Tertullian believed that only prophets and apostles possessed the power to remit or retain sins. If a bishop or presbyter were going to act on the authority given to Peter and the other apostles, they must, according to Tertullian, exhibit prophetic evidence. More >
Historical Repudiation of Roman Papal Authority Part 1: The Foundation of the Church
Feb 5th
“Of so much importance is it to them not to have any proofs for the things which they maintain, lest along with them there be introduced damaging exposures of those things which they mendaciously devise.” (Tertullian 160 – 225 AD)
It is much easier to be audacious while sitting on a horse than it is to muster courage when standing face to face with your opponent. For Catholics the opponent is history and the horse is the magisterium. It is not uncommon for a Catholic to boldly proclaim that the Roman Catholic Church is the very church founded by Christ nearly 2000 years ago. With that goes the assertion that Christ established a church hierarchy through His apostle Peter. They further assert that Peter was the first bishop of the church in Rome and that his authority was passed onto the succeeding bishops on down to the present day.
Most Catholics make these claims, not because they have studied the history, but because they ride on the backs of those to whom they place their trust, the magisterium of the Catholic Church. If the catholic leadership, who are well educated, highly intelligent, and dedicated to study, affirms to the Catholic faithful such claims as I stated above, many will shout it from the rooftops without giving it a second thought.
However, some Catholics, perhaps disappointed by the conduct of the leadership, or finding it difficult to reconcile discrepancies between church doctrine and biblical understanding, are willing to dismount and face the challenge of the historical evidence that simply does not reflect well in the favor of Catholicism. So the challenge here for those astute Catholics who want to defend their doctrine, but are willing to face the evidence against the claims of their church is threefold. More >
Truth: The Alternative to Sacred Tradition
Jan 22nd
One of the primary goals of Catholic apologetics is to convince people that the modern Roman Catholic Church is no different than the post apostolic church of the first few centuries. This claim is put forth in no uncertain terms by the purveyor of the website, staycatholic.com. In his introduction to his essays on the website, the author made the following claim:
“I also refer to the writings of the Early Church Fathers. I do so in order to show that those who were taught by the Apostles believed and interpreted the Scriptures in the same way that the Catholic Church does today.” (Sebastian R. Fama, staycatholic.com/about_the_essays.htm)
In his essay on tradition, the author claims that what Catholics call Sacred Tradition can be traced back to the early Church. He also stated that if traditions cannot be traced back to the early Church they would have to be man-made. So to put his standard for legitimate tradition to the test, I would like to take the two early church examples he used in his essay to prove that the author is mistaken and that Roman Catholic sacred tradition is indeed man-made. Here is an excerpt from the Staycatholic.com essay on tradition where the references to the early church are found.
“Early Christians knew the importance of Sacred Tradition. In the year 200 AD Tertullian wrote, ‘Wherever it shall be clear that the truth of the Christian discipline and faith are present, there also will be found the truth of the Scriptures and their explanation, and of all the Christian traditions’ ( The Demurrer against the heretics 19:3). A few decades later, Origen writes, ‘That alone is to be believed as the truth which is in no way at variance with ecclesiastical and apostolic tradition’ ( Fundamental doctrines 1, preface: 2, circa 225 AD).”
The following is just one of many examples that demonstrate the absurdity of the Catholic claim that their sacred tradition is of apostolical source. More >
Christian Authority: Church or Scripture?
Jan 2nd
In response to the general introduction of “The Church and Tradition”
One of the main points of contention between Catholics and Protestants is what each considers to be the source of Christian authority. Catholics will point to the Catholic magisterium as the supreme authority while Protestants look to the Scriptures as the supreme rule of faith. In his book, The Church and Tradition, Agius objected to the idea that each individual believer could judge for himself the precepts set forth in the word of God. He further asserted that only the church can proclaim what doctrines are to be believed and what practices are to be observed, and whether such doctrines and practices are found in Scripture or not.
The introduction to this book is very short, but in it are two quotes from writers who wrote during the period of church history known as the ante-Nicene period. The ante-Nicene period is the time in church history before the council of Nicea, which was held in the year, 325. Both quotes – one from a second century bishop named, Irenaeus and the other from a third century presbyter named, Tertullian – are intended by Agius to support his claim that the rule of faith belongs to the Catholic Church rather than to each one’s own interpretation of Scripture. More >
The Plight and Flight of the Puritans
Oct 30th
There has never been a country like it nor can any ancient kingdom compare. It was built upon the principles found within the pages of Sacred Text and sustained by the faithfulness of God. Thrust upon her shores were men, women, and children whose destiny was to build a Christian nation. Driven by both persecution and a passionate drive for Gospel liberty, they came to America. They laid the foundation of a nation that would become the symbol of freedom for the entire world. They were simple God fearing devout Christians known as the Puritans.
Looked upon as heretics by Catholics and fanatics by many Protestants, Puritans suffered greatly being persecuted by both. But it was their aspirations that were essential in the shaping of American politics and culture. To discover who the Puritans were and why they came to America, we must go back into history about 500 years to a time when kings ruled and the title to religion was held by the state.
The Church and Tradition in Context (CTIC) Project
Oct 16th
Introduction
What is the CTIC Project?
C.T.I.C. stands for “Church and Tradition in Context.” It is a series of articles addressing the claims of a book written by Msgr. George Agius called, “Tradition and the Church.” The book was written in 1928 and was updated and rereleased in 2005 by TAN books. Many Catholics consider this book to be the quintessential guide on the validity Catholic tradition. The publisher even goes so far as to call the book, “providential,” and asserts that if a person reads it, he will “never question the nature of Tradition again.”
Here is one published review:
This book exposes all aspects of Tradition, so that once a person has read his book, he will never question the nature of Tradition again and will have a healthy respect for what has been handed down to us from the Apostles. Though this is an excellent book to help Protestants understand the role of Tradition, every priest, bishop and cardinal, every seminarian and everyone who considers himself to be an informed Catholic should also read this providential book – which is reappearing at a crucial time in the history of the Church, to help clarify our understanding about the nature of the Deposit of Faith and how we should all revere and cherish the Tradition of the Church…that Church which is the vehicle of our salvation.
And here is what a reader had to say…
“This Catholic book debunks the Protestant views of “sola scriptura” “sufficiency of scripture” and supremacy of private interpretation. Any Protestant who reads this book will have heartburn, for sure. Catholics who have even read the Catechism of the Catholic Church need to read this exhaustive (310 page) book on why Catholicism is the Church of Jesus Christ. I may as well say that here, because that is what the book says. And, more than that, the book proves it — from scripture.
Anyone who wants to be a Protestant needs to climb over the insurmountable arguments in this book, to be intellectually honest. Protestantism is actually a rejection of scripture, because you have to reject so much scripture to be a Protestant. You have to reject “the whole gospel” to pick and choose the verses that make you feel good. With all due respect, the book shows AND SAYS that Protestantism is contradictory, inconsistent, unbiblical, and unhistorical. No one should be mislead now about what is in this book. I’ve said it.” (R. Luczak, Posted on Amozon.com)
The CTIC project will not only clime over the so-called “insurmountable” evidence of this book; it will examine it with a fine-toothed comb and compare it to the contextual evidence of history and Scripture.
Agius’ book is apologetic in nature and was written in response to the Protestant doctrines of “Sola Scriptura” and “Privet Judgment.” The CTIC Project is not a defense of Protestantism or any of its doctrines. The project is simply a critical examination of the evidence Agius claimed as support for Sacred Tradition as presented in his book, Tradition and the Church.
About the Author, Msgr. George Agius, from catechismclass.com:
“Msgr. George Agius, D.D., J.C.D. was a priest that served in the various dioceses throughout the United States and abroad, and studied in Rome with the (then) future pope Pius XII. He spent much of his life and priestly ministry studying in order to help meet the challenges that confronted the Church in the 1920’s. It was during this time that he wrote Tradition and the Church, which was originally published in 1928, largely in response to Protestant doctrines of Sola Scriptura and private judgment.”
The History of Infant Baptism and Original Sin
– Part 6: Augustine
Sep 11th
The fifth century brings the final chapter to our subject. It’s where the doctrines of infant baptism and original sin are thrust into victory by the influential and increasingly powerful leadership of the church. Among those leaders was the influential and highly revered, Augustine of Hippo.
Augustine was a philosopher who converted to Christianity when he was about 33 years old. He became bishop of Hippo when he was 41 years old. As bishop Augustine essentially defined the doctrine of original sin in the context of infant baptism. In his writings against the Pelagians there is evidence of at least three differing and popular philosophies concerning the spiritual state of an infant at birth. The two primary, and possibly only, philosophies opposed by Augustine were these that he addressed in his writings:
“Infants are absolutely pure and free from all sin, whether original or actual; and those who suppose that so soon as born, infants have contracted actual sins of their own, from which they need cleansing by baptism.” (Merits of remission of sin and Infant Baptism 1:64)
The latter demonstrates a fair amount of confusion. As far as most were concerned, the church had been baptizing infants since the time of Christ, but reasons as to why conjured questions and theories. As we saw with Origen and Tertullian, people saw infants as innocent and pure, but conversely, they were taught by tradition that infants were also in need of baptism. And we saw how the collision of the two met head on in a letter written by Cyprian, where he logically concluded that infants must possess innate strains of Adam’s sin, or else why would they be in need of baptism. Incidentally, Cyprian is the only historical reference mentioned by Augustine in his thesis, and whose logic he adopted.
But Augustine goes much further in his assessment of the state of infants. He argues at length from Scripture using every implicit interpretation possible to make his case. And the case Augustine makes is nothing short of appalling in the eyes of those who see in infants the innocents of God’s creation. More >
Recent Comments