SRR #87 The Diving Board, Ep 1 - The Conversion of Ray Ryland, Part 1

ThornCrown Network iconThornCrown Network

0 views

0 comments

TPW 23 | Response to Vines's "God and the Gay Christian" - Part 2

00:02
I do a podcast. I'm not interested in your podcast. The anathema of God was for those who denied justification by faith alone.
00:13
When that is at stake, we need to be on the battlefield, exposing the air and combating the air.
00:24
We are unabashedly, unashamedly, Clarkian. And so, the next few statements that I'm going to make,
00:30
I'm probably going to step on all of the Vantillian toes at the same time. And this is what we do at Simple Riff around the radio, you know.
00:37
We are polemical and polarizing Jesus style. I would first say that to characterize what we do as bashing is itself bashing.
00:57
It's not hate. It's history. It's not bashing. It's the Bible. Jesus said, woe to you when men speak well of you, for their fathers used to treat the false prophets in the same way.
01:13
As opposed to, blessed are you when you have been persecuted for the sake of righteousness. It is on.
01:23
We're taking the gloves off. It's time to battle. Hello there.
01:31
This is Timothy F. Kaufman coming to you on Simple Riff Armando radio. Today we are starting a new podcast called
01:39
The Diving Board. It is in parallel with our series on eschatology called The Danielic Imperative.
01:45
Our new series, The Diving Board, is an analysis of the conversion testimonies of people who have become
01:51
Roman Catholic. This is something I've wanted to do for a while. It is an important series because of how effective the conversion testimonies can be.
02:00
Many intelligent people fall for the arguments put forth by Roman Catholic converts. And each time
02:05
I read one, I am shocked at the lack of scholarship and integrity in the arguments that are repeated by those who convert.
02:12
I have read so many of these conversion testimonies and they all come down to one thing. An argument that Roman Catholicism is the only religion with a legitimate claim to apostolicity.
02:23
To prove it, the Roman Catholic convert attempts to establish a continuity between the Roman Catholicism of the late 4th century with the
02:30
Catholicism of the first 3 centuries. I use that term deliberately. The early church considered itself
02:36
Catholic or universal. But it did not consider itself Roman Catholic. In fact, that is one of the first arguments that is made to prove continuity.
02:45
That the early church called itself Catholic. For example, the
02:50
Roman Catholic apologist will often try to make the case that in the early church, a traveling Christian would enter a town and instead of asking where any particular denomination meets to worship, he would instead ask where the
03:02
Catholic church meets to worship. See? There was only one denomination in the early church and it was
03:08
Catholic. Therefore, everyone needs to convert to Roman Catholicism, Mother Church.
03:14
Well, it is a funny argument with a tremendous invalid logical leap at the end of it. And we will kick off this series by addressing it.
03:22
In the first few centuries of Christianity, a traveling Christian would enter a town and instead of asking where the
03:28
Roman Catholic church meets to worship, he would ask where the Catholic church meets to worship. The early church was not
03:34
Roman Catholic. And nobody would have known what you were talking about if you were to ask where you could find the
03:39
Roman Catholic church. Unless, of course, you were actually in the city of Rome. If you were in Alexandria, you would ask for the
03:46
Alexandrian Catholic church. If you were in Antioch, you would ask for the Antiochian Catholic church.
03:52
And if you were in Smyrna, you would ask for the Smyrnaean Catholic church. It was not until the latter part of the 4th century that the idea of a centrally located religion based in Rome became a part of the vernacular.
04:04
Lacking evidence for a Roman Catholic church any earlier than that, Roman Catholic apologists pretty much invent the continuity that would be necessary to prove the apostolicity of the
04:12
Roman religion. And that's what we're going to address today in the first podcast of our series.
04:18
And in fact, we will address it in pretty much every episode because the presumption of apostolic continuity is the centerpiece of the
04:24
Roman argument. What we're going to cover in this episode is a speech given by Father Ray Ryland, who converted from the
04:32
Episcopalian church to Roman Catholicism. The video we are covering today is entitled, Papal Authority and the
04:38
Early Church. And it comes to us from a 2004 conference by the Coming Home Network, a ministry founded by former
04:45
Protestants who have crossed over to Rome, believing that it is the true church. Yes, we know that we are 14 years behind in our assessment of the conference.
04:54
And frankly, we've been a little bit busy, but the arguments never get old. So we don't need to have a fresh conference in order to interact with the silly arguments they make.
05:02
The conference was called Deep in History, based on a statement that Cardinal Newman once made about his own journey from Anglicanism to Roman Catholicism.
05:11
He is arguably one of the most famous converts to Roman Catholicism because of his high position prior to and after converting.
05:19
He was an Anglican priest until his conversion to Roman Catholicism in 1845. He was ultimately appointed to the
05:25
Pope's College of Cardinals and wrote prolifically as an apologist for Roman Catholicism. His famous saying was,
05:32
To be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant. And it comes from his introduction to what is arguably his most famous work,
05:40
On the Development of Christian Doctrine. He wrote, Whatever history teaches, whatever it omits, whatever it exaggerates or extenuates, whatever it says and unsays, at least the
05:51
Christianity of history is not Protestantism. If ever there were a safe truth, it is this,
05:57
To be deep in history is to cease to be a Protestant. That statement was the inspiration for the
06:03
Deep in History conference sponsored by the Coming Home Network. The meaning is that if a
06:08
Protestant will simply be honest in the face of history, the rest will take care of itself. And that is what
06:14
Fr. Ray Ryland claimed to do, be honest in the face of history. Fr.
06:20
Ray Ryland's talk, Papal Authority and the Early Church, is available at the Coming Home Network webpage, and we encourage our subscribers to watch or listen to the whole thing.
06:29
It is very revealing. And to the unequipped Protestant, it can come across as very convincing. But it is not at all compelling because of how fundamentally dishonest with history,
06:39
Ray Ryland must be in order to make a case for the historicity of his church and papal authority.
06:45
In fact, I'll just come out and say it. He's playing in the kiddie pool, and has not ventured into the deep end at all.
06:52
His whole talk is 40 minutes, but we are only going to interact with a few of his claims as they regard papal authority in the first three centuries of the church.
07:00
And we will just say at the outset that they are very shallow arguments indeed. The truth is, to be deep in history is to cease to be
07:08
Roman Catholic, and that is why Roman Catholicism cannot venture too deeply into history without losing its footing.
07:15
There is a lot of posturing and hand -waving with claims to antiquity, but in the end, the honest
07:20
Roman Catholic apologist knows very well that he cannot find Roman Catholicism in the early church.
07:25
Even Cardinal Newman, in his famous essay, acknowledged this. Even while claiming that to be deep in history is to cease to be a
07:32
Protestant, Newman also confessed that he could find Roman Catholicism no earlier than the 4th century.
07:39
And to find it earlier than that, he had to fill in a lot of missing history, and acknowledged that his starting assumption was the presumption of apostolic continuity, which, as it turns out, is an easily falsifiable assumption.
07:51
We will return to that presumption of apostolic continuity repeatedly in this series, but for now, let's dive into the deep end of the history pool so that we may offer a critique of Ray Ryland's conversion.
08:03
Let's just start with Ryland's appeal to the early church's deference to papal authority. His first reference is to a letter of Clement, the
08:11
Bishop of Rome, to the church at Corinth. This is a letter that is dated toward the end of the first century.
08:17
The church at Corinth had experienced a division and rebellion in the ranks, and the elders of Corinth wrote to Clement to ask for advice.
08:25
Clement wrote back to Corinth, and this is taken by Ryland to mean that the church at Corinth deferred to Rome's authority in a matter of church discipline.
08:34
I will let Ryland comment on the letter, and then we will provide some additional commentary. Ryland's comments on Clement are abbreviated because an earlier speaker had covered the matter in some detail, but we will want to interact specifically with Ryland's points.
08:49
Now, Ray Ryland. Let's take a few samplings of the exercise of papal authority, just a few samplings from the early centuries.
08:59
Dr. Marchner took us through one of those samplings, the letter of Clement in 96
09:05
AD to the church at Corinth. He healed the schism. He mentioned the fact that they could have appealed to the
09:11
Patriarch of Jerusalem. They could have appealed to the Patriarch of Alexandria. They also could have appealed to the
09:17
Apostle John himself, who was still alive. According to Clement of Alexandria and Tertullian, he was still alive then, and he was much closer geographically to Corinth than was
09:29
Rome. They could have had an apostle. The beloved apostles settled their problems. To whom did they appeal?
09:36
They appealed to the successor, Peter. Let me read to you what he wrote to them, a section of what he wrote to them.
09:43
When Clement wrote to them, he said, You therefore, he's talking to the insurgents, he says,
09:49
You therefore, the prime movers of the schism, submit to the presbyters, and bending the knees of your hearts, accept correction and change your minds.
09:57
And he called on them to be obedient to what we have written through the Holy Spirit. You see the clear implication there?
10:06
Then he spoke of Jesus Christ, and St. Clement said to the insurgents, But should any disobey what has been said to him by Christ through us, get that?
10:15
Christ through us, let them understand they will entangle themselves in transgression and no small danger.
10:22
Very clearly perceives himself as speaking with the authority of Christ. Now, there are several rather bold assumptions made by Ryland, and we'll have to spend some time on each one.
10:34
First, he makes an argument that Corinth was geographically closer to Jerusalem and Alexandria, and could have appealed to them, or to the
10:41
Apostle John, who was supposedly still living in Ephesus at the time. But instead, the Corinthians appealed to Rome.
10:48
Now keep that in mind. Ryland said that they could have appealed to the Apostle John, but did not.
10:53
And this is presented by Ryland as evidence of a widespread deference to the successor of Peter in Rome.
11:00
We are highlighting this because it will be important when we get to the next section, and we will come back to it.
11:06
But before we go much farther, there is a piece of history with which every Christian ought to be familiar, because Roman Catholicism would actually prefer that you be ignorant of it.
11:14
The piece of history with which we must all be familiar is that the early churches wrote letters to each other, all the time.
11:21
Yes, a lot of letters. And they wrote to each other in a spirit of collegiality and of brotherly admonition and correction, asking for and giving advice and accepting correction.
11:32
Everybody did this. In fact, just prior to the Council of Nicaea, Alexander of Alexandria, who was the first to depose
11:39
Arius, the namesake of the Arian Controversy, addressed a letter to the whole church throughout the world, saying how important it is for everyone to write to each other, all the time, about what they are doing.
11:51
Here is his opening line, now quoting from Alexander of Alexandria, the deposition of Arius.
11:57
Greeting in paragraph one. To our beloved and most reverend fellow ministers of the
12:04
Catholic Church in every place, Alexander sends greetings in the Lord. Since the body of the
12:09
Catholic Church is one, and it is commanded in Holy Scripture that we should keep the bond of unanimity and peace, it follows that we should write and signify to one another the things which are done by each of us, that whether one member suffer or rejoice, we may all either suffer or rejoice with one another.
12:28
Now, let me just observe that Alexander did not say, since the body of the
12:33
Catholic Church is one, it follows that we should get all of our advice and correction from a single source in Rome.
12:39
No, that did not even cross his mind and was a concept completely foreign to the early church. What was common was to write opinions and reports on issues they were facing and let other bishops comment on them and provide guidance or insight or feedback.
12:53
That is how the early church lived and practiced the faith as the church grew and spread across the known world.
12:59
The letters went in many different directions from and to many different congregations, but Ryland has highlighted a single instance and wants you to conclude in your mind that the standard practice of the day was for churches to write to Rome for advice.
13:13
Now, there are a couple points I will make here. First, I would like to give you a sampling of how often these kinds of letters were exchanged.
13:21
Yes, it is true Corinth wrote to the Church of Rome and Clement wrote back to the church at Corinth and asked the
13:27
Corinthians to write back and let him know how they were progressing. That's from Clement to the Corinthians, paragraph 65.
13:35
Ignatius, the bishop of Antioch, at the time wrote letters to Ephesus, Tralas, Magnesia, Rome, Philadelphia, and Smyrna and asked them to write letters back to him, as indicated by Ignatius of Antioch to the
13:48
Smyrnaeans, chapter 11, and to elect delegates who could journey to the church at Antioch to send greetings from their churches.
13:55
That's from Ignatius of Antioch to Polycarp, chapter 7. The church at Philippi wrote to Polycarp, bishop of Smyrna, to ask his advice, and Polycarp of Smyrna wrote back to Philippi, saying,
14:06
These things, brethren, I write to you concerning righteousness, not because I take anything upon myself, but because you have invited me to do so.
14:14
That's Polycarp to Philippi, chapter 3. In the letter to Polycarp, the church at Philippi requested that their letter to him be duplicated and forwarded to Antioch, and further requested that copies of Ignatius' letters be sent to Philippi, and Ignatius wrote to Polycarp requesting that the letter from Philippi be forwarded to him.
14:34
Polycarp agreed to all of these requests, as indicated in his letter to Philippi, chapter 13.
14:40
And when Polycarp died, the church at Smyrna wrote to Philomelium, saying, To the church of God which dwells at Philomelium, and to all the parishes of the
14:48
Holy Catholic Church in every place, mercy and peace and love from God the Father be multiplied.
14:54
That's a quotation recorded for us by Eusebius, Church History, book 4, chapter 15.
14:59
And the church at Smyrna further requested that the letter be copied and sent to other churches that were even more remote.
15:06
That's from the Martyrdom of Polycarp, chapter 20. Take any one of these letters in isolation, subject it to a clinical analysis intent on a preferred outcome, and one can prove the primacy of any
15:16
Episcopal seat in the early church. But such a skewed analysis requires that we ignore the plain ecclesiological expressions in those very letters.
15:25
When read in context, the emergent ecclesiology of the early church does not have them deriving their authority from a chief shepherd presiding in Rome over all apostolic congregations.
15:35
Rather, there was a mutual collegiality among them, none of them presuming to be in charge of the other, Christ alone being the chief shepherd.
15:43
And this brings me to my second point. It is important to know about all the epistles that were exchanged between the early congregations because sometimes another bishop would write to Rome to encourage their erring presbyters and rebuke them for creating a schism.
15:57
And then the bishop of Rome would write back to that bishop, thanking him for correcting his erring flock.
16:03
Ray Ryland does not mention those letters. What he does is isolate the letters in which a bishop of one church asks the bishop of Rome for advice and the letters in which the bishop of Rome gives advice and asks you to conclude a position of primacy in Rome.
16:17
It is a common deception in which the Roman apologist relies on your ignorance of history and lets you conclude invalidly that you are deep in history when you are in fact still at the shallow end of the history pool.
16:29
The fact that Ryland has done so here will become apparent as we proceed today. But for now, let me give an example of when a congregation in Rome sought the counsel of others when it was in the exact same situation that Corinth faced.
16:42
Ryland does not mention these because if he were to read into these what he has read into the correspondence between Rome and Corinth, he would have to conclude that Rome deferred to Carthage and Carthage was the chief episcopal seat of the early church.
16:54
Consider this example. In the 3rd century, there was a disagreement in the Roman congregation and a competing bishop had been ordained and there erupted a schism in the early church at Rome.
17:06
Cyprian of Carthage wrote to the erring presbyters and rebuked them demanding that they believe and acquiesce in his letters.
17:13
Now citing from Cyprian of Carthage's Epistle to the Roman Schismatics, Epistle 43.
17:48
That is what is neither right nor allowable to be done. Now based on Cyprian's rebuke, the erring presbyters returned to the rightfully elected bishop in Rome whereupon the
18:09
Roman bishop wrote to Cyprian to notify him of the return of the schismatics. That's Epistle 45 of Cyprian.
18:16
And the schismatics wrote to Cyprian to notify him of their repentance and return to the unity of the church.
18:22
That's Epistle 49. Remember what Ryland said about the letter of Clement to Corinth? Just think about that as you hear the bishop of Carthage intervening in a similar schism in the
18:31
Roman church. If I were to read these letters the way Ray Ryland read the letter of Clement to Rome, to the
18:36
Corinthians, I would have to say that the bishop of Carthage was the head of the church because Cyprian had the right to the schismatics command that they believe and submit based on his letter and both the bishop of Rome and the schismatics wrote separately to Cyprian to let him know the outcome and to thank him for it.
18:52
In isolation, that sure sounds like the bishop of Carthage pretty much ran the ancient church. But we ought not read these letters in isolation.
19:00
But I can say that Ray Ryland read the letter of Clement to Corinth in isolation in order to make it look like the bishop of Rome ruled the early church.
19:08
In another letter, the Roman congregation wrote to Pope Cyprian thanking him for his rigorous discipline that he had administered.
19:17
Now reading from the letter of the presbyters and deacons abiding at Rome to Cyprian. Epistle 29, paragraph 1.
19:27
The presbyters and deacons abiding at Rome to Pope Cyprian. Greeting! When, beloved brother, we carefully read your letter which you sent by Fortunatus, the subdeacon, we were smitten with a double sorrow and disordered with a twofold grief that there was not any rest given to you in such necessities of the persecution and that the unreasonable petulance of the lapsed brethren was declared to be carried even to a dangerous boldness of expression.
19:55
But although those things which we have spoken of severely afflicted us in our spirit, yet your rigor and the severity that you have used according to the proper discipline moderates the so heavy load of our grief and that you rightly restrain the wickedness of some and, by your exhortation to repentance, show the legitimate way of salvation.
20:16
And again in epistle 30, paragraph 1. They confess their crimes and degeneracy to Cyprian.
20:23
And what is most telling, this occurred during a time when the Roman congregation quote, had no bishop appointed as yet because the previous bishop had been martyred.
20:33
And though many of the surrounding churches had recommended they appoint a bishop, they deferred instead to Cyprian's advice that they call a church council to settle other more pressing matters first, that is, to determine what should be done with the
20:46
Christians who had denied Christ during the persecution but still wanted to get back into the church after the persecution had passed.
20:53
They were called the lapsed. And it was a rather controversial matter in the church at the time.
20:58
Here's what the Roman congregation said to Cyprian about the fact that there was no bishop currently appointed in Rome and there would not be one until after they had time to call a council to deal with the lapsed.
21:10
Now citing from a letter from the congregation at Rome to Cyprian, epistle 30, paragraph 5.
21:16
Since the departure of Bishop Fabian, of most notable memory, we have had no bishop appointed as yet on account of the difficulties of affairs and times who can arrange all things of this kind and who can take account of those who are lapsed with authority and wisdom.
21:32
However, what you also have yourself declared in so important a matter is satisfactory to us that the peace of the church must first be maintained, then that an assembly for council be gathered together with bishops, presbyters, deacons, and confessors, as well as a laity who stand fast, we should deal with the case of the lapsed.
21:52
Again, epistle 30, paragraph 5. Once those matters were settled, they could return to the less important matter of having a bishop in Rome, according to paragraph 8 of the same letter.
22:04
And here is the closing sentence of the letter from the Roman congregation to Cyprian of Carthage. The Roman congregation was not worried about appointing a new bishop because they had
22:22
Cyprian of Carthage to guide them. Just think about the significance of that letter to Cyprian. In Roman Catholicism, there are few things more important than electing a new bishop of Rome.
22:32
But the congregation in Rome did not think it was that important and agreed with Cyprian that the peace of the church must first be maintained by calling a council to deal with the lapsed and that they could choose a bishop at a later, more convenient time.
22:45
If Ryland were to look at those exchanges between Rome and Carthage in the same way that he looked at the exchanges between Rome and Corinth, he would have to conclude that the early church thought
22:53
Carthage, not Rome, was the chief episcopal seat of the church and that Cyprian was its pope. Our point is simply that the congregations all wrote to each other and we need to understand that as we look at each letter individually.
23:06
It was not unusual for bishops in the various cities to send letters to one another seeking counsel and advice on various issues and also letting the various churches know what position they had taken on various issues that had come up.
23:17
Ryland found one letter that seemed to support his assumption and he did not go any deeper into history than that.
23:24
Okay, so let's move on to his next point. He read a section of Clement's letter and took it to mean that Clement believed the
23:31
Holy Spirit was speaking through him to the church at Corinth and he had read another section and took it to mean that Clement believed he was speaking with the authority of Christ.
23:41
Let me play the clip on the Holy Spirit. Returning now to Ryland's argument. When Clement wrote to them, he said,
23:49
You therefore, he's talking to the insurgents, he says, You therefore, the prime movers of the schism, submit to the presbyters and bending the knees of your hearts, accept correction and change your minds.
24:01
And he called on them to be obedient to what we have written through the Holy Spirit. You see how they declare implication there?
24:09
Okay, now here is the paragraph immediately preceding the one Ryland was quoting, just so you have the context.
24:15
Now citing Clement to the Corinthians, paragraph 56. Those exhortations by which we admonish one another are both good and highly profitable, for they tend to unite us to the will of God, for thus says the
24:53
Holy Word. Clement then proceeds from that point to cite scripture after scripture after scripture about the
25:00
Lord's chastening unto repentance. Clement is not asking them to submit to him, but to the scriptures and then goes on to cite a lot of scriptures about accepting correction from the
25:10
Lord. From that point, Clement continues in the next paragraph, the one Ryland cited in isolation, and notice that Clement has simply continued in his line of thought by citing
25:20
Proverbs 1, 22 -33, in which the Holy Spirit is mentioned. Here is what
25:26
Clement wrote, imploring the rebellious presbyters to submit, now citing from chapter 57 of the same letter.
25:34
You therefore, who laid the foundations of this sedition, submit yourselves to the presbyters and receive correction so as to repent, bending the knees of your hearts.
25:44
Learn to be subject, laying aside the proud and arrogant self -confidence of your tongue. For it is better for you that you should occupy a humble but honorable place in the flock of Christ than that, being highly exalted, you should be cast out from the hope of his people.
25:59
For thus speaks all virtuous wisdom, Behold, I will bring forth to you the words of my
26:06
Spirit, and I will teach you my speech. Since I called, and you did not hear, I held forth my words, and you regarded not, but said it not my counsels, and yielded not in my reproofs.
26:18
Therefore I too will laugh at your destruction, etc., etc. Again, notice that Clement quoted a passage of Scripture in which the
26:26
Holy Spirit teaches humility and wisdom and repentance, but Clement does not say he is speaking on behalf of the
26:32
Holy Spirit. In fact, the context shows that Clement believed that they should bend the knee not to him, but rather to the
26:39
Spirit -inspired Word of God, a point he makes explicitly in the preceding paragraph that was not cited by Ryland.
26:45
So where does Ryland actually get the idea that Clement thinks that the words written by him were from the
26:51
Holy Spirit? Well, that's an interesting story by itself. Let me give you a couple translations.
26:57
This is from James A. Kleist's 1949 translation of chapter 63, verse 2 of Clement's letter, which reads,
27:04
You certainly will give us the keenest pleasure if you prove obedient to what we have written through the Holy Spirit, and extirpate the lawless passion of your jealousy, in accordance with the pleas we have made in this letter for peace and concord.
27:18
And another rendering, this from J. B. Lightfoot's 1890 translation, rendering similarly, as if the things written by Clement were the words of the
27:26
Holy Spirit. You will give us great joy and gladness if you render obedience unto the things written by us through the
27:33
Holy Spirit, and root out the unrighteous anger of your jealousy, according to the entreaty which we have made for peace and concord in this letter.
27:42
Now, I will just say that Kleist was a Jesuit and Lightfoot was an Anglican who conceded early primacy to the
27:48
Bishop of Rome, and both of them saw Clement's words here as evidence that the Bishop of Rome, as early as the first century, recognized that he was not merely a bishop of a church in a single city.
27:59
Both translators attach the phrase, through the Holy Spirit, to the things written by us, to make
28:05
Clement appear to claim that his own letter is inspired by the Holy Spirit. But two other Protestant translators render it differently, and attach the phrase, through the
28:14
Holy Spirit, to the repentance that Clement seeks from the Corinthians. This is from Charles Houle's 1885 translation, and he renders it,
28:23
For joy and rejoicing will ye afford us, if, becoming obedient to the things that have been written by us, ye put an end, by the suggestion of the
28:31
Holy Spirit, to the unlawful wrath of your discord, according to the supplication we have made, concerning peace and unity in this epistle.
28:40
And now reading from John Keith's 1896 translation, which renders it, Joy and gladness will ye afford us, if ye become obedient to the words written by us, and through the
28:50
Holy Spirit root out the lawless wrath of your jealousy, according to the intercession which we have made for peace and unity in this letter.
28:57
Our first observation is that Houle's and Keith's translations appear more consistent with Clement's letter, since Clement, throughout, has invoked the
29:05
Holy Spirit's movement in the believer toward an attitude of repentance. See, for example, paragraphs 7, 8, 13, 16, 56, and 57.
29:15
But there is something more that we need to consider in Clement's letter, and it comes to us from chapter 45, verse 2, in which
29:22
Clement implores the Corinthians to investigate the scriptures, which are the true sayings of the Holy Spirit.
29:28
Clement, in his original Greek, actually uses the plural Greek definite article to describe the scriptures as THE TRUTHS OF THE HOLY SPIRIT.
29:37
The Greek is TAS ALETHIS, which are THE TRUTHS, which you can see in Jacques Meunier's series on the
29:44
Greek Fathers, volume 1, column 300. The scriptures, which are the truths of the
29:50
Holy Spirit. The earliest Latin translation, which we find in column 299 of the same volume, reads
29:57
SPIRITUS SANCTI VERA ORACULA, the Holy Spirit's true sayings. What is interesting is that Houle and Keith render it in their faithful English translations the way the original
30:09
Greek and earliest Latin translations rendered it. Here is Houle's 1885 translation.
30:16
LOOK DILIGENTLY INTO THE SCRIPTURES, WHICH ARE THE TRUE SAYINGS OF THE HOLY SPIRIT. And Keith's 1896 translation.
30:24
LOOK CAREFULLY INTO THE SCRIPTURES, WHICH ARE THE TRUE UTTERANCES OF THE HOLY SPIRIT. The Latin and the
30:30
Greek are simple, straightforward, and terse. They are definite in assigning to the scriptures the exclusivity of being true utterances of the
30:37
Holy Spirit. But Cleist and Lightfoot both changed the sense to eliminate from Clement the view that the scriptures alone are the true sayings of the
30:46
Holy Spirit. Cleist's 1949 translation says YOU HAVE LOOKED DEEP INTO THE SACRED WRITINGS, WHICH TELL THE TRUTH AND PROCEED FROM THE HOLY SPIRIT.
30:55
And Lightfoot's 1890 translation renders it YOU HAVE SEARCHED THE SCRIPTURES, WHICH ARE TRUE, WHICH WERE GIVEN THROUGH THE HOLY GHOST.
31:04
Notice that they both eliminate the exclusivity that is present in Clement's original. The scriptures are the truths of the
31:10
Holy Spirit. Cleist says that the scriptures tell the truth and come from the Spirit.
31:16
And Lightfoot says they are true and were given by the Spirit. But Clement says they are the truths of the
31:22
Holy Spirit. And that is why we are so skeptical of Ryland's conclusions on that point.
31:28
If Clement believed that the scriptures are THE truths of the Holy Spirit, or THE true sayings of the
31:34
Holy Spirit, would he really then tell the Corinthians that his own letter was written through the Holy Spirit?
31:39
To do so would be for Clement to elevate his own letter to the level of inspired scriptures, because it would have him saying that his own letter is also a true utterance of the
31:49
Holy Spirit, and thus Scripture. Ryland's reliance on such a questionable translation to arrive at early papal primacy essentially makes
31:57
Clement's letter internally inconsistent, which is why we cannot accept his rendering. Clement cannot simultaneously hold that the scriptures are
32:05
THE true utterances of the Holy Spirit, and also that his own letter is also a true utterance of the
32:11
Holy Spirit, without making his own letter inspired scriptures, something that Clement never would have done.
32:17
Popes have taught that their own infallible sayings are as authoritative as scriptures, but not even the
32:23
Pope at Rome has said his encyclicals are scriptures. Clement was not claiming that his own writings were utterances of the
32:30
Holy Spirit, and he certainly wasn't saying that the Holy Spirit had written the letter to the Corinthians through the
32:35
Bishop of Rome. Okay, so here's the next clip in which Clement is alleged in the next paragraphs to be speaking with the authority of Christ.
32:44
Again, here is Ryland. Then he spoke of Jesus Christ, and St.
32:51
Clement said to the insurgents, But should any disobey what has been said to him by Christ through us, get that?
32:58
Christ through us, let them understand they will entangle themselves in transgression and no small danger.
33:05
Very clearly perceives himself as speaking with the authority of Christ. Okay, let's look at Clement's actual words.
33:13
His actual words were, If, however, any shall disobey the word spoken by him through us, not by Christ through us, let him know that they will involve themselves in transgression and serious error.
33:26
Okay, who is the him to whom Clement is referring? If Ryland had simply read and quoted the letter in context, he and his listeners would have seen that Clement was speaking not of Christ, but of the
33:36
Father, who had been speaking in the first person in Proverbs 1 .23, which Clement had just quoted.
33:43
And thus, Clement had not been claiming to speak with the authority of Christ, but with the authority of the scriptures, an authority with which every
33:50
Christian is equipped to speak, and an authority with which the bishops of the other church constantly address themselves.
33:56
Here are the actual words of Clement's letter, now citing paragraphs 58 and 59. For as God lives, and as the
34:05
Lord Jesus Christ and the Holy Ghost live, both the faith and hope of the elect, he who in loneliness of mind, with instant gentleness, and without repentance, has observed the ordinances and appointments given by God, that is, the
34:19
Father. The same shall obtain a place and name in the number of those who are being saved through Jesus Christ, through whom is glory to him,
34:28
God the Father, forever and ever. Amen. If, however, any shall disobey the word spoken by him,
34:35
God the Father, through us, let him know that they will involve themselves in transgression and serious danger.
34:41
Again, Clement of Rome to the Corinthians, paragraphs 58 and 59, including the section that Ryland cited out of context.
34:51
Obviously, Clement had been referring to the Father, not to Christ when he said, If, however, any shall disobey the word spoken by him.
34:59
And his point was that the presbyters in Corinth should submit not to Rome, but to the scriptures.
35:04
Now just consider the intellectual poverty of Ryland's argument based on these words of Clement. Not only did
35:10
Clement's letter not say the words spoken by Christ through us, but also the person to whom
35:16
Clement was referring was the Father himself, not the Son. If we were to apply Ryland's reasoning to the actual words of Clement, Ryland would have to conclude that Clement was not claiming to speak with the authority of Christ, but with the authority of the
35:29
Father. In reality, all Clement had done was quote the Father, saying in Proverbs 122, that I will pour my spirit unto you,
35:38
I will make known my words unto you. In that section of Proverbs, the reader is cautioned to fear the
35:43
Lord and not despise his reproof. Clement, the Bishop of Rome, was simply saying that we ought to listen to what
35:49
God says to us in the scriptures. It was no claim to papal authority. Okay, let's move on to Ryland's next argument from history.
35:57
This time, Victor, the Bishop of Rome, late in the second century, attempted to excommunicate the
36:03
Asian bishops because they celebrated Christ's Passover and resurrection on a different day than he did.
36:09
It was known as the Easter Controversy. Here is Ryland's argument about how the
36:14
Easter Controversy was settled when Victor tried to excommunicate everyone who disagreed with him. In the second century,
36:22
Pope Saint Victor encountered a problem. His papacy went from 189 to 199.
36:29
In the East, a number of Jewish converts had brought with them Jewish customs, one of which was to observe
36:36
Passover, to observe Easter on the day of Passover, the 14th of the month of Nisan, even though it fell during the week.
36:46
And there were some heretical elements involved in this wrongful celebration of Easter.
36:54
And so Pope Victor, after having called some synods and ascertained what was actually going on there, issued an order saying that the bishops of the
37:02
East, the churches of the East, it was a great portions of the East, that they had to come under the church's rule for following Easter, otherwise they would be excommunicated, the whole section, the whole section.
37:16
Now, if any other bishop had made that threat, he would have been ridiculed, he would have been pointless.
37:24
And this is very significant. Not one, not even one of those Eastern bishops under the threat, not one of them disputed or questioned the
37:33
Pope's authority. They fussed about it, they screamed about it, but they didn't say, you can't do that, you can't do that.
37:40
And so far as we know, that threat was not carried out, and eventually the whole church came under the same rule of observance of Easter.
37:52
Okay, to give you some context, some churches wanted to celebrate Passover on the 14th of the month of Nisan, and some wanted to celebrate it on the
38:00
Lord's Day. In the spirit of diatrophies, that is from 3 John verse 9,
38:06
Victor had directed all episcopates to conform to one rule and excommunicated those who refused.
38:12
Now, I want you to remember Ryland's earlier argument on Clement's letter to the Corinthians, and the fact that Corinth had consulted with the
38:18
Roman bishop rather than with the Apostle John. Now, with that in mind, I want to read to you what the bishops of Asia responded to Bishop Victor of Rome when he told them that they had to celebrate the resurrection on a date of his determination.
38:33
Polycrates, bishop of Ephesus, told Victor that his opinions carried no weight outside of his own episcopate, and that the churches of Asia were unmoved by his presumptuous tone and had no plans to change the date they celebrated
38:43
Easter. Now, citing from Eusebius, Church History, book 3, chapter 31, which contains
38:49
Polycrates' response to Victor. We observe the exact day, neither adding nor taking away.
38:56
For in Asia also great lights have fallen asleep, which shall rise again on the day of the
39:01
Lord's coming, when he shall come with glory from heaven and shall seek out all the saints. Among these are
39:07
Philip, one of the twelve apostles, who fell asleep in Hierapolis, and his two aged virgin daughters, and another daughter, who lived in the
39:15
Holy Spirit and now rests at Ephesus. And moreover, John, who was both a witness and a teacher, who reclined on the bosom of the
39:22
Lord and, being a priest, wore the sacerdotal plate. He fell asleep at Ephesus. And Polycarp in Smyrna, who was a bishop and martyr.
39:31
And Thracius, bishop and martyr from Eumenia, who fell asleep in Smyrna. Why need I mention the bishop and martyr
39:37
Segarus, who fell asleep in Laodicea, or the blessed Pepyrus, or Melito the eunuch, who lived altogether in the
39:44
Holy Spirit, and who lies in Sardis, awaiting the episcopate from heaven, when he shall rise from the dead.
39:50
All these observed the fourteenth day of the Passover, according to the gospel, deviating in no respect, but following the rule of faith.
39:57
And I also, Polycrates, the least of all of you, do according to the tradition of my relatives, some of whom
40:03
I have closely followed. For seven of my relatives were bishops, and I am the eighth. And my relatives always observed the day when the people put away the leaven.
40:12
I, therefore, brethren, who have lived sixty -five years in the Lord, and have met with the brethren throughout the world, and have gone through every holy scripture, am not affrighted by terrifying words.
40:23
For those greater than I have said, We ought to obey God rather than man. Now, keep in mind that the apostle who said,
40:31
We ought to obey God rather than man, is Peter himself, from Acts 5 .29. Polycrates was quoting
40:38
Peter to the bishop of Rome, saying that the bishop of Rome was speaking out of turn. And instead of obeying
40:44
Victor of Rome, who was just a man, Polycrates said he was going to celebrate Easter the way he learned it from his ancestors, and in fact the way the apostles
40:52
Philip and John celebrated it. And keep in mind what Ryland said about the Corinthian controversy, and that the
40:57
Corinthians did not appeal to John for help. Here the Asian bishops reject a claim to papal authority from the bishop of Rome, and Ryland makes no mention of the fact that the other bishops had absolutely no regard for him, and in fact appealed to the other apostles,
41:11
Philip and John, and then quoted Peter to object to Victor's attempt to force their compliance. What is more, even those who agreed with Victor on the date of Easter rebuked him sharply for what he had done.
41:23
Now reading from Eusebius' Church History, Book 5, Chapter 24, Paragraph 9.
41:29
But this did not please all the bishops, and they besought him to consider the things of peace and of neighborly unity and love.
41:35
Words of theirs are extant, sharply rebuking Victor. Among them was Irenaeus. Now think about Ryland's claim that nobody questioned
41:45
Victor's authority to declare the date of Easter and excommunicate everyone who disagreed. The bishop of Rome had spoken on a matter related to the church liturgical calendar, and everyone either criticized his direction as the words of a mere man, or rebuked him sharply for dividing the church.
42:01
Does that really sound like papal authority in the early church? Ryland wants you to think so, but that is because he was swimming in the shallow end of the history pool.
42:09
The truth is, there is no scriptural imperative for celebrating the Lord's Passover on Sunday or on the 14th of the month of Nisan, and everyone should be able to make up their own mind, or come to a mutual agreement if they like.
42:22
It turns out, at the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD, everyone came together and agreed on when it should be celebrated, and they agreed to celebrate on Sunday.
42:31
That was 130 years later, and the bishops of the known world all got together and decided when to celebrate the resurrection.
42:38
Ryland closes this section by saying everyone eventually did what Victor said. The problem was that they did so without the involvement of the
42:45
Bishop of Rome. He did not even attend the Council of Nicaea, and Nicaea made no mention of the
42:51
Bishop of Rome as the reason they did it. And they did it more than a century after Victor tried to excommunicate the
42:56
Asian churches, and everyone stopped him and told him to pipe down. That is not papal authority, and frankly, it is a pretty sorry attempt to prove it.
43:04
I can't imagine a worse argument for papal authority than all the other bishops telling the Bishop of Rome to go pound sand, which is pretty much what everybody told him.
43:14
Ryland concludes by saying that not one, not a single Asian bishop disagreed with Victor's prerogative to do what he did, but we already have the words of Polycrates in his answer to the
43:23
Bishop of Rome. It is better to obey God than man. That does not sound to me like the statement of a man who thought
43:29
Victor had the authority to define the date of Easter or excommunicate those who disagreed. And we have the words of Eusebius of Caesarea responding that even those who agreed with Victor on the date of Easter rebuked him sternly for thinking to excommunicate everyone.
43:43
Does that really sound like papal authority? No one swimming in the deep end of the history pool could possibly conclude papal authority from a universal rejection of Victor's presumption.
43:54
Okay, let's move on to Ryland's next argument on Dionysius of Alexandria in the middle of the 3rd century.
44:03
Or to skip down to, say, to Pope Dionysius in the middle of the 3rd century.
44:11
Well, the Patriarch of Alexandria, named Dionysius, the same name as the Pope of that time, wrote a letter to two of his bishops condemning civilianism.
44:21
Civilianism, also known as modalistic monarchy, and that's the title in which you know it, held that the persons of the
44:28
Godhead are only appearances or modes of presenting God, the one
44:33
God. Now, the bishops to whom the Patriarch wrote, they thought that he had over -emphasized the humanity of our
44:40
Lord, and so they complained in a letter to the Pope. Now, that complaint itself is a recognition of papal authority.
44:48
The Pope answered those bishops setting forth the Church's true faith and made use of a term homoousian, namely of one substance, which 75 years later would be taken up by the
44:59
Council of Nicaea in rejecting Arianism. And he also wrote to Dionysius and he said, let's have an explanation about this.
45:08
Dionysius, the Patriarch, wrote right back, very gracious, he said, of course, of course, and he gave the explanation and satisfied the
45:14
Pope. He clearly acknowledged the Pope's authority over him in matters of doctrine.
45:20
Okay, so we are talking about two bishops named Dionysius, one in Alexandria and one in Rome.
45:28
Ray Ryland has provided you a brief summary of the controversy and some events related to the controversy.
45:34
Bishop Dionysius in Alexandria wrote against a heresy that was occurring in his region, that is, the
45:40
Pentapolis, which is under the jurisdiction of Alexandria. And that is recorded from us in Athanasius, the
45:46
Opinion of Dionysius, paragraph 13. Dionysius of Rome responded by writing against the heresy and apparently against the opinion of Dionysius of Alexandria, correcting some of what the
45:57
Alexandrian Dionysius appeared to be saying. That's from Dionysius of Rome against the
46:02
Sibyllians. Dionysius of Alexandria then restated his opinion in a matter more consistent with the letter of Dionysius of Rome.
46:11
That's from Dionysius of Alexandria, Epistle to Dionysius, Bishop of Rome. Well, first of all, let me start by saying that at no point in the narrative does anyone say that Dionysius in Alexandria submitted to the
46:24
Dionysius in Rome because he was the Bishop of Rome. Ryland had to fill in that detail for you.
46:30
And as it turns out, that detail is actually not true and is by no means congruent with the evidence. Ryland has told you some things that are true and based on those things that are true, he wants you to conclude invalidly that the
46:41
Alexandrian Dionysius clearly believed that the Roman Dionysius, as Bishop of Rome, had authority over him in matters of doctrine.
46:49
Ryland wants you to think that the only possible reason for the way this unfolded is papal primacy.
46:55
But there is another reason, and that reason is actually found in the evidence. There is much, much more to the story and the truth is in the details.
47:03
And there are four in particular that are of note. First and foremost, Dionysius of Alexandria deeply, deeply admired and respected
47:12
Dionysius of Rome as a friend and a clergyman. In fact, we learn from Church historian Eusebius that the
47:18
Alexandrian Dionysius was writing to the Roman Dionysius about doctrinal matters before he was even elected
47:24
Bishop of Rome. This is what Eusebius said, now reading from Eusebius' Church History, Book 7,
47:30
Chapter 7, Paragraph 6. His fourth epistle on baptism was written to Dionysius of Rome, who was then a presbyter, but not long after received the episcopate of that church.
47:44
So, keep that in mind. Writing to Dionysius on a matter of doctrine, while he is not yet the
47:50
Bishop of Rome, shows that he was already consulting him on matters of doctrine before he was
47:55
Bishop, and his office of Bishop was not the reason he was consulting with him. Second, the way
48:00
Dionysius, as Bishop of Alexandria, addressed Dionysius, presbyter of Rome, was in a manner of deep abiding respect.
48:08
This is what Eusebius wrote about Dionysius regarding that letter on baptism before Dionysius of Rome was the
48:15
Bishop there, now citing from the same paragraph in Eusebius' Church History. Quote, It is evident from what is stated of him by Dionysius of Alexandria that he also was a learned and admirable man.
48:28
So again, Dionysius of Alexandria referred to Dionysius of Rome in terms of deep, utmost respect, and deferred to Dionysius of Rome not because he was the
48:40
Bishop of Rome, but because he was his friend and mentor, and it was a friend and mentor to whom he was writing and deferring even before he was
48:49
Bishop of Rome. Remember, this is how the bishops and presbyters of the ancient church communicated and worked with each other, which brings me to my third point.
48:58
Ryland has proposed that because presbyters in Pentapolis, in the jurisdiction of Alexandria, went to the
49:04
Bishop of Rome about the Bishop in Alexandria, who then wrote to Alexandria about what had been reported to him, it must mean, and can only mean, that the
49:12
Bishop of Rome was in charge of everyone. What then are we to make of the church at Gaul, a century later, writing to Cyprian of Carthage about a problem that was taking place in Rome, and then
49:23
Cyprian of Carthage writing to Rome and instructing the bishop there to clarify the situation to the church in Gaul by sending letters to them?
49:30
You can read about that situation in Cyprian's 66th Epistle to the Bishop of Rome, which we now cite.
49:39
Cyprian, to his brother Stephen, greeting, Faustina's our colleague, abiding at Lyons, has once and again written to me, dearest brother, informing me of those things which
49:49
I certainly know to have been told to you. Wherefore, it behooves you write a very copious letter to our fellow bishops appointed in Gaul.
49:57
Let letters be directed by you into the province, and to the people abiding at Arlis. That's from Epistle 66 of Cyprian, paragraphs 1, 2, and 3.
50:09
Now, this is how they wrote and communicated, and we cannot take a single instance in which someone goes to Rome about what is happening in Alexandria, and gets the
50:18
Bishop of Rome involved, and take it as an indication of Roman papal authority, while ignoring all the other letters that were exchanged.
50:25
There are other examples of people writing to Carthage about what was happening in Rome, and the Bishop of Carthage getting involved.
50:31
In fact, telling the Bishop of Rome to read the letters from Carthage aloud in his congregation, in order to preserve the clergy of Rome from heresy.
50:39
Now citing from Cyprian, Epistle 54, paragraph 20, in which he addresses the
50:44
Roman congregation. And although I know, dearest brother, from the mutual love which we owe and manifest one toward another, that you always read my letters to the very distinguished clergy who preside with you there, and to your very holy and large congregation, yet now
51:02
I both warn and ask you to do by my request what at other times you do of your own accord and courtesy, that so, by the reading of this my letter, if any contagion of envenomed speech and of pestilent propagation is crept in there, it may be all purged out of the ears and of the hearts of the brethren, and the sound of sincere affection of the good may be cleansed anew from all the filth of heretical disparagement.
51:28
Again, that's Cyprian writing to the Bishop of Rome, instructing him, that not just out of courtesy, but out of direction this time, to read his letters to the
51:38
Roman congregation in order to purge them of error. Just imagine what the Roman Catholic apologists would do with this information, had the roles been reversed, and Rome wrote to Carthage, insisting that Roman letters be read to the
51:50
Carthaginian clergy in order to purge them of heresy. On another occasion, a Bishop in Caesarea wrote to Cyprian complaining about the errors emanating from the
51:59
Roman Bishop, thanking Cyprian for settling the controversy regarding the Bishop of Rome, in which the
52:04
Bishop of Rome was understood to be wrong. That's from Cyprian's epistle 74 in 256
52:10
AD, addressed to Cyprian from Milian, Bishop of Caesarea. If you are not familiar with the way the
52:16
Church communicated back then, it is easy to fall for Ryland's very misleading and shallow examination of history, and conclude that Rome was in charge of everyone.
52:25
Take this same approach to the letters addressed to Cyprian of Carthage, and you would conclude that Carthage must have been in charge.
52:33
But there is one more point, our fourth point, related to Dionysius of Alexandria. Ryland concluded that Dionysius of Alexandria deferred to Dionysius of Rome on matters of doctrine, because he was the
52:44
Bishop of Rome. All of that is overturned by the letter Dionysius of Alexandria, sent to the
52:50
Bishop of Rome correcting him, point by point, on the matter of baptizing heretics. There was a controversy at the time about what to do with heretics who had been baptized in heretical sects, but wanted to join the
53:01
Church. Stephen, the Bishop of Rome at the time, taught that since the heretical baptism was of the same form as Christian baptism, heretics who convert did not need to be re -baptized, and their baptism could be considered legitimate, saying that this was the tradition of the ancient
53:17
Church of the Apostles. Dionysius disagreed vehemently, and wrote to the Bishop of Rome explaining why he was wrong, and in particular explaining the custom of accepting the baptism of heretics was not consistent with the teaching of the
53:29
Apostles. Now reading from Dionysius of Alexandria to the Bishop of Rome on the baptism of heretics, explaining why it is right and proper to accept the teaching of the
53:39
Apostles, but to dismiss what has come to us since the death of the Apostles. If then it was from the
53:46
Apostles, as we said above, that this custom took its beginning, we must adjust ourselves thereto, whatsoever may have been their reasons and the grounds on which they acted, to the end that we too may observe the same in accordance with their practice.
53:59
For as to things which were written afterwards, and which are until now still found, they are ignored by us, and let them be ignored, no matter what they are.
54:08
How can these comply with the customs of the ancients? That's from Dionysius of Alexandria to the Bishop of Rome on the baptism of heretics.
54:15
This objection by Dionysius to Stephen's novelty is confirmed for us in Eusebius' Church History, Book 7,
54:21
Chapter 5, in which Dionysius of Alexandria says that he could not agree with Stephen of Rome because truly, in the largest
54:28
Synods of the Bishops, as I learned, decrees have been passed on this subject that those coming over from heresy should be instructed and then should be washed and cleansed from the filth of their old and impure leaven.
54:40
That's from paragraph 5. Keep that in mind as Ryland tries to convince us that Dionysius clearly acknowledged the
54:46
Pope's authority over him on matters of doctrine. He freely wrote to the Bishops of Rome to correct them, and while it is true that he deferred to Dionysius of Rome on matters of doctrine, he had been deferring to Dionysius of Rome since he was a mere presbyter before Dionysius of Rome had become bishop.
55:03
That is not evidence of early papal authority. And that is where we will end this inaugural episode of The Diving Board.
55:10
We will pick up next time, continuing with Ryland's conversion testimony as he attempts to extract papal authority from the excommunication of Paulus Amasada.
55:19
Until next time, this is Timothy F. Coffman, podcasting from The Diving Board. We'll see you next time.
55:28
Hello, this is Tom Judas, President of the Trinity Foundation. Thank you for listening to Semper Reformanda Radio.
55:35
For more information on the Trinity Foundation, please visit our website at www .trinityfoundation
55:42
.org www .trinityfoundation .org There you can read, download, and or print over 300 articles, or listen to over 200
55:51
MP3 audio lectures, and check out our over 65 titles of books and other media.
55:58
And if you are between the ages of 16 through 25, you can enter our 2018
56:03
Christian Worldview Essay Contest on the topic of the book, The Emperor Has No Clothes, Richard B.
56:10
Gaffin, Jr.'s Doctrine of Justification, by author Stephen Cunha. Thank you, and remember, the