Searching Nicene/Ante-Nicene/Post Nicene Resources all at once - Looking for Resources to refute Pap

I am doing some research on the Church Fathers where they disagreed with Peter being the Rock in Matthew 16. I want to be able to make a search that brings up everything in Nicene/Ante/Post as opposed to searching each book separately. I am looking for all instances where Church Fathers disagreed with the concept of succession and papacy and rock.

I found 2 by Augustine where he disagrees with Vatican 1

” What meaneth, “Upon this rock I will build my Church”? Upon this faith; upon this that has been said, “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the Living God. Upon this rock,” saith He, “I will build my Church.” Mighty praise!^{^[1]}

“Upon this Rock I will build My Church.” Therefore She crieth from the ends of the earth, whom He hath willed to be builded upon a Rock. But in order that the Church might be builded upon the Rock, who was made the Rock? Hear Paul saying: “But the Rock was Christ.”⁵On Him therefore builded we have been. …^{^[1]}

^{^[1]} Augustine of Hippo, “Expositions on the Book of Psalms,” in Saint Augustin: Expositions on the Book of Psalms, ed. Philip Schaff, trans. A. Cleveland Coxe, vol. 8, A Select Library of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church, First Series (New York: Christian Literature Company, 1888), 249.

^{^[1]} Augustine of Hippo, “Ten Homilies on the First Epistle of John,” in St. Augustin: Homilies on the Gospel of John, Homilies on the First Epistle of John, Soliloquies, ed. Philip Schaff, trans. H. Browne and Joseph H. Myers, vol. 7, A Select Library of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church, First Series (New York: Christian Literature Company, 1888), 520.

I have been searching each book one by one but there has to be a better way to search all at once.

Also if anyone can point me to some documented statements by early Church Father's and writers that clearly show that the first few centuries had no concept of a papacy or pope that would also be helpful.

Thanks!

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Graham Criddle

Hi Steve

I've read your post a few times and am concerned that some of the ways you are phrasing things could cause real offense to many people who use these forums regularly and those who visit them occasionally. Please refrain from such theologically-charged statements.

I have been searching each book one by one but there has to be a better way to search all at once.

Are you familiar with the use of Collections (http://wiki.logos.com/Collections)? You can create a collection of the resources you are interested in and search that. My collection definition for the Ante-Nicene Fathers is shown below as an example

I found 2 by Augustine where he disagrees with Vatican 1

Incidentally, I found this slightly strange - with Vatican 1 being in the 1800s and Augustine being born in 354[:)]

Graham

Steven Lang

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/595223#Comment_595223

Graham truth is offensive. But nevertheless I changed my wording as to not offend.

Also Augustine was not in agreement with Vatican 1 just as Paul is not in agreement with Jehovah Witnesses. Its a matter of truth not time [:)]

Graham Criddle

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/595227#Comment_595227

I changed my wording as to not offend.

Thank you

Dave Hooton

Also if anyone can point me to some documented statements by early Church Father's and writers that clearly show that the first few centuries had no concept of a papacy or pope that would also be helpful.

Search the Surface Text of an Ante-nicene Fathers collection for (papacy, pope). Comments may come from the editors but they relate to the writings of the Fathers.

DMB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/595239#Comment_595239

The other angle is discussions of James relative to Jerusalem, in which case you'd look for 'bishop'.

fgh

I haven't read them, but I would expect that The Papacy: Its Historic Origin and Primitive Relations with the Eastern Churches, Papalism: A Treatise On the Claims of the Papacy As Set Forth in ‘Satis Cognitum’ and Popes and Patriarchs: An Orthodox Perspective on Roman Catholic Claims could help you. Unlike most Evangelicals, these authors know their Church Fathers. Or at least they should.

However, be aware that the Fathers may well use the same text for one purpose at one time and for another purpose at another time, so just collecting quotes you like may give you wrong impression of what they actually believed. For example, there are other places where Augustine does refer to Peter as being the rock. He seems to consider both interpretations legitimate.

Also, even if someone did believe that 'the rock' refers to Peter's faith, it doesn't follow that he rejected the papacy. Augustine in any case did not: "Rome has spoken; the case is closed" (yes, that's a paraphrase, but it's a faithful paraphrase).

And if you want to do a good job, you will also need to know the position you're arguing against. For that I suggest Upon this Rock: St. Peter and the Primacy of Rome in Scripture and the Early Church. It has a huge section on the Fathers.

Finally, would you mind adding an initial or something to your name? We have another Steve here on the forums, and he is Catholic. Two Steves from completely opposite perspectives is a bit confusing... I only realized today that you weren't he.

DMB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/595259#Comment_595259

Well, looks like everyone's in fine form the late spring morning. 'The truth' is looking for evidence (oddly enough). And the evidence 'might not be' for evangelicals.

I've always thought James was the best support for a central authority. Peter, I'd think, tended to propose (construction zoning requirements for tents, and dreamy evidence of eating rules). Plus there was the nagging apostolic fathers missing a bishop in Rome (along with succession sequences).

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/595239#Comment_595239

Search the Surface Text of an Ante-nicene Fathers collection for (papacy, pope).

Depending on the translation, this shouldn't be reliable:

From Wikipedia on "Pop": The title was from the early 3rd century a general term used to refer to all bishops. From the 6th century the title began to be used particularly of the Bishop of Rome, and in the late 11th century Pope Gregory VII issued a declaration that has been widely interpreted as stating this by then established Western convention. By the same 6th century, this was also the normal practice of the imperial chancery of Constantinople

The term is also used by the Coptic Orthodox to refer to Theodoros II aka Tawadros II,

SineNomine

Also if anyone can point me to some documented statements by early Church Father's and writers that clearly show that the first few centuries had no concept of a papacy or pope that would also be helpful.

I could point you to some documented statements by early Church Fathers and writers that clearly show that the first few centuries had some concept of a papacy or pope, which you might find helpful, but this whole thread is probably already too close to a forbidden theological discussion as it is.

Dave Hooton

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/595329#Comment_595329

Search the Surface Text of an Ante-nicene Fathers collection for (papacy, pope).

Depending on the translation, this shouldn't be reliable:

The rest of my comment states that results mainly come from the editors of the series. I note one translation of "pope victor" (c. 189 AD) from Hippolytus in ANF5. The preceding "Elucidations III" (p. 154) comments on Hippolytus' use of the term Papa.

Steven Lang

Thanks all!

Appreciate the input and recommendations!

The Calvinist Steve