Original Sin

That the concupiscence which remains after regeneration is truly sin:

We cannot be clean in this in this earthly and carrion habitation of the body unless through the ablution of mercy from heaven, we attain a cleansing when a more glorious nature is wrought in our earthly body after the change of the resurrection.

Hilary, as quoted by Augustine in Contra Julianum.

Law and Gospel

Therefore, whenever you hear sinners cursed in Scripture, understand it concerning the proud, as I said, that is, those who defend their sins. Likewise, as often as you hear the poor praised, do not consider it with regard to all the poor, but only those Christians who are meek and humble of heart. Of these it is written: 'Upon whom shall my spirit rest, but upon the humble and meek, upon him that trembleth at my words?'
Caesarius of Arles, Homily 48

The Papacy

Scripture References:
Confessional references: Smalcald Articles, Part II, Art IV; Treatise on the Power and Primacy of the Pope;

And if we too have said like Peter, “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God,” not as if flesh and blood had revealed it unto us, but by light from the Father in heaven having shone in our heart, we become a Peter, and to us there might be said by the Word, “Thou art Peter,” etc. For a rock is every disciple of Christ of whom those drank who drank of the spiritual rock which followed them, and upon every such rock is built every word of the church, add the polity in accordance with it; for in each of the perfect, who have the combination of words and deeds and thoughts which fill up the blessedness, is the church built by God.
Origen, Commentary on Matthew 12.10

They say that Linus succeeded the mighty Peter and ruled the church of the Romans after him.
Theodoret of Cyrus (c. 393-457), Commentary on 2 Timothy, Chapter 4.
Note: Theodoret clearly limits the ecclesiastical authority of the successor of Peter to the local Roman church only.

Let no one then foolishly suppose that the Christ is any other than the only begotten Son. Let us not imagine ourselves wiser than the gift of the Spirit. Let us hear the words of the great Peter, “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.” Let us hear the Lord Christ confirming this confession, for “On this rock,” He says, “I will build my church and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it.”
Theodoret, Letters of the Blessed Theodoret, Bishop of Cyrus, Letter146

What then saith Christ? “Thou art Simon, the son of Jonas; thou shalt be called Cephas.” “Thus since thou hast proclaimed my Father, I too name him that begat thee;” all but saying, “As thou art son of Jonas, even so am I of my Father.” Else it were superfluous to say, “Thou art Son of Jonas;” but since he had said, “Son of God,” to point out that He is so Son of God, as the other son of Jonas, of the same substance with Him that begat Him, therefore He added this, “And I say unto thee, Thou art Peter, and upon this rock will I build my Church;” that is, on the faith of his confession.
John Chrysostom, Homilies on the Gospel of Matthew LIV.3

If any one consider and examine these things, there is no need for lengthened discussion and arguments. There is easy proof for faith in a short summary of the truth. The Lord speaks to Peter, saying, “I say unto thee, that thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound also in heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven”… Assuredly the rest of the apostles were also the same as was Peter, endowed with a like partnership both of honour and power; but the beginning proceeds from unity.
Cyprian, On the Unity of the Church 4

An Ecumenical Council condemns a Pope for heresy:
After reading the doctrinal letter of Sergius of Constantinople to Cyrus of Phasis (afterwards of Alexandria) and to Pope Honorius, and also the letter of the latter to Sergius, we found that these documents were quite foreign...to the apostolic doctrines, and to the declarations of the holy Councils and all the Fathers of note, and follow the false doctrines of heretics. Therefore we reject them completely, and abhor...them as hurtful to the soul. But also the names of these men must be thrust out of the Church, namely, that of Sergius, the first who wrote on this impious doctrine. Further, that of Cyrus of Alexandria, of Pyrrhus, Paul, and Peter of Constantinople, and of Theodore of Pharan, all of whom also Pope Agatho rejected in his letter to the Emperor. We punish them all with anathema. But along with them, it is our universal decision that there shall also be shut out from the Church and anathematized the former Pope Honorius of Old Rome, because we found in his letter to Sergius, that in everything he followed his view and confirmed his impious doctrine.
Sixth Ecumenical Council, Session XIII, March 28 (o.s.) 681
Note: On this matter, the scholar Jaroslav Pelikan wites the following, "In the controversy between East and West...the case of Honorius served as proof to Photius that the popes not only lacked authority over church councils, but were fallible in matters of dogma; for Honorius had embraced the heresy of the Monotheletes. The proponents of that heresy likewise cited the case of Honorius, not in opposition to the authority of the pope but in support of their own doctrine, urging that all teachers of the true faith had confessed it, including Sergius, the bishop of New Rome, and Honorius, the bishop of Old Rome" (Jaroslav Pelikan, The Christian Tradition: A History of the Development of Doctrine (Chicago: University of Chicago, 1974), Volume Two, pp. 150-151).
A leading Roman Catholic historian of the 19th century regarded this decision as decisive evidence against papal infallibility as defined in 1870, "This one fact, that a Great Council, universally received afterwards without hesitation throughout the Church, and presided over by Papal legates, pronounced the dogmatic decision of a Pope heretical, and anathematized him by name as a heretic is a proof, clear as the sun at noonday, that the notion of any peculiar enlightenment or inerrancy of the Popes was then utterly unknown to the whole Church (Janus (Johann Joseph Ignaz von Dollinger), The Pope and the Council (Boston: Roberts, 1870,p. 61).

The Mass

The Mass not a Sin-Offering
Scripture References: 1 Cor 11:20ff; Hebrews 7:27; 9:28; 10:10, 12-14;
Confessional References: AC XXIV; Apol XXIV;

So if the priesthood according to the Law also came to an end, and the highpriest according to the order of Melchizedek offered sacrifice and made further sacrifices unnecessary, why do the priests of the New Covenant perform the sacramental liturgy? It is clear to those versed in divine things, however, that it is not another sacrifice we offer; rather, we perform the commemoration of the one, saving sacrifice. The Lord himself, remember, required this of us, "Do this in memory of me," so that we should recall with insight the type of the sufferings undergone for us, kindle love for the benefactor and look forward to the enjoyment of the good things to come.
Theodoret of Cyrus (c. 393-457), Commentary on the Letter to the Hebrews, Chapter 8.

...in Alexandria, the Scriptures are read and the doctors expound them on Wednesday and Friday, and all things are done except for the solemn remembrance of the sacrifice.
Cassiodorus (480-570), The Tripartite Ecclesiastical History, quoting Socrates, Ecclesiastical History, V.22. (the significance of this quote is two-fold: 1) note the attention paid in Alexandria to the exposition of the scriptures in public worship 2) note also that this took place without the celebration of holy communion, which, germane to our topic, is referred to as 'the solemn remembrance of the sacrifice', i.e. not a sacrifice itself, and was presumably reserved for the Lord's Day.)

Feedback Requested From Followers and Readers

Greetings Followers and other Readers of this Blog!

I hope you are well and that the blog has been of benefit to you in increasing your confidence in the catholicity of Lutheran doctrine.

Today is my 'day off' (I'm actually posting this on Monday 16th Australian time, for some reason my date stamp is a day behind), which gives me a little time to work on my blogs.

I've been mulling over the format of Lutheran Catholicity and wondering whether, before it gets too big, a change in format might be advisable. I would appreciate your feedback on this matter. Please do so via the comments box or e-mail me via my profile page e-mail address.

Basically, as you know, at the moment the format is that of an expanding book, with new entries added to an existing 'chapter'. This suits my purposes well but probably makes it difficult for the reader to follow - a new entry containing an important citation, e.g. the recently posted quote from John Chrysostom on the justification of the thief on the cross by grace alone through faith alone, might be missed if you do not re-read the appropriate 'chapter' and see the new quote. Therefore I am proposing a normal blog format where each new post is a new and separate entry which is also filed under one or more categories. This would mean that I will have to re-post all the quotes on the blog at present in this format, a little bit of extra work, but worth it if it makes the blog easier to follow and benefit from, which is the goal.

Let me know what you think...

Peace & Joy in the Lord!
'Acroamaticus'

Scripture's Clarity

In the two testaments every word that pertaineth unto God may be sought and discussed, and out of them all knowledge of things may be understood. And if anything remains which Holy Scripture does not determine, no other third scripture ought to be received to authorize any knowledge, but we must “commit to the fire” what remains, that is, reserve it unto God.
Origen, Homily on Leviticus

When I arrived in the district of Arsinoe, when as you know this notion had long been widely held, so that schisms and secessions of entire churches had taken place, I called a meeting of the presbyters and teachers of the village congregations, with any laymen who wished to attend, and urged them to thrash out the question in public.
So they brought me this book as positive and irrefutable proof, and I sat with them for three days on end from dawn to dusk, criticizing its contents point by point. In the process I was immensely impressed by the essential soundness, complete sincerity, logical grasp, and mental clarity shown by these good people, as we methodically and good-temperedly dealt with questions, objections, and points of agreement. We refused to cling with pig-headed determination to opinions once held even if proved wrong. There was no shirking of difficulties, but to the limit of our powers we tried to grapple with the problems and master them; nor were we too proud, if worsted in argument, to abandon our position and admit defeat; conscientiously, honestly, and with simple-minded trust in God, we accepted the conclusions to be drawn from the proofs and teachings of Holy Writ.
Eusebius, The History of the Church, quoting Dionysius c. 200-c. 265, Bishop of Alexandria

They have not hesitated to corrupt the word of God; they have treated the standard of the primitive faith with contempt; they have not known Christ. Instead of asking what Holy Scripture says, they strain every nerve to find a syllogistic figure to bolster up their godlessness. If anyone challenges them with a text from Divine Scripture, they examine it to see whether it can be turned into a conjunctive or disjunctive syllogistic figure. They put aside the sacred word of God, and devote themselves to geometry—earth measurement—because they are from the earth and speak from the earth, and do not know the One who comes from above. Some of them give all their energies to the study of Euclidean geometry, and treat Aristotle and Theophrastus with reverent awe; to some of them Galen is almost an object of worship. When people avail themselves of the arts of unbelievers to lend colour to their heretical views, and with godless rascality corrupt the simple Faith of Holy Writ, it is obvious that they are nowhere near the Faith.
Eusebius, The History of the Church, Book 5, quoting an anonymous “orthodox churchman” who wrote during the time of Zephyrinus, bishop of Rome A.D. 201-217.

When we receive money, we do not trust to those who give it to us; we wish to count it ourselves: and when there is a question of Divine things, would it not be a folly rashly and blindly to receive the opinions of others, when we have a rule by which we can examine everything? I mean the Divine law. It is for this reason that I adjure you all, without resting in the slightest degree on the judgment of others, to consult the Scriptures.
John Chrysostom, Homilily 13 on 2 Corinthians

It is from ignorance of Scripture that all our evils arise; hence the plague of so many heresies, hence our careless lives, our fruitless labors… They err who look not to the bright rays of the divine Scriptures, because they walk in darkness.
John Chrysostom, Homilies on Romans, more exact reference needed

Look for no other teacher; you have the oracles of God; none can teach you like these.
John Chrysostom, Homily 9 on the Epistle to the Colossians

When you shall see the wicked heresy, which is the army of Antichrist, standing in the holy places of the church, then let those who are in Judea head for the mountains, that is, those who are Christians should head for the Scriptures. For
the true Judea is Christendom, and the mountains are the Scriptures of the prophets and apostles, as it is written: “Her foundations are in the holy mountains.” But why should all Christians at this time head for the Scriptures?
Because in this period in which heresy has taken possession of the churches there can be no proof of true Christianity nor any other refuge for Christians who want to know the truth of the faith except the divine Scriptures. Earlier we showed in many ways which is the church of Christ, and which heathenism. But now there is for those who want to know which is the true church of Christ no way to know it except only the through the Scriptures. Why? Because heresy has everything just like the church. How, then, will anyone who wants to know which is the true church of Christ know it in the midst of this great confusion resulting from this similarity, except only through the Scriptures? The Lord, therefore, knowing that there would be such a great confusion of things in the last days, commands that Christians who…want to gain steadfastness in the true faith should take refuge in nothing else but the Scriptures. Otherwise, if they look to other things, they will be offended and will perish, because they will not know which is the true church, and as a result they will fall into the abomination of desolation which stands in the holy places of the church.
Ascribed to John Chrysostom, Glossa Ordinaria,49th Homily,on Matt 24

Scripture and Tradition

Such, then, is their system, which neither the prophets announced, nor the Lord taught, nor the apostles delivered, but of which they boast that beyond all others they have a perfect knowledge. They gather their views from other sources than the Scriptures; and, to use a common proverb, they strive to weave ropes of sand, while they endeavour to adapt with an air of probability to their own peculiar assertions the parables of the Lord, the sayings of the prophets, and the words of the apostles, in order that their scheme may not seem altogether without support. In doing so, however, they disregard the order and the connection of the Scriptures, and so far as in them lies, dismember and destroy the truth. By transferring passages, and dressing them up anew, and making one thing out of another, they succeed in deluding many through their wicked art in adapting the oracles of the Lord to their opinions. Their manner of acting is just as if one, when a beautiful image of a king has been constructed by some skilful artist out of precious jewels, should then take this likeness of the man all to pieces, should rearrange the gems, and so fit them together as to make them into the form of a dog or of a fox, and even that but poorly executed; and should then maintain and declare that this was the beautiful image of the king which the skilful artist constructed, pointing to the jewels which had been admirably fitted together by the first artist to form the image of the king, but have been with bad effect transferred by the latter one to the shape of a dog, and by thus exhibiting the jewels, should deceive the ignorant who had no conception what a king’s form was like, and persuade them that that miserable likeness of the fox was, in fact, the beautiful image of the king. In like manner do these persons patch together old wives’ fables, and then endeavour, by violently drawing away from their proper connection, words, expressions, and parables whenever found, to adapt the oracles of God to their baseless fictions. We have already stated how far they proceed in this way with respect to the interior of the Pleroma.
Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Book 1, Chapter 8, Section 1



If the truth has become uncertain at any point, let us return to its origin in the Lord and to the tradition of the Gospels and the Apostles.
Cyprian, Ad Pompeium

Where is this tradition from? Does it come from the authority of the Lord and of the Gospels, or from the commands and Epistles of the Apostles? For God testifies in Joshua 1:7 that those things which are written must be done. If, therefore, it is either commanded in the Gospels or contained in the Epistles and Acts of the Apostles, let also this holy tradition be observed.
Cyprian, Ad Pompeium

We are not content simply because this is the tradition of the Fathers. What is important is that the Fathers followed the meaning of the Scripture.
Basil the Great, On the Holy Spirit, 7.16

If the Lord is faithful in all he says, it is clearly a falling from faith and a sin of pride either to reject anything of the things that are written or to add anything unwritten.
Basil the Great, cited in Chemnitz, ECT 1.224

The generality of men still fluctuate in their opinions about this, which are as erroneous as they are numerous. As for ourselves, if the Gentile philosophy, which deals methodically with all these points, were really adequate for a demonstration, it would certainly be superfluous to add a discussion on the soul to those speculations, but while the latter proceeded, on the subject of the soul, as far in the direction of supposed consequences as the thinker pleased, we are not entitled to such license, I mean that of affirming what we please; we make the Holy Scriptures the rule and the measure of every tenet (dogma); we necessarily fix our eyes upon that, and approve that alone which may be made to harmonise with the intention of those writings.
Gregory of Nyssa, On the Soul And the Resurrection, NPNF II, V.439



But take thou and hold that faith only as a learner and in profession, which is by the Church delivered to thee, and is established from all Scripture. For since all cannot read the Scripture, but some as being unlearned, others by business, are hindered from the knowledge of them; in order that the soul may not perish for lack of instruction, in the Articles which are few we comprehend the whole doctrine of Faith...And for the present, commit to memory the Faith, merely listening to the words; and expect at the fitting season the proof of each of its parts from the Divine Scriptures. For the Articles of the Faith were not composed at the good pleasure of men: but the most important points chosen from all Scriptures, make up the one teaching of the Faith. And, as the mustard seed in a little grain contains many branches, thus also this Faith, in a few words, hath enfolded in its bosom the whole knowledge of godliness contained both in the Old and New Testaments. Behold, therefore, brethren and hold the traditions which ye now receive, and write them on the table of your hearts
Cyril of Jeruslaem, Catechetical Lectures 5.12