[Morganite]

Optatus, in his De Schismate Donatistarum (On the Donatist Schism) II, 13, in PL 11:966, states that "the true Church cannot be cruel," since "dum sanat, vulnerat" (it causes pain while healing), ibid. in PL (Patrologia Latinae) 11:1020.

Those whom we kill are not martyrs, since only members of our church can be martyrs, ibid. in PL 11:1013-15, 1019; our side cannot persecute, since we are in the right, while anything that displeases us is necessarily persecution, ibid, in PL 11:1013, 1017; since we have the Scriptures written in our hearts, all Scripture we cite condemns you, while any you may cite against us is void, ibid. in PL 11:1101.

Pacianus, Epistolae (Epistles) II, 5, in PL 13:1061-62, assures the Novatians that his side does not persecute, since it attacks only with words: "We deal with you like doves, ore potius quam dente confligimus."

Yet Optatus tells the opposition that when they attack with words only they cut more cruelly than any swords, "slaying with the sword of the tongue," Optatus, On the Donatist Schism II, 13, in PL 11:979, 983.

Augustine, Contra Donatistas (Against the Donatists) II, 11, says that persecution by the Church is "the persecution of love," and that as long as the Emperor persecutes on the right side he does well, Augustine, Epistolae (Epistles) 43, in PL 33:321-23.

Lucifer of Caliaris, De Non Conveniendo Haeresibus, in PL 13:768-70, 774, 777, 787, 791. True, Lucifer is extreme, but Athanasius, Ad Luciferum Epistolae 2, in PL 13:1040-41, who calls him the most inspired voice of the age, is himself no less severe: "Christus recusat et respuit obsequium tuum" (Christ rejects and disdains your compliance), he writes to a too-tolerant emperor, Athanasius, Epistolae (Epistles) XVII, in PL 16:1002-5.

The common-sense republicanism of Tiberius Caesar had prompted the sentiment "deorum injuriae dis curae" (the gods' injuries are matters of concern to the gods). Constantine, however, undertook to support the prestige of deity by a law which forbade blasphemous utterances under pain of a fine of one-half one's goods." Cochrane, Christianity and Classical Culture, 204.

John Chrysostom, Homilia in Joannem (Homily on John) LIV, 4, in PG 59:301; Hilary, Against the Emperor Constantius II, 9, in PL 10:585: "unigenitus Deus, quem in me persequeris" (the only begotten God, whom you persecute in me).

Augustine, Enarrationes in Psalmos (Narrations on Psalms) 62:15, in PL 36:684-85; Augustine, De Civitate Dei (The City of God) XX, 19, 3, in PL 41:686. "How can we be blessed unless we loathe you utterly?" is Lucifer's refrain, in Lucifer of Caliaris, De Non Conveniendo Haeresibus, in PL 13:770-71.

Augustine, Contra Julianum Pelagianum (Against Julian Pelagius) IV, 30-31, in PL 44:753-54, 763: "Unbelievers do evil even when they do good." Cf. Augustine, Sermones (Sermons) CXLI, 3-4, in PL 38:777; Augustine, Epistles 113, in PL 33:322; Augustine, Narrations on Psalms 57:15, in PL 36:684-85.

To call the emperor Antichrist when he is mistaken "non est temeritas, sed fides; neque inconsideratio, sed ratio" (it is not rashness but loyalty, not thoughtlessness but concern), and so forth, Hilary, De Non Conveniendo Hereticis, in PL 13:806. When the Emperor puts his official severitas at the disposal of the Church, "neither brother, beloved wife, nor son" should be spared, all loyal subjects being armed "to dismember the sacrilegious," Julius Firmicus Maternus, The Error of Pagan Religions 30, in PL 12:1048.

Writers of the fourth century sometimes yield to principles of humanity, "nec potest aut veritas vi, aut justitia crudelitate conjugi" (truth cannot be joined with violence nor justice with cruelty), says Lactantius, Divinae Institutiones (Divine Institutions) V, 20, in PL 6:615; yet Lucifer can twist this sentiment into a proof that the Church, being true and just, is never cruel.

St Jerome must confess a definite conflict between the justa judicia of the Church and her irrationabili (irationality!) clementia, Jerome, Epistolae (Epistle) 17, in PL 22:828, while Optatus pays a touching compliment to kindness when he declares that the Donatists should suffer death because they lack charity! Optatus, On the Donatist Schism III, 8, in PL 11:1018-19.

Basil, De Spiritu Sancto (On the Holy Ghost) 76-77, in PG [Patrologia Greacae] 32:213-17, agrees perfectly with the description in John Chrysostom, Adversus Oppugnatores Vitae Monasticae III, 8-10, in PG 47:361-65. The fourth-century fathers "cast aside truth and decency [Anstand] and converted controversy into the business of questioning personal loyalty," thus Martin Schanz, Geschichte der römischen Literatur, 4 vols. (Munich: Beck, 1914), 4:1:534.

Basil, On the Holy Ghost 76-77, in PG 32:213-17. According to Chrysostom, the spirit of the times is well expressed in the common remark: "I wish an earthquake would come and kill everybody but me; then I would be the richest man in Antioch!" John Chrysostom, In Epistolam II ad Timotheum (Commentary on the Second Epistle to Timothy) VII, 1-2, in PG 62:638.

Jakob C. Burckhardt, Die Zeit Konstantins des Grossen (Stuttgart: Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt, 1929), 452. Optatus affirms that if chastity and virginity are found among any barbarian nations it is because something has gone wrong, for that simply cannot be, in Optatus, On the Donatist Schism III, 3, in PL 11:999.

89. Sozomen, Ecclesiastical History II, 28, in PG 67:1013-17. Later churchmen used Constantine's example to spur his successors to acts of increasing violence against unbelievers, P. Petit, "Libanius et la Vita Constantini," Historia 1 (1950): 581. In the Theodosian Code XVI, 1, 2, all who differ from the Emperor's theology are declared "extravagant madmen" who "must expect to suffer the severe penalties, which our authority . . . shall think proper to inflict upon them," cited in Gibbon, Decline and Fall, 2:8. Constantine shows an "obvious lack of any sense of the limitations of law," says Cochrane, Error, 204; "Ses conseillers l'ont fait vivre dans un monde d'illusions" (his advisers let him live in a dream world), Piganiol, "L'état actuel de la question Constantinienne 1939-49,"

Ambrose, Epistles 12, in PL 16:988-89. John Chrysostom, De Sancto Babyla, Contra Julianum et Gentiles (On Saint Babyla, Against Julian and the Gentiles) 8, in PG 50:544, says that the Church was better off under pagan emperors, because the members fought less savagely among themselves.



What went wrong? Or, were they right?


M:)RGANITE

[RickJ]

Maybe this is just too deep for me... but can you summarize in a sentence or two what the premise based on the quotes is?. Then clarify what the question is?

[Morganite]

Maybe this is just too deep for me...but can you summarize in a sentence or two what the premise based on the quotes is? ...Then clarify what the question is?

The premise is that something seems to have gone badly wrong with attitudes inside the Christian church, and these statements culled from the Patrologies (Greek and Latin) are offered as evidence.


The question is, as stated, "What went wrong." You are invited to venture an opinion as to how the message of Jesus was able to be distorted to the somewhat hard, even caustic, and potentially murderous views represented in this handful of quotes from early Church Fathers. While I recognise that the writings of the Fathers are probably closed books to more than 99% of Christians, they were the genesis of the path the church took in dealing with its heretics, Jews, and infidels.



M:)


.

[valinors_sorrow]

What went wrong dear Morg is human nature not Christian nature.

Tis easier to shoot thy mouth off in righteous condemnation (blessed by any God or not) than to learn, understand, relate, embrace and verily love one another. That takes WORK!

And so it shall remain, I lament and suspect, until people see the substantial and irretractable damage it does. My only hope is its realised by enough people before its too late.

[VBNomad]

I think the very fact that the fathers felt they had to 'deal' with the heretics, Jews, and infidels instead of peacefully coexisting is the root of the problem. If christianity were the peaceful religion it claims to be, our world would look vastly different.

[Starman]

What went wrong was simply a continuation of what had already gone wrong in Eden--demonic deceit that was listened to and believed. The truth was distorted and lead to a camouflaged apostasy claiming adherence to Christianity on one hand while propagating injustices on the other. The emergence of this apostasy was foretold:


"I know that after I leave, savage wolves will come in among you and will not spare the flock. Even from your own number men will arise and distort the truth in order to draw away disciples after them. So be on your guard! Remember that for three years I never stopped warning each of you night and days with tears." (Acts 20:29-31) (New International Version)



"But relative to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Messiah, and our gathering together to [meet] Him, we beg you, brethren, not to allow your minds to be quickly unsettled or disturbed or kept excited or alarmed, whether it be by some [pretended] revelation of [the] Spirit or by word or by letter [alleged to be] from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has [already] arrived and is here. Let no one deceive or beguile you in any way, for that day will not come except the apostasy comes first - that is, unless the [predicted] great falling away of those who have professed to be Christians has come - and the man of lawlessness (sin) is revealed, who is the son of doom (of perdition)." (2 Thessalonians 2:1-3) (Amplified Bible)


The one behind the those who distorted Christianity via lies is the Devil whom Jesus identified as the ultimate liar.

Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He (the devil) was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it" (John 8:44).

In fact, the Devil is described in the prophetic book of Revelations as deceiving the whole world:

Revelation 12:9 "And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceives the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him." (See also Rev 20:2).

[RickJ]

I don't agree with the use of "the church" in the premise or the question. In every faith group we can find quotes that we do not agree with.

And since this is about Christianity, and there are thousands of sects, which "the church" are you speaking of?

I'm no dummy. I, for example, am Catholic yet I recognize that bad, wrong and even horrible things have been said by and done by Catholics... but that's not really the point.

You seem to imply that these quotes are evidence of something wrong. Are you just asking "were these guys distorting the message?" Well maybe, maybe not. A sentence or two from a work speak little as to what the message of the work really was. Today they call this "soundbytes".

Just because those individuals [some of whom are quite obscure, and NOT accepted as "orthodox"] said those things, what tie are you making to "the Church" with them?

Frankly, there are many quotes from writers of every century - that the Church still deems important today - that explain and elaborate very nicely the message of Jesus.

For all those interested in the "Fathers", here is a huge list of them that you can read online: http://www.newadvent.org/fathers

A caveat: This is not to say that all of them are "orthodox" or "correct"...

[valinors_sorrow]

Ye verily, and I say unto you: I have met the devil and he is us. (Just kidding, sort of LOL) I understand that we have in each of us a little broken off piece of both God (good) and Devil (bad) and like sooooo many faiths suggest, its incumbent on us to grow the appropriate part. You cannot say you represent good whilst doing bad, LOL so any faith that espouses that has slid off the path somewhere, as far as I am concerned. Funny thing is many many many people of all different kinds of faiths and of no faiths believe that very same thing! People are growing in their sophistication with information and this questioning of our various imperfect religions (or application thereof) is apparently gaining with it. You only need look to the world to see that confirmed.

Each to his own belief but I like mine with the fantastic, enormous and undeniable logic that I see present in the fantastic, enormous and undeniable natural universe. If it doesn't absolutely fit with that, its only a superstition waiting to be dispelled in time. This is where science meets religion and those two seemingly incompatibles have even been hanging out together here and there LOL. Wow!

The only solid "hook" any of the major competing faiths have for getting us or keeping us is what they claim happens after we die - which is probably the biggest area in the human psyche ripe for the sewing of superstitious seeds LOL and all because no one on earth knows what happens when we die. Isn't that something remarkable?

[K_3]

God is in all of us. He created us. The devil was one of God's angels, to say there is a piece of him in us as a piece of God is not my belief. The devil tries to control us but he did not have anything to do with creating us. We are only a part of God.

The Bible has been rewritten and I believe there were changes made and books left out. I believe as always the "powers to be" wanted to control the masses and religion then was as politics are today. I believe there are messages in the Bible left out that we should know, but the ones in control only wanted to have that information. I know many will disagree with me, I feel in my heart God wanted us to know more than we do about living and life.

This is just my opinion. I believe in God and Jesus, as that is how I have been raised. I do not condemn any other religons based on a God, love and compassion for others. We all have our own path to follow and we have a right to get there the way we feel we must.

[Morganite]

I don't agree with the use of "the church" in the premise or the question. In every faith group we can find quotes that we do not agree with.

And since this is about Christianity, and there are thousands of sects, which "the church" are you speaking of?

I'm no dummy. I, for example, am Catholic yet I recognize that bad, wrong and even horrible things have been said by and done by Catholics...but that's not really the point.

You seem to imply that these quotes are evidence of something wrong. Are you just asking "were these guys distorting the message?" Well maybe, maybe not. A sentence or two from a work speak little as to what the message of the work really was. Today they call this "soundbytes".

Just because those individuals [some of whom are quite obscure, and NOT accepted as "orthodox"] said those things, what tie are you making to "the Church" with them?

Frankly, there are many quotes from writers of every century - that the Church still deems important today - that explain and elaborate very nicely the message of Jesus.

For all those interested in the "Fathers", here is a huge list of them that you can read online: http://www.newadvent.org/fathers

A caveat: This is not to say that all of them are "orthodox" or "correct"...

The problem with determining who was and who was not 'orthodox' or 'correct' in the early Christian centuries lies in the fact that the line or boundaries of orthodoxy was constantly shifting, so that you could wake up orthodox and go to sleep a condemned heteric, or go to sleep orthodox and wake up a black-hearted heretodox, without changing one jot of your beliefs.

Like soccer, a person could suddenly become 'offside' without moving his feet. But that is of small moment to the present question, which is "What went wrong?" How did the church change from a persecuted church into a persecuting church?

It is undeniable that "the church" (Which 'church?' I leave readers to answer that for themselves) became a persecuting church. We cannot deny the facts of history, and the fact as I have presented them speak for themselves. "The Church Fathers' steered "The Church Fathers' steered " down a path that is not in harmony with any of the teachings of Jesus. which events are writ large ineccelesiastical history?

The beliefs of Gnostic Christianity deviated from the teachings of “the church.” They were considered heretics by the church. They were persecuted, exiled and almost completely exterminated by the church. One reason why they were condemned as heretics was their belief in the grounds of salvation. They believed that humans are profoundly flawed and could not be saved through any good works or action of their own.

They taught that God sent Jesus to impart knowledge to humanity so that they could ascend to heaven to be with God when they died. Their beliefs about salvation are close to that of conservative Christianity today - that salvation is attained solely by grace from God, and not by any works that an individual may have done. In this they markedly differed from the mainline church that tuaght that salvation came by good works as commanded. This is but one group that the church persecuted because of differences in belief, but it will serve to illuminate the question and the need for it.

DW Bercot studied all the non-canonical Christian writers "from the time of the Apostle John to the inauguration of Constantine," whose literary works have survived. I now quote from him:

He writes, "... early Christians universally believed that works or obedience play an essential role in our salvation." (DW Bercot, "Will the Real Heretics Please Stand Up: A New Look at Today's Evangelical Church in the Light of Early Christianity," Scroll Publishing, Tyler, TX, (1989), Pages 63-72.)

All the early Christian writers "who discussed the subject of salvation presented the same view." Some examples are:

Clement of Rome (30 - 100 CE) was an overseer of the church at Rome. (Clement of Rome, "Letter to the Corinthians," Chapters 34 & 35.) He urged his followers to try to be among those who wait for the Lord "by doing the things that are in harmony with His blameless will."

Polycarp (69 - 156) was an overseer of the church at Smyrna. He said that we will be resurrected when we die "if we do His will and walk in His commandments..." (Polycarp, "Letter to the Philippians," Chapter 2)

Shepherd of Hermas (d. 150) Little is known about his background. He wrote that only those who "fear the Lord and keep His commandments" will have eternal life. (Hermas, "Shepherd," Book 2, Comm. 7; Book 3, Sim. 10, Chapter 2)

Justin Martyr (110 - 165) was a philosopher who converted to Christianity as an adult. He wrote that "if men by their works show themselves worthy of His design, they are deemed worthy of reigning in company with Him." (Justin Martyr, "First Apology," Chapter 10)

Clement of Alexandria (150 - 200) was an elder of the church at Alexandria, Egypt. He wrote that only individuals who obtain the truth and "distinguishes himself in good works" shall gain eternal life. (Clement of Alexandria, "Rich Man," Chapters 1 & 2)

Origen (185 - 255) was an elder of the church at Alexandria, Egypt. He wrote that a soul would inherit eternal life if its "actions shall have procured this for it..." (Origen, "Of First Things," Preface, Chapter 5)

Hippolytus (170 - 236) was an overseer in a church in France. He said that Christians achieve "for themselves eternal life through good works." (Hippolytus, "Fragments from Commentaries," "On Proverbs") Once in heaven, they will only remember "the righteous deeds by which they reached the heavenly kingdom." (Hippolytus, "Against Plato," Section 3)

Cyprian (200 - 258) was overseer of the church in Carthage, North Africa. He wrote that a person can prophesy, conduct exorcisms and do "great acts." But he will not get to heaven "unless he walks in the observance of the right and just way." (Cyprian, "Unity of the Church," Section 15)

Lactantius (260 - 330) was a Roman teacher who lived in France. He wrote that a person either loses eternal life because of sinful behavior, or gains it by their virtue. (Lactantius, "Institutes," Book 7, chapter 5)

“The teaching of the Lord by the Twelve Apostles to the Gentiles" (Didache) was written for the guidance of Christians circa 60 to 100 CE, and almostm found its way into the canon. It deal with such topics as:

~ loving behavior towards your neighbor, enemies and persecutors;
~ abstaining from lusts
~ giving away what you posses to the needy
~ do not murder, commit adultery, fornication, theft, abortion, infanticide
~ do not be prone to anger
~ do not engage in sorcery, witchcraft, enchanting, astrology
~ share all things with your brother
~ do not eat food that was sacrifice to idols
~ baptize in living water in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
~ fast on the 4th day of the week
~ recite the Our Father prayer three times a day.
~ beware of false prophets
~ elect honorable Christians to be bishops and deacons.
~ be ready at all times for the second coming of Jesus, which they expected would come soon.

All of the instructions relate to behavior confirming that the early church held works to be of paramount importance.

But it was not long before the church's rule became even stricter and moved to cover matters of faith and belief as well as Christian living, and it was from the church's efforts to control the minds of men in regard to religious faith, both in and out of the church, that the persecutions that eventually reached epidemic proportions began.

The initial question invited thoughtful responses that would detail the path the church took to arrive at penalties greater than ostracism and excommunication as the price of non-conformity to whatever dogmas were held to be 'orthodox' at any given time.


M

[Starman]

Morganite agrees: Do you accept a personal Devil?

I accept the existence of an entity which the Bible's calls the Devil.
However, I don't consider him my personal anything. : )

Also some evil proceeds from the human condition and doesn't necessarily involve evil spirit forces though they might encourage it once it begins.

[magprob]

"I wish an earthquake would come and kill everybody but me; then I would be the richest man in Antioch!"
Hey, wait a minute, stop stealing my lines!
But seriously folks, man created religon and I think all of this rehtoric proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that anything man has a hand in ends up as that, a big fiasco. Not to mention that Justinian's despotic control over the church, along with others, was such that priests, bishops, and even the Pope were essentially powerless to resist their imperial doctinal decrees. If you don't believe me, just go ask Jimmy Swaggert! You can also call into the Jim Baker show for further information. Now, back to my big tall, cold glass of Jim Jones.
Praise the Lord-he is in you-not separate from you-Dualism is the problem. Everything is separate from the self therefore nothing is as important as one's self-greed-hatred-when all really is one. Spend your time looking inward-not outward for the answer! "Be still and know that I am GOD."

[valinors_sorrow]

Also some evil proceeds from the human condition and doesn't necessarily involve evil spirit forces though they might encourage it once it begins.

Speaking of what went wrong! This is exactly the ACTION of what was (and continues) to be wrong...

Everything is separate from the self therefore nothing is as important as one's self-greed-hatred-when all really is one. Spend your time looking inward-not outward for the answer! "Be still and know that I am GOD."

This is the UNDEFENDABLE EXCUSE that it hid (and continues to hide) behind (oh hey it ain't me, God said so LOL)...

We are all one.
We are all the same.
We are all in it together.
And if we harnessed the higher self in each of us, I believe we would "meet" God.

Some people in history have seen this more clearly than others, brilliantly so even... Buddha, Jesus, Mohammed, etc. but like it or not, the politicians get their hands on it every time.

If you must label me any religion at all, it's the religion of "mind-you-own-biz-and-look-at-self"--- for there lies the only power to change anything, resurrect anything, salvage anything, etc, etc, etc. Overlook that and you missed the spiritual boat completely. Whatever religion you belong to, I still believe its ALL ABOUT YOU, not the other guy or the one down the street or the one in a foreign country, etc ad naseum. And more over, you CANNOT give away what you don't have either. SO unless you are talking from your "higher self", you aren't capable of carrying the message and if you are talking from your "higher self" people will recognise the love you radiate and listen.

Religion is how I live, not what I think.

[Morganite]

"I wish an earthquake would come and kill everybody but me; then I would be the richest man in Antioch!"
Hey, wait a minute, stop stealing my lines!
But seriously folks, man created religon and I think all of this rehtoric proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that anything man has a hand in ends up as that, a big fiasco. Not to mention that Justinian's despotic control over the church, along with others, was such that priests, bishops, and even the Pope were essentially powerless to resist their imperial doctinal decrees. If you don't believe me, just go ask Jimmy Swaggert! You can also call into the Jim Baker show for futher information. Now, back to my big tall, cold glass of Jim Jones.
Praise the Lord-he is in you-not separate from you-Dualism is the problem. Everything is separate from the self therefore nothing is as important as one's self-greed-hatred-when all really is one. Spend your time looking inward-not outward for the answer! "Be still and know that I am GOD."

LOL

Thank you for sharing your point of view.

[Starman]

Speaking of what went wrong!! This is exactly the ACTION of what was (and continues) to be wrong....

Can you please clarify what action you are referring to.