[pastorsforum] Re: [PastorsForum] Was St. Patty a Baptist????

Message: < previous - next > : Reply : Subscribe : Cleanse
Home   : March 2005 : Group Archive : Group : All Groups

From: "Steven G. Rockhill" <revrock@...>
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 22:14:45 -0500
It must be that 'frozen chosen' stereotype.

Peace,
Steve

DAVID POWELL wrote:

> Steve, whoever told me, years ago, that Presbyterians don't have a sense 
> of humor,,,,,lied!
> 
> ROTFLOL
> 
> God Bless
> 
> dp
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pastor David
> Shalom Alechem...Barukh Hashem Y'shua!
> (Peace and Blessings in Jesus' name!)
>  >From: "Steven G. Rockhill" <revrock@...>
>  >Reply-To: pastorsforum@...
>  >To: pastorsforum@...
>  >Subject: Re: [PastorsForum] Was St. Patty a Baptist????
>  >Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 21:27:34 -0500
>  >
>  >I must admit as I was reading this I was waiting for:
>  >
>  >Number Nine:  Patrick used the King James Bible   :-) (smiley face)
>  >
>  >Interesting article.  Though there is a lot of 'presumption' and
>  >'assumption' where the historical record is silent.  e.g. Just
>  >because you go down to a 'spring' to be baptized does not mean you
>  >were immersed.  Besides a 'spring' is not exactly a river or lake.  
>  >But we have been there and done that (immersion and baptist history
>  >both) and even though it is probably time to go there again
>  >(according to the cycling of usual topics) I am not up to it this go
>  >round.
>  >
>  >  I am curious though that all the historians quoted are 'baptist'
>  >historians.  If it was such a historical fact why don't other
>  >historians pick up on it.  Anyway as far as I am concerned, if you
>  >want St. Patrick you can have him - he's a little too green for me.  
>  >:-) (smiley face)
>  >
>  >Peace,
>  >steve
>  >
>  >Pastor David Warner wrote:
>  >>Ahhh, I didn't want to do this but it looks as though we have some
>  >>doubting Thomases out there.  Sooooo,
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>     St. Patrick A Baptist!
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>By Dr. L. K. Landis
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>For centuries Roman Catholicism has laid claim to the supposition
>  >>that Patrick of Ireland was a Roman priest. However, over 100
>  >>hundred years ago W. A. Jarrel, much respected author and church
>  >>historian, put into print what had been known by Baptists since the
>  >>very beginning, that Patrick was not a Catholic priest, but rather
>  >>a Baptist missionary. It is because of this much neglected fact
>  >>that we put into print this material so that this present
>  >>generation may know the truth and great heritage of this early
>  >>Baptist missionary to Ireland.  So zealous were these historians of
>  >>the 1800's and so spirited was their conviction to this that one
>  >>wrote, "Rome's most audacious theft was when she seized bodily the
>  >>Apostle Peter and made him the putative head and founder of her
>  >>system; but next to that brazen act stands her effrontery when she
>  >>'annexed' the great missionary preacher of Ireland and enrolled him
>  >>among her saints" (A Short History of the Baptists [1907], Henry C.
>  >>Vedder, pg. 71-72).
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>Most church historians agree that Patrick, originally named Succat
>  >>(or Succathus) Patricus, was born sometime between the years 360 AD
>  >>and 387 AD, probably near what is now Dumbarton, Scotland. It is
>  >>also generally accepted by those knowledgeable of the subject that
>  >>he lived to a well advanced age, some placing him at over 100 years
>  >>old at the time of his death.
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>Cathcart, the dean among Baptist apologists, suggests that Patrick
>  >>is not his name, but rather a title of honor meaning noble and
>  >>illustrious and was bestowed upon him by his grateful admirers (The
>  >>Baptist Encyclopedia [1881], by William Cathcart, pg. 886). His
>  >>writings reveal that his father, Calpurnius, was a deacon in a
>  >>Baptist church (we know that there were Baptist churches on the
>  >>British Isle as far back as A.D. 63, History of the Welch Baptists
>  >>[1770], by J. Davis, Page 14), having apparently been converted to
>  >>Christ while on a business trip to Rome as he also served as a
>  >>Roman civil officer. In spite of being reared in a godly home and
>  >>taught the ways of the Scriptures, Cathcart also states that the
>  >>young Patrick was "...wild and wicked until his sixteenth year..."
>  >>when, while working on his father's farm, he and several others
>  >>were seized and carried away captive by a band of pirates to
>  >>Ireland, where he was sold into slavery to a petty Irish clan
>  >>chieftain. For over five years he suffered the atrocities of
>  >>slavery. Later, however, he would recount that it was during this
>  >>most dark period of his life that he, himself, was converted to
>  >>Christ remembering the Christian training he had received from his
>  >>godly father while but a child.  Regarding this, W. A. Jarrel wrote
>  >>over one hundred years ago, "...the truth which saved him when a
>  >>youthful slave in pagan Ireland was taught him in the godly home
>  >>of...his father" (Baptist Church Perpetuity or History [1894], W. A
>  >>Jarrel, pg. 472).
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>Historians also record that "...upon his twenty-first year, he
>  >>escaped the chains of servitude..." and returned to his father's
>  >>home in Scotland, only to find that he had died and his land
>  >>acquired by others. It was during this time that Patrick, "being a
>  >>stronger Christian, the Lord soon called him back to Ireland as the
>  >>missionary for that blinded country" (Ibid.).  Jarrel further
>  >>suggests that the more one studies the life, ministry and writings
>  >>of this Irish "apostle", "...the more he stands out as a Baptist."
>  >>He, Jarrel, is perhaps among the greatest authorities on the
>  >>subject of Saint Patrick, as one full chapter of his makes several
>  >>suggestions as to why Patrick could not have been a Roman Catholic
>  >>priest:
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>1. "At the time of Saint Patrick the Romish church was only en
>  >>embryo".
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>2. "In St. Patrick's time the authority of the bishop of Rome was
>  >>not generally recognized."
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>3. "There is no history to sustain the Romish claim that Patrick
>  >>was sent to Ireland by Pope Celistine." Not one of the early
>  >>biographers of his life mentions any ties to Rome. Even in all the
>  >>writings of Saint Patrick himself there is never any mention of
>  >>connection with Rome.
>  >>
>  >>Neander, the church historian, wrote, "If Patrick came to Ireland
>  >>as a deputy from Rome, it might naturally be expected that in the
>  >>Irish church a certain sense of dependence would always have been
>  >>preserved towards the mother church. But we find, on the contrary,
>  >>in the Irish church a spirit of church freedom, similar to that in
>  >>Britain, which struggled against the yoke of Roman ordinances. We
>  >>find subsequently among the Irish a much greater agreement with the
>  >>ancient British than with Roman ecclesiastical usages. This goes to
>  >>prove that the origin of the church was independent of Rome, and
>  >>must be traced solely to the people of Britain... Again, no
>  >>indication of his connection with the Romish church is to be found
>  >>in his confession; rather everything seems to favor the supposition
>  >>that he was ordained bishop in Britain itself" (Neander's History
>  >>of the Christian Church, Volume 2, page 123).
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>Another Irish scholar says, "...Leo II, was bishop of Rome from 440
>  >>to 461 A.D. and upwards of one hundred and forty of his letters to
>  >>correspondents in all parts of Christendom still remain and yet he
>  >>never mentions Patrick or his work, or in any way intimates that he
>  >>knew of the great work being done there."
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>Professor George T. Stokes, still yet another prominent scholar,
>  >>declares that prior to the synod of Rathbresail in A.D. 1112, the
>  >>rule of each Irish church was independent, autonomous, and
>  >>"...dioceses and diocesan episcopacy had no existence at all."
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>Considering these indisputable and undeniable facts, it is
>  >>impossible for Patrick to have been the patron Roman Catholic saint
>  >>of Ireland. The material is just not there to substantiate any such
>  >>claim. Baptist pastor, author and historian Gillham says that in
>  >>the middle of the nineteenth century, Baptists universally accepted
>  >>the fact that Patrick of Ireland was of apostolic tradition and
>  >>therefore a Baptist. It was also commonly accepted that the baptism
>  >>of the heirs to his ministry were also investigated and found to be
>  >>New Testament in origin. It was only during these last 150 years
>  >>that Baptists have been willing to relinquish Patrick to the hands
>  >>of the papacy.
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>However, the insurmountable evidence of his position among the
>  >>Baptists of antiquity comes from the writings of this great man
>  >>himself. While several letters written by Patrick and sent to
>  >>Christians converted to Christ under his ministry still exist, most
>  >>of what we know of his beliefs are taken from two documents that he
>  >>wrote: St. Patrick's Confession, or Epistle to the Irish; and an
>  >>"Epistle to Coroticus." In these two writings that still survive,
>  >>it becomes very apparent that this great preacher was not of Roman
>  >>Catholic persuasion. He was a Baptist through and through, holding
>  >>recognized Baptist positions on all the cardinal doctrines.
>  >>Consider these eight (8) conclusive reasons why Saint Patrick was a
>  >>Baptist!
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>   Number One: St. Patrick Baptized Only Professed Believers
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>Contrary to Catholic dogma, which teaches that infants are to be
>  >>"baptized", in all of Patrick's writings he does not mention one
>  >>single incident when he baptized an infant, much less someone who
>  >>had not professed Christ as their Saviour. Patrick records the
>  >>baptism of one convert named Enda the night after his infant son,
>  >>Cormac, was born. What an ideal  opportunity to record the baptism
>  >>of an infant, and yet Patrick makes no mention of it at all.  Only
>  >>Enda, a professed believer; not his infant son who could make no
>  >>claim of Christ. In all of his writings, the great Irish preacher
>  >>never mentions or even alludes to pedobaptism (the baptism of
>  >>infants). In fact, each time he refers to baptism at all he calls
>  >>those ready for the ordinance of baptism "baptized captives",
>  >>"baptized handmaidens of Christ", "baptized women distributed as
>  >>rewards", "baptized believers", "men" and "women." In one place,
>  >>Patrick wrote, "Perhaps, since I have baptized so many thousand
>  >>men, I might have expected half a screpall [a coin worth six cents]
>  >>from some of them..." Notice that he refers to having baptized
>  >>"...so many thousand men..", no infants, but men; adult,
>  >>professing, believing, responsible men. Another place he writes,
>  >>"So that even after my death I may leave as legacies to my
>  >>brethren...whom I have baptized in the Lord, so many thousand men."
>  >>Again he acknowledges the fact that he has baptized thousands of
>  >>men, but not one infant.
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>   Number Two: St. Patrick Baptized By Immersion Only
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>This has been a leading principle among the Baptists since the days
>  >>of the Apostles and still is today. Again, in all of his writings
>  >>there is not one shred of evidence that the Irish preacher knew
>  >>anything of sprinkling. All of the records of his baptisms tell of
>  >>immersion.  Cathcart (along with Nennius, Todd, O'Farrell and other
>  >>church historians) records one such instance, "When the saint
>  >>entered Tirawly, the seven sons of Amalgaidh assembled with their
>  >>followers. Profiting by the presence of so vast a multitude, the
>  >>apostle entered into the midst of them, his soul inflamed with the
>  >>love of God, and with a celestial courage preached the truths of
>  >>Christianity; and so powerful was the effect of his burning words
>  >>that the seven princes and over twelve thousand more were converted
>  >>on that day, and were soon baptized in a spring called Tobar
>  >>Enadhaire" (The Baptist Encyclopedia [1881], by William Cathcart,
>  >>page 887). Dr. Cathcart further states, "There is absolutely no
>  >>evidence that any baptism but that of immersion of adult believers
>  >>existed among the ancient Britons, in the first half of the fifth
>  >>century, nor for a long time afterwards."
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>In 1631 the English Baptists discovered, and subsequently
>  >>corresponded with, small communities of Baptists in Ireland and
>  >>found them to be sound. These churches, located in Dublin,
>  >>Waterford, Clonmel, Kilkenny, Cork, Limerick, Galloway, Wexford,
>  >>Carrick Fergus and Kerry are listed in Joseph Ivimey's
>  >>comprehensive History of the English Baptists [1811], Volume 1,
>  >>Pages 240-241. It is believed that some of these churches had
>  >>histories dating to the time of Patrick. Many of them can
>  >>substantiate and confirm their claims of such for nearly 1100
>  >>years, which places them within two hundred years of Patrick.
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>   Number Three: In Church Government, St. Patrick Was A Baptist
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>During his ministry, Patrick is recorded to have "founded 365
>  >>churches and consecrated the same number of bishops, and ordained
>  >>3,000 presbyters (Ancient British and Irish Churches, William
>  >>Cathcart, page 282). Anglican Bishop Stillingfleet refers to an
>  >>account of a great council of Brevy, Wales at which there were 118
>  >>Irish bishops. Noting that if these were Catholic bishops this
>  >>little island was in danger of "...going to seed --- in bishops."  
>  >>Other historians concede that "...Saint Patrick placed a bishop in
>  >>every church which he founded; and several presbyters after the
>  >>example of the New Testament churches." One such scholar, a Dr.
>  >>Carew of Maynooth, admits that a bishop "...was simply the pastor
>  >>of one congregation." The Catholic and Protestant idea of a bishop
>  >>being the head over several churches in different cities was
>  >>totally unknown among those early churches on the British Isles.
>  >>This can be confirmed from writings of Irish clergymen dated from
>  >>A.D. 1112 and reconfirmed from the same in A.D. 1057.
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>Number Four: Patrick Was A Baptist In Independence From Creeds,
>  >>Councils, Popes, etc.
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>Patrick never attended one council and recognized no authority over
>  >>him, save that of the Lord Jesus Himself. There is not any evidence
>  >>whatsoever that even remotely suggests that the famed Irish
>  >>preacher acknowledged any man to be of superior authority, power or
>  >>position than he. He recognized no Pope. He recognized no Cardinal.
>  >>In all of his writings it cannot be found where one time he
>  >>subscribes to even the most insignificant and remote catechism,
>  >>creed, or dogma of the Roman Catholic system. Of all the great
>  >>Christians that Patrick refers to in his letters, he never pays
>  >>homage to any Pope, nor mentions any man as being superior in
>  >>church clergy. Instead, the great Irish missionary speaks of his
>  >>love, regards, and terms of affection for those men whom had been
>  >>ordained as pastors of the churches he founded. Upon the authority
>  >>of the little Baptist church in Scotland where he was saved and
>  >>from which he received his commission much as did Paul and Barnabus
>  >>(Acts 15:22).
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>   Number Five: In Doctrine, Patrick Was A Baptist
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>In all of his writings, all of the doctrine that Patrick espouses
>  >>adherence to is consistent with historic Baptist doctrine. The
>  >>venerable preacher wrote, "It is Christ who gave His life for thee
>  >>(and) is He who speaks to thee. He has poured out upon us
>  >>abundantly the Holy Spirit, the gift and assurance of immortality,
>  >>who causes men to believe and become obedient that they might be
>  >>the sons of God and joint heirs with Christ." In this one
>  >>statement, Patrick alludes to six (6) major Baptist doctrines:
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>a. Patrick believed in the substitutionary atonement of Christ. He
>  >>did not believe that salvation comes through catechism, communion,
>  >>confession or christening. He believes what Baptists have always
>  >>believed, that all are saved by the Grace of God, through faith in
>  >>His Son, coming in repentance, and by His blood. William Cathcart
>  >>wrote, "There is no ground for doubting but that he preached the
>  >>gospel of repentance and faith in Ireland, and that his
>  >>ministrations were attended by overwhelming success" (The Baptist
>  >>Encyclopedia, page 887).
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>b. He believes in the free gift of the Holy Spirit which comes to
>  >>the believer at the moment of salvation. He does not believe that
>  >>the gift of the Holy Spirit is a separate work of grace, nor is He
>  >>manifested by speaking in tongues (John 14:16).
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>c. He also firmly conveys the message of the eternal security of
>  >>the believer in that those who are genuinely saved have put on
>  >>immortality (II Timothy 1:10).
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>d. He confirms his belief that men must be drawn by God in order to
>  >>be saved (John 6:44).
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>e. Patrick affirms his conviction in the sonship of the believer
>  >>(John 1:12). He believes that while Jesus Christ is the only
>  >>begotten Son of God, every true believer in Christ is also a son.
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>f. And the great Irish theologian attests to the fact that all
>  >>believers are joint-heirs with Christ (Romans 8:16-17). Patrick's
>  >>doctrine is also recorded by his disciples. Comgall writes,
>  >>"religion does not exist in bodily efforts..." Muirchu states that
>  >>the ancient poet Dubthac was redeemed under the ministry of Patrick
>  >>and that he "...first on that day believed in God and it was
>  >>imputed to him for righteousness" No mention of baptism for
>  >>salvation. No mention of a confessional. No mention of communion.
>  >>Patrick taught his disciples well that salvation comes only by and
>  >>through the grace of Almighty God.
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>   Number Six: In Terms Of The Lord's Supper, Patrick Was A Baptist
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>  From his writings we know that he rejected the Roman Catholic
>  >>view of salvation in the ordinance. Also from his writings, we know
>  >>that Patrick believed that the believer himself should partake of
>  >>both elements of communion, the bread and the cup, and not just the
>  >>administrator exclusively. In writing of the conversion of the two
>  >>daughters of Irish King Loeghaire under his ministry, Patrick tells
>  >>them to put away their idols and trust Christ alone. His
>  >>instructions to them regarding the Lord's Supper is that they
>  >>receive both elements representative of His body and blood.
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>   Number Seven: Patrick Rejects The Roman Catholic Dogma Of
>  >>   Transubstantiation
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>Patrick believed that the elements were only pictures of Christ's
>  >>body and Christ's blood.  Dr. Jarrell wrote, "In all the
>  >>descriptions of the Eucharist quoted there is no evidence that it
>  >>is...", or literally becomes the flesh of Christ and His blood. The
>  >>elements are merely symbols of such.
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>   Number Eight: Patrick Never Affirmed His Belief In, Or Adherence
>  >>To,
>  >>   Many Crucial Catholic Pecularities
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>St. Patrick was a Baptist and the first Irish churches were Baptist
>  >>churches. He knew nothing of priestly confession and priestly
>  >>forgiveness. He was not acquainted with extreme unction. He
>  >>strictly forbade the worship of images. Never once did he instruct
>  >>his converts that they were to pay homage to Mary or worship her.
>  >>He never mentions the intercession of Mary or of any departed
>  >>saint. In all of his writings there is no mention at all of
>  >>purgatory, of indulgences, of keeping holy days, of praying to
>  >>anyone but God Himself, of the persecution of opposers of the
>  >>church, of distinguishing clerical garments, of the rosary, of last
>  >>rites, of mass, of allegiance to the Pope. None of these crucial
>  >>Catholic doctrines and dogmas were practiced by or even mentioned
>  >>by the great missionary to Ireland.
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>It is my firm conviction that it has sufficiently been shown that
>  >>Saint Patrick was not a Roman Catholic in doctrine or practice, but
>  >>rather an early Baptist preacher following in the footsteps of the
>  >>Apostles themselves, believing what they believed, practicing what
>  >>they practiced. In conclusion, it seems that the words of W.A.
>  >>Jarrell on this subject are most fitting, "Were Patrick not turned
>  >>to dust, and were the body able to hear and turn, he would turn
>  >>over in his coffin at the disgrace on his memory from the Romish
>  >>church claiming him as a Roman Catholic" (Baptist Church Perpetuity
>  >>or History, page 479).
>  >>
>  >>
>  >
>  >--
>  >To unsubscribe, send ANY message to:
>  >pastorsforum-unsubscribe@...
>  >
>  >"In essential things, unity; in non-essential things, liberty; and
>  >in all things, charity."
>  >
> -- To unsubscribe, send ANY message to: 
> pastorsforum-unsubscribe@... "In essential things, unity; in 
> non-essential things, liberty; and in all things, charity."

-- 
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Pastor Steven G. Rockhill
Lisbon Reformed Presbyterian Church
PO Box 88
Lisbon, NY  13658
315-393-9041
revrock@...
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++