I have had St. john quoted against me in a discussion as follows: -
on Confession (Penance)
“We do not request you to go to confess your sins to any of your fellow-men, but only to God!” (Crhysostom, Homily on 50th Psalm)
“We do not ask you to go and confess your iniquities to a sinful man for pardon - but only to God.” (Ibid.)
“You need no witness of your confession. Secretly acknowledge your sins and let God alone hear you.” (Chrysostom, De Paenitentia, Volume IV, Col. 901)
“Therefore, I beseech you, always confess your sins to God! I, in no way, ask you to confess them to me. To God alone should you expose the wounds of your soul, and from him alone expect the cure. Go to Him, then, and you shall not be cast off, but healed. For, before you utter a single word, God knows your prayer.” (Chrysostom, De Incomprehensibili, Volume I, Homily V)
"All things are plain and simple in the Holy Scriptures; all things necessary are evident." (2 Thessalonians, Homily III, Volume xi, 528)
Does St. Chrysostom clearly state that all things that are necessary (i.e., for salvation, for doctrine, etc.) are already present and evident in Scripture?
Does the Roman Catholic Church teach that all things that are necessary (i.e., for salvation, for doctrine, etc.) are not already present and evident in Scripture, but that her traditions are equally necessary, and of equal value to Scripture?
Since it is impossible to answer both the above questions “yes,” (they are mutually contradictory and mutually exclusive), which one is teaching doctrinal error?
(1) St. Chrysostom was teaching error.
(2) Rome is teaching error.
on Peter as the “ROCK” or first Pope of Rome
St. John Chrysostom, one of the greatest theologian of the early Church, says of Peter:
First Citation: “‘And I say unto thee, Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church;’ that is, on the faith of his confession.” (A Library of the Fathers of the Holy Catholic Church, Oxford: Parker, 1844; Homilies of S. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of Matthew, Homily 54.3)
Second Citation: “’ 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. Hereby He signifies that many were now on the point of believing, and raises his spirit and makes him a shepherd, ‘And the gates of hell’ shall not prevail against it.” (Roberts, Alexander and Donaldson, James, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, First Series: Volume X (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1997.)
Third Citation: “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. Hereby He signifies that many were now on the point of believing, and raises his spirit, and makes him a shepherd. “And the gates of hell” shall not prevail against it.” (Roberts, Alexander and Donaldson, James, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, First Series: Volume X, (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc.) 1997.)
Who does St. John Chrysostom identify as the ROCK upon which the true Church will be built - Peter or Christ Himself via Peter’s confession of faith?
Jesus is the Rock Peter is the Rock
**Does Rome enjoy the “Unanimous consent of the Fathers” on this topic? **
Since St. Chrysostom says Jesus is the ROCK, and Rome says the Peter is the ROCK, both cannot be right. One of the two is teaching doctrinal error; which one?
St. Chrysostom is teaching error Rome is teaching error