![\"\"](\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/572\/2020\/02\/OrthodoxChurchThessaloniki.jpg\")
<\/div>\nTheologically, the Donatists were rigorists, holding that the Church of the saints must remain \u2018holy,\u2019 and that sacraments conferred by\u00a0traditores<\/em>\u00a0were invalid . . . The Church maintained that the unworthiness of the minister did not affect the validity of sacraments, since, as Augustine insisted, their true minister was Christ. The Donatists, on the other hand, went so far as to assert that all those who communicated with\u00a0traditores<\/em>\u00a0were infected, and that, since the Church is one and holy, the Donatists alone formed the Church. Converts to Donatism were rebaptized, a proceeding repeatedly condemned by orthodox synods.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/div>\n
\nTraditores<\/em>: The name given in Africa in early times to Christians who surrendered the Scriptures when their possession was forbidden in the persecution of Diocletian. The controversy between Catholics and Donatists which followed the persecution was centred chiefly in the refusal of the Donatists to recognize Caecilian, Bishop of Carthage, on the ground that he had been consecrated by\u00a0traditores<\/em>.<\/div>\n<\/blockquote>\nMy analogy applies in the following manner:<\/div>\n*<\/div>\n1) Anti-ecumenical or anti-Catholic Orthodox groups also rebaptize converts from Catholicism and Protestantism, thus following the Donatist practice and defying the Tradition of the unified early Church with regard to converts from Donatism, and even the mainstream Tradition of Orthodoxy.<\/div>\n*
\n2) These groups often claim that the Catholic Church is (in essence) different now than it was before Vatican II. Presumably before that time, the Catholic Church possessed apostolic succession (or at least a measure of \u201cinstitutional\u201d grace in some fashion), but somehow lost it, and changed in essence (so we are told).<\/div>\n*<\/div>\n3) Yet no dogma of the Catholic Church was changed at Vatican II. Therefore, the objection has to be on the basis of schism or on rigorous grounds \u2014 precisely as with the Donatists. Thus we see much outcry from Orthodox polemicists (often former Catholics) about the crisis of liberalism in the Catholic Church \u2014 as if that has any relevance as to whether the Catholic Church is\u00a0apostolic<\/em>\u00a0or not (since liberal heterodoxy has not been enshrined in Catholic dogma at all). The Donatists did the same thing: they looked at sin and sinners in the Church (which Christ already predicted would be the case) and concluded that therefore, the Church was not the Church (and claimed that title for themselves \u2014 as if\u00a0they<\/em>\u00a0were not sinners).<\/div>\n*<\/div>\n4) Like the Donatists, the rigorous, anti-ecumenical Orthodox now say they are \u201cthe Church,\u201d to the more-or-less\u00a0complete<\/em>\u00a0institutional (and even informal?) exclusion of Catholicism. Archbishop Kallistos Ware, however, speaks an altogether different language (quite similar to the Catholic position):<\/div>\n\nThere is first a more moderate group . . . This group holds that, while it is true to say that Orthodoxy is the Church, it is false to conclude from this that those who are not Orthodox cannot possibly belong to the Church. Many people may be members of the Church who are not visibly so; invisible bonds may exist despite an outward separation. The Spirit of God blows where it chooses and, as Irenaeus said, where the Spirit is, there is the Church. We know where the Church is but we cannot be sure where it is not . . .<\/div>\n*<\/div>\nThere is only one Church, but there are many different ways of being related to this one Church . . . there are other Christian communions which possess to a greater or lesser degree a genuine measure of Orthodoxy. All these facts must be taken into account: one cannot simply say that all non-Orthodox are outside the Church, and leave it at that; one cannot treat other Christians as if they stood on the same level as unbelievers.<\/div>\n<\/blockquote>\n\nSuch is the view of the more moderate party. But there also exists in the Orthodox Church a more rigorous group, who hold that since Orthodoxy is the Church, anyone who is not Orthodox cannot be a member of the Church . . .<\/div>\n*
\nOf course (so this stricter group add) divine grace may well be active among many non-Orthodox, and if they are sincere in their love of God, then we may be sure that God will have mercy upon them; but they cannot, in their present state, be termed members of the Church . . .\u00a0(The Orthodox Church<\/em>, New York: Penguin Books, revised edition, 1993, 308-309)<\/div>\n<\/blockquote>\nAlso, far from pointing to Vatican II as the\u00a0demise<\/em>\u00a0of the Catholic Church (or whatever was left of it, from a critical Orthodox standpoint), Ware takes a completely opposite view:<\/div>\n\nThe changes brought about in the Roman Catholic Church at the Second Vatican Council (1962-5) have made possible a gradual rapprochement between Rome and Orthodoxy at the official level.\u00a0(Ware,\u00a0ibid<\/em>., 315)<\/div>\n<\/blockquote>\n5) Even with regard to heresy, the anti-ecumenical Orthodox faction is inconsistent, since it condemns Orthodox ecumenism as \u201cheresy\u201d and accuses fellow Orthodox brethren of adopting relativistic indifferentism. Yet the more rigorist factions of Orthodoxy (with the exception of some extremely separatist groups such as HOCNA) do not assert that ecumenical Orthodox have lost the sacraments and apostolic succession. But the Catholic Church has \u2014 according to them \u2014 at least partially, for the very same reason (the emphasis on ecumenism and religious freedom of Vatican II). If, on the other hand, Vatican II was in fact irrelevant to the ecclesiological status of the Catholic Church, then why discuss it at all? If a horse is dead, it can\u2019t become\u00a0more<\/em>\u00a0dead. If the\u00a0filioque<\/em>, Scholasticism, and the papacy didn\u2019t make us heretics in Orthodox eyes, then why would mere ecumenism?<\/div>\n*
\n6) The very notion of Christ\u2019s Church \u201cgoing off the rails\u201d is nonsensical and unbiblical, whether it be in the 7th century or the 11th, the 16th, or in 1965. The Church is\u00a0indefectible<\/em>\u00a0(Mt 16:18; 28:20; Jn 14:16-17; 1 Tim 3:15; Ps 89:33-37; Is 55:3; 61:8; Jer 32:40, many other indirect proofs). It simply can\u2019t happen that the Church, which is apostolic and which possesses true Tradition and valid sacraments by its very nature, can somehow lose them. Even the Jews of the Old Covenant, with all their rebellion, idolatry, and wickedness, were not rejected by God, since He had made an eternal covenant with them. Certainly the Church cannot be less secure.<\/div>\n*<\/div>\nMost Orthodox will admit that Rome was the center (or at the very least\u00a0a<\/em>\u00a0center) of orthodoxy for the first 1000 years of the Church. How is it that this could be the case, \u2014 and the papacy existed, and was broadly acknowledged by both East and West \u2013, then suddenly the faith of Rome is shipwrecked, and Rome and the papacy cease to be an essential part of the Church?<\/div>\n*
\n7) The historical argument against anti-ecumenical Orthodoxy runs as follows: Clearly the orthodox Christian Church (wherever else it may have been\u00a0present<\/em>) resided at, and was centered at, Rome throughout these many centuries when the East was in frequent schism and weighed down by various heresies (even Christological ones). We can\u2019t reasonably say that it resided in Constantinople, or Alexandria, or Antioch in the years when those sees were formally heretical. Therefore it is without doubt that Rome was the center of the Church: ergo: it possessed apostolic succession and valid sacraments.<\/div>\n*
\n8) These considerations also demolish the historically tenuous claim that the Catholic Church \u201cdeparted\u201d from the Orthodox Church, rather than vice versa (if anyone<\/em> is to be thought of as having \u201cdeparted\u201d). Now the more rigorist Orthodox claim that Rome has lost apostolic succession, and the sacraments. But this can\u2019t happen, according to the explicit biblical principle of the indefectibility of the Church. If Rome once possessed the essential marks of the Church (which must be the case up through the ninth century, or else no continuous institutional Church existed and apostolic succession would be broken), it could not have lost them, because God the Holy Spirit \u2014 the Guardian and Teacher of the Church \u2014 wouldn\u2019t allow that to happen.<\/div>\n*
\n9) So to contend that Orthodoxy or a part of Orthodoxy possesses apostolic succession and sacraments, while Catholicism does not<\/em> is impossible, based on the triple criteria of history, the Bible, and reason. Like the Donatist heresy (which it resembles), it is a self-defeating position. One possible way out of the dilemma would be to deny the concept and\/or actuality of indefectibility, but Orthodox believe that about themselves, so this is hardly a viable option. They could deny that Rome ever had apostolic succession, but that would be very difficult, in the face of the contrasting situation in the East and West during those early centuries vis-a-vis orthodox Christian theology.<\/div>\n*
\n10) Therefore, the only solution is to adopt a position in which both Catholicism and Orthodoxy possess apostolic succession and valid sacraments (in other words, the ecumenical outlook). Error exists on one or both sides in the instances where they disagree, but these are not sufficient enough to annihilate apostolic succession, since the principle of indefectibility will not allow it.<\/div>\n*
\n11) To assert an ecclesiological and historical position whereby the Catholic Church headed by the pope in Rome was the standard and guardian of orthodoxy for 1000 years, but then passed the \u201capostolic ball\u201d over to Constantinople (and thereafter lost it) is an absurd position to take \u2014 just as ludicrous as the anti-ecumenical Protestant position which holds that the Catholic Church forsook Christianity right after the apostolic age, or with Constantine in the 4th century, or with the advent of the \u201creformers\u201d Luther and Calvin in the 16th century (who were actually revolutionaries \u2014 overthrowing much of unbroken Church Tradition).<\/div>\n*<\/div>\n12) A stream cannot rise above its source, and both Orthodoxy and Protestantism could never hope to be remotely as they are today without the necessary historical and ecclesiological \u201cgroundwork\u201d laid down by Rome. Without the unwaveringly orthodox Roman See and its infallible popes, arguably Christianity would not be here at all, let alone being theoretically centered in Geneva or Constantinople.<\/div>\n*<\/div>\nIn my opinion, the facts of Church history and the biblical descriptions of the nature of the Church and God\u2019s protection of it will not permit any other interpretation. I didn\u2019t determine this history, or what God intended to convey in His revelation, the Bible. But in the face of that history, one must adopt a non-contradictory interpretation. Catholics do not exclude Orthodox or Catholics altogether from the Church. We are applying a standard no different than does Archbishop Kallistos Ware in the citation above: \u201cWe know where the Church is but we cannot be sure where it is not . . . \u201c<\/div>\n*<\/div>\n13) The Catholic Church is now what it has always been. We have maintained continuity and the same principle all along. So my argument is, essentially:<\/div>\n\nCatholicism and Western Christianity hasn\u2019t changed in essence at all, while Eastern Christianity and Orthodoxy went through all sorts of heresies, split from the West again and again, and finally split off altogether. Therefore, the Orthodox cannot argue that\u00a0they<\/em>\u00a0possess apostolic succession and the sacraments while Catholicism\u00a0does not<\/em>, according to the biblical principle of indefectibility.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
***<\/p>\n
Related Reading<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n
Roman See as Historic Standard-Bearer of Orthodoxy (+ the Ecclesiological Absurdity of Anti-Catholic-Type Eastern Orthodox Arguments Against Roman Primacy & Apostolicity)<\/a>\u00a0[1997]<\/p>\n
Filioque<\/em>: Catholic-Orthodox Dialogue\u00a0<\/a>(William Klimon) [July 1997]<\/p>\n
Sack of Constantinople (1204) & Unknown Byzantine Atrocities\u00a0<\/a>[1998]<\/p>\n
Contraception: Early Church Teaching<\/a>\u00a0(William Klimon) [1998]<\/p>\n
Divorce: Early Church Teaching<\/a>\u00a0[Oct. 1998]<\/p>\n
\u201cWestern\u201d View of the Holy Trinity,\u00a0Monarchia<\/em>, Procession, Etc.<\/a>\u00a0(vs. David Waltz and Drake Shelton) [3-5-12]<\/p>\n
Orthodoxy and Catholicism: A Comparison<\/a><\/i>\u00a0(book: July 2004 \/ rev. Sep. 2014, 383p)\u00a0[third revised edition includes\u00a0much<\/i>\u00a0material from Byzantine Catholic Fr. Deacon Daniel Dozier]<\/p>\n
Orthodoxy & Contraception: Continuity or Compromise?<\/a>\u00a0[2015]<\/p>\n
***<\/p>\n
Unfortunately, Money Trees Do Not Exist<\/strong>:\u00a0<\/span>If you have been aided in any way by my work, or think it is valuable and worthwhile, please strongly consider financially supporting it (even $10 \/ month \u2014 a mere 33 cents a day \u2014 would be very helpful). I have been a full-time Catholic apologist since Dec. 2001, and have been writing Christian apologetics since 1981 (see\u00a0my Resume<\/a>).\u00a0My work has been proven (by God\u2019s grace alone) to be fruitful, in terms of changing lives (see the tangible evidences\u00a0from unsolicited \u201ctestimonies\u201d<\/a>).\u00a0I have to pay my bills like all of you: and have a (homeschooling) wife and two children still at home to provide for, and a mortgage to pay.<\/div>\n*<\/div>\nMy book royalties from\u00a0three bestsellers in the field<\/a>\u00a0(published in 2003-2007) have been decreasing, as has my overall income, making it increasingly difficult to make ends meet.\u00a0 I provide over 2700 free articles here, for the purpose of your edification and education, and have\u00a0written 50 books<\/a>.\u00a0It\u2019ll literally be a struggle to survive financially until Dec. 2020, when both my wife and I will be receiving Social Security. If you cannot contribute, I ask for your prayers (and \u201clikes\u201d and links and shares). Thanks!<\/div>\n*<\/div>\nSee my\u00a0information on how to donate<\/a>\u00a0(including 100% tax-deductible donations). It\u2019s very simple to contribute to my apostolate via PayPal, if a tax deduction is not needed (my \u201cbusiness name\u201d there is called \u201cCatholic Used Book Service,\u201d from my old bookselling days 17 or so years ago, but send to my email: apologistdave@gmail.com). Another easy way to send and receive money (with a bank account or a mobile phone) is through\u00a0Zelle<\/a>. Again, just send to my e-mail address.\u00a0May God abundantly bless you.<\/div>\n*<\/div>\n***<\/div>\n<\/div>\n(originally Nov. 1998; revised in 2004)<\/div>\n*<\/div>\nPhoto credit:<\/span><\/strong> Votsis Panagiotis<\/a>; Greek Orthodox Church in Thessaloniki, Greece<\/span> [public domain \/ Pexels.com<\/a>]<\/div>\n*<\/div>\n***<\/div>\n<\/body><\/html>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"An Orthodox Christian whom I encountered on the Internet objected to my comparison of the anti-ecumenical school of Orthodoxy to the ancient Donatist schismatics. The non-Catholic Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church\u00a0(2nd edition, edited by F. A. Cross and E. A. Livingstone, Oxford University Press, 1983, 419, 1389), defines Donatism as follows: Theologically, the Donatists […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2331,"featured_media":44946,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[231,131,808],"tags":[4967,598,10319,1131,1132,7396,809,3820,310,2813,245,2364,163,3232,570,10322,161,10325,7390,1130,162,1133,1653,324,1129],"class_list":["post-44945","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-anti-catholicism","category-church-ecclesiology","category-eastern-orthodoxy","tag-4967","tag-apostolic-succession","tag-apostolicity","tag-bible-papacy","tag-biblical-authority","tag-biblical-ecclesiology","tag-bishops","tag-christian-church","tag-christian-unity","tag-church-offices","tag-early-church","tag-eastern-orthodoxy","tag-ecclesiology","tag-hierarchical-church","tag-orthodoxy","tag-orthodoxy-apostolicity","tag-papacy","tag-patriarchs","tag-patristic-ecclesiology","tag-petrine-primacy","tag-popes","tag-primacy-of-rome","tag-roman-primacy","tag-schism","tag-st-peter"],"yoast_head":"\n
Anti-Catholic Orthodox Claims of Exclusive Apostolic Succession<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"The Eastern Orthodox cannot argue that\u00a0they\u00a0possess apostolic succession & the sacraments while Catholicism\u00a0does not, according to the biblical principle of indefectibility.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/02\/anti-catholic-orthodox-claims-of-exclusive-apostolic-succession.html\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Anti-Catholic Orthodox Claims of Exclusive Apostolic Succession\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"The Eastern Orthodox cannot argue that\u00a0they\u00a0possess apostolic succession & the sacraments while Catholicism\u00a0does not, according to the biblical principle of indefectibility.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/02\/anti-catholic-orthodox-claims-of-exclusive-apostolic-succession.html\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:author\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/dave.armstrong.798\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2020-02-26T17:00:59+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/572\/2020\/02\/OrthodoxChurchThessaloniki.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"640\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"426\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Dave Armstrong\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Dave Armstrong\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"11 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/02\/anti-catholic-orthodox-claims-of-exclusive-apostolic-succession.html\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/02\/anti-catholic-orthodox-claims-of-exclusive-apostolic-succession.html\",\"name\":\"Anti-Catholic Orthodox Claims of Exclusive Apostolic Succession\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2020-02-26T17:00:59+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2020-02-26T17:00:59+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/471eaa20e441eca4bb1ea50393cf632e\"},\"description\":\"The Eastern Orthodox cannot argue that\u00a0they\u00a0possess apostolic succession & the sacraments while Catholicism\u00a0does not, according to the biblical principle of indefectibility.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/02\/anti-catholic-orthodox-claims-of-exclusive-apostolic-succession.html#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/02\/anti-catholic-orthodox-claims-of-exclusive-apostolic-succession.html\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/02\/anti-catholic-orthodox-claims-of-exclusive-apostolic-succession.html#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Anti-Catholic Orthodox Claims of Exclusive Apostolic Succession\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/\",\"name\":\"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism\",\"description\":\"Catholic biblical apologetics\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":\"required name=search_term_string\"}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/471eaa20e441eca4bb1ea50393cf632e\",\"name\":\"Dave Armstrong\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/820e6db89734ae7a9e5dac8d498f5ac7?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/820e6db89734ae7a9e5dac8d498f5ac7?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Dave Armstrong\"},\"description\":\"Dave Armstrong is a Catholic author and apologist, who has been actively proclaiming and defending Christianity since 1981, and Catholicism in particular since 1991 (full-time since December 2001). Formerly a campus missionary, as a Protestant, Dave was received into the Catholic Church in February 1991, by the late, well-known catechist and theologian, Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J. Dave\u2019s articles have appeared in many influential Catholic periodicals, including \\\"This Rock\\\" (now called \\\"Catholic Answers Magazine\\\"), \\\"Envoy Magazine\\\" (Patrick Madrid), \\\"The Catholic Answer,\\\" \\\"The Coming Home Journal,\\\" \\\"Gilbert Magazine\\\" (American Chesterton Society), and \\\"The Latin Mass.\\\" He also writes a featured column for every issue of \\\"The Michigan Catholic\\\": published by the archdiocese of Detroit, and was editor for most of the apologetics tracts published by the St. Paul Street Evangelization apostolate. Dave\u2019s apologetics and writing apostolate was the subject of a feature article in the May 2002 issue of \\\"Envoy Magazine.\\\" He served as the staff moderator at the Internet discussion forum for The Coming Home Network, from 2007-2010. Dave has been interviewed on many nationally syndicated Catholic radio shows, including \\\"Catholic Answers Live\\\" (twice), \\\"Faith and Family Live\\\" (Steve Wood), \\\"Kresta in the Afternoon,\\\" \\\"Son Rise Morning Show,\\\" \\\"Catholic Connection\\\" (Teresa Tomeo), and \\\"The Catholics Next Door.\\\" His large and popular website, \\\"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism,\\\" was online from March 1997 to March 2007, and received the 1998 Catholic Website of the Year award from \\\"Envoy Magazine.\\\" His blog of the same name (now transferred to Patheos), begun in February 2004, contains more than 1,500 papers, at least 500 debates or dialogues, and over 50 distinct \\\"index\\\" web pages. Unsolicited correspondence has indicated many hundreds of conversions (or returns) to the Catholic faith as a result, by God's grace, of these writings. Dave's conversion story was published in the bestselling book \\\"Surprised by Truth\\\" (edited by Patrick Madrid; San Diego: Basilica Press, 1994). Sophia Institute Press has published six of his books: \\\"A Biblical Defense of Catholicism\\\" (Foreword by Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J., 1996 \/ 2003), \\\"The Catholic Verses\\\" (2004), \\\"The One-Minute Apologist\\\" (2007), \\\"Bible Proofs for Catholic Truths\\\" (2009), \\\"The Quotable Newman\\\" (editor: 2012), and \\\"Proving the Catholic Faith is Biblical\\\" (2015). He is co-author (with Dr. Paul Thigpen) of the inserts for \\\"The New Catholic Answer Bible\\\" (Our Sunday Visitor: 2005), and editor for \\\"The Wisdom of Mr. Chesterton: The Very Best Quotes, Quips, and Cracks from the Pen of G. K. Chesterton\\\" (Saint Benedict Press \/ TAN Books: 2009). \\\"100 Biblical Arguments Against Sola Scriptura\\\" was published by Catholic Answers in May 2012. His \\\"Quotable Wesley\\\" compilation was published by (Protestant \/ Wesleyan publisher) Beacon Hill Press in April 2014. Several of his 49 books are bestsellers in their field. Dave maintains a popular personal Facebook page, a Facebook author page, and has a Twitter account as well. He offers almost all of his books in e-book form on his own Biblical Catholicism site (http:\/\/biblicalcatholicism.com\/), at a permanent deep discount: only $2.99 for ePub, mobi, and AZW, and $1.99 for PDF. His writing has been enthusiastically endorsed or recommended by many leading Catholic apologists, authors, and priests, including Dr. Scott Hahn, Fr. Peter M. J. Stravinskas, Marcus Grodi, Patrick Madrid, Steve Ray, Tim Staples, Devin Rose, Mike Aquilina, Al Kresta, Karl Keating, Fr. Dwight Longenecker, Brandon Vogt, Marcellino D'Ambrosio, and Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J. Dave has been happily married to his wife Judy since October 1984. They have three sons and a daughter, and reside in southeast Michigan (metro Detroit).\",\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/biblicalcatholicism.com\/\",\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/dave.armstrong.798\",\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/@LuxVeritatisApologetics\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/author\/davearmstrong\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Anti-Catholic Orthodox Claims of Exclusive Apostolic Succession","description":"The Eastern Orthodox cannot argue that\u00a0they\u00a0possess apostolic succession & the sacraments while Catholicism\u00a0does not, according to the biblical principle of indefectibility.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/02\/anti-catholic-orthodox-claims-of-exclusive-apostolic-succession.html","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Anti-Catholic Orthodox Claims of Exclusive Apostolic Succession","og_description":"The Eastern Orthodox cannot argue that\u00a0they\u00a0possess apostolic succession & the sacraments while Catholicism\u00a0does not, according to the biblical principle of indefectibility.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/02\/anti-catholic-orthodox-claims-of-exclusive-apostolic-succession.html","og_site_name":"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism","article_author":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/dave.armstrong.798","article_published_time":"2020-02-26T17:00:59+00:00","og_image":[{"width":640,"height":426,"url":"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/572\/2020\/02\/OrthodoxChurchThessaloniki.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Dave Armstrong","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Dave Armstrong","Est. reading time":"11 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/02\/anti-catholic-orthodox-claims-of-exclusive-apostolic-succession.html","url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/02\/anti-catholic-orthodox-claims-of-exclusive-apostolic-succession.html","name":"Anti-Catholic Orthodox Claims of Exclusive Apostolic Succession","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#website"},"datePublished":"2020-02-26T17:00:59+00:00","dateModified":"2020-02-26T17:00:59+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/471eaa20e441eca4bb1ea50393cf632e"},"description":"The Eastern Orthodox cannot argue that\u00a0they\u00a0possess apostolic succession & the sacraments while Catholicism\u00a0does not, according to the biblical principle of indefectibility.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/02\/anti-catholic-orthodox-claims-of-exclusive-apostolic-succession.html#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/02\/anti-catholic-orthodox-claims-of-exclusive-apostolic-succession.html"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2020\/02\/anti-catholic-orthodox-claims-of-exclusive-apostolic-succession.html#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Anti-Catholic Orthodox Claims of Exclusive Apostolic Succession"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/","name":"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism","description":"Catholic biblical apologetics","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":"required name=search_term_string"}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/471eaa20e441eca4bb1ea50393cf632e","name":"Dave Armstrong","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/820e6db89734ae7a9e5dac8d498f5ac7?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/820e6db89734ae7a9e5dac8d498f5ac7?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Dave Armstrong"},"description":"Dave Armstrong is a Catholic author and apologist, who has been actively proclaiming and defending Christianity since 1981, and Catholicism in particular since 1991 (full-time since December 2001). Formerly a campus missionary, as a Protestant, Dave was received into the Catholic Church in February 1991, by the late, well-known catechist and theologian, Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J. Dave\u2019s articles have appeared in many influential Catholic periodicals, including \"This Rock\" (now called \"Catholic Answers Magazine\"), \"Envoy Magazine\" (Patrick Madrid), \"The Catholic Answer,\" \"The Coming Home Journal,\" \"Gilbert Magazine\" (American Chesterton Society), and \"The Latin Mass.\" He also writes a featured column for every issue of \"The Michigan Catholic\": published by the archdiocese of Detroit, and was editor for most of the apologetics tracts published by the St. Paul Street Evangelization apostolate. Dave\u2019s apologetics and writing apostolate was the subject of a feature article in the May 2002 issue of \"Envoy Magazine.\" He served as the staff moderator at the Internet discussion forum for The Coming Home Network, from 2007-2010. Dave has been interviewed on many nationally syndicated Catholic radio shows, including \"Catholic Answers Live\" (twice), \"Faith and Family Live\" (Steve Wood), \"Kresta in the Afternoon,\" \"Son Rise Morning Show,\" \"Catholic Connection\" (Teresa Tomeo), and \"The Catholics Next Door.\" His large and popular website, \"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism,\" was online from March 1997 to March 2007, and received the 1998 Catholic Website of the Year award from \"Envoy Magazine.\" His blog of the same name (now transferred to Patheos), begun in February 2004, contains more than 1,500 papers, at least 500 debates or dialogues, and over 50 distinct \"index\" web pages. Unsolicited correspondence has indicated many hundreds of conversions (or returns) to the Catholic faith as a result, by God's grace, of these writings. Dave's conversion story was published in the bestselling book \"Surprised by Truth\" (edited by Patrick Madrid; San Diego: Basilica Press, 1994). Sophia Institute Press has published six of his books: \"A Biblical Defense of Catholicism\" (Foreword by Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J., 1996 \/ 2003), \"The Catholic Verses\" (2004), \"The One-Minute Apologist\" (2007), \"Bible Proofs for Catholic Truths\" (2009), \"The Quotable Newman\" (editor: 2012), and \"Proving the Catholic Faith is Biblical\" (2015). He is co-author (with Dr. Paul Thigpen) of the inserts for \"The New Catholic Answer Bible\" (Our Sunday Visitor: 2005), and editor for \"The Wisdom of Mr. Chesterton: The Very Best Quotes, Quips, and Cracks from the Pen of G. K. Chesterton\" (Saint Benedict Press \/ TAN Books: 2009). \"100 Biblical Arguments Against Sola Scriptura\" was published by Catholic Answers in May 2012. His \"Quotable Wesley\" compilation was published by (Protestant \/ Wesleyan publisher) Beacon Hill Press in April 2014. Several of his 49 books are bestsellers in their field. Dave maintains a popular personal Facebook page, a Facebook author page, and has a Twitter account as well. He offers almost all of his books in e-book form on his own Biblical Catholicism site (http:\/\/biblicalcatholicism.com\/), at a permanent deep discount: only $2.99 for ePub, mobi, and AZW, and $1.99 for PDF. His writing has been enthusiastically endorsed or recommended by many leading Catholic apologists, authors, and priests, including Dr. Scott Hahn, Fr. Peter M. J. Stravinskas, Marcus Grodi, Patrick Madrid, Steve Ray, Tim Staples, Devin Rose, Mike Aquilina, Al Kresta, Karl Keating, Fr. Dwight Longenecker, Brandon Vogt, Marcellino D'Ambrosio, and Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J. Dave has been happily married to his wife Judy since October 1984. They have three sons and a daughter, and reside in southeast Michigan (metro Detroit).","sameAs":["https:\/\/biblicalcatholicism.com\/","https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/dave.armstrong.798","https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/@LuxVeritatisApologetics"],"url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/author\/davearmstrong"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/44945","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2331"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=44945"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/44945\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/44946"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=44945"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=44945"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=44945"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}