- Status
N
Nicea325
Guest
And that is the problem with many Protestants,they disort many of the ECF’s writings in order to suit their “johnny-come-lately” beliefs and traditions. As I once asked a Protestant here:
If the Eucharist is merely symbolic,then where are the overwhelming writings from the ECF defending a symbolic Eucharist? How ironic we have scores of writings defending many other doctrines,but a symbolic Eucharist is silent? :ehh:
D
Darran
Guest
Indeed they do, we ought to be in full communion with some form of person who can guide us. Perhaps a direct successor to one of the apostles or so, who can teach with full infaliable authority.And Catholics and Orthodox claim to adhere to the Bible, too. What is more, they both claim to adhere to scripture and Tradition, and they still don’t agree either.
Based on the above, that’s a great question for all of us.
Jon
Dunno where we can find one of those though.
Actually, according to Apostolic Succession, there’s lots of them, but you are right thar somehow, with the guidance of the Holy Spirit, we all need to find a way back to full communion.
Jon
D
Darran
Guest
Is there? Perhaps we could do with just one. You know, someone like Peter, he was a pretty cool guy.
P
pgreen
Guest
According to official church teachings the Catholic church began in 33 AD. Jesus gave authority to Peter to found a church and the Holy Spirit descended at the Pentecost. I have just been demonstrating that Peter and the apostles were part of the Jerusalem Church which preceeded the church in Rome. This is a fact that isn’t denied by the Catholic church. So I don’t see any need for argument. Roman Catholic implies a Roman connection. This connection came after the Jerusalem Church.
But the Catholic church began at Pentecost. Only later did the Romans become a part of the Catholic church when Constantine made it the official religion. So to answer your question - yes, the Catholic Church which later became the Roman Catholic Church began at Pentecost. But in the first years after Jesus’ ascension Peter headed a church based in Jerusalem before he left for Rome. Because of Peter that church is linked to Rome and therefore the Roman Catholic Church traces its roots to 33 AD when Peter and the other apostles received the Holy Spirit.
But the Catholic church began at Pentecost. Only later did the Romans become a part of the Catholic church when Constantine made it the official religion. So to answer your question - yes, the Catholic Church which later became the Roman Catholic Church began at Pentecost. But in the first years after Jesus’ ascension Peter headed a church based in Jerusalem before he left for Rome. Because of Peter that church is linked to Rome and therefore the Roman Catholic Church traces its roots to 33 AD when Peter and the other apostles received the Holy Spirit.
I
Isaiah45_9
Guest
Peter is cool, but I’ll confess that I relate to Thomas more
Sure. Aren’t all bishops in line with the apostles? Peter was a pretty cool guy. And I think Pope Benedict XVI is, too.
Jon
N
Newsy
Guest
So, you are completely disagreeing with what you stated earlier?
The city of Rome had nothing to do with the Founding of the Catholic Church in 33ad. Roman Rite is only one part of the Holy Catholic Church.We agree that the Catholic Church started in 33 ad by Jesus Christ and His Apostles, correct?
D
Darran
Guest
Ah indeed, this Pope Benedict fellow. Now if only we knew what apostle he occupies the seat of
Yeah, but that guy occupied more than one. Antioch, wasn’t it?Ah indeed, this Pope Benedict fellow. Now if only we knew what apostle he occupies the seat of
The problem is what is meant by the seat of St. Peter. What did the early Church say about the Bishop of Rome. Nicea says he is the western patriarche. I agree. No mention of universal jurisdiction.
Jon
R
rinnie
Guest
All you have to do is find the keys. Who has the Keys? Well according to Jesus its Peter.
Here I will show you. Matt 16:18 You are Peter, now are all the Apostles named Peter? No just Simon Peter do you not agree? Now Jesus said I will give YOU the keys to the kingdom.
Now many will say ALL of the Apostles have the keys to the Kingdom, I say show me.
Next People say they are all Equal. God did not choose among them. So then I ask, why then did Peter state:
Acts 15:8 My brothers, you know PERFECTLY WELL that in the early days GOD MADE HIS CHOICE among you the gentile were to learn the good news FROM ME and so become believers.
Why Did Jesus say to Peter FEED MY SHEEP. Why only Peter, and he said his name every single time.
Now if you can show me where Jesus gave ALL of the Apostles the keys to the kingdom, I will be glad to recant. But until you can. That is the proof, that Peter is the leader, and he has passed on this authority, from the time of his death. If you can prove history wrong, I am willing to listen.
J
jlhargus
Guest
JL: You summed it up in a nut shell. It couldn’t be any more to the point and precise.
C
CopticChristian
Guest
What is the purpose in knowing the number of these Bible alone people?
What is the thrust of asking leadership of these Bible alone people?
N
Nicea325
Guest
Unfortunately,many will argue that all the Apostles received the keys?JL: You summed it up in a nut shell. It couldn’t be any more to the point and precise.
Yes, my friend, we will. And so will the Orthodox.Unfortunately,many will argue that all the Apostles received the keys?
Jon
N
Nicea325
Guest
Indeed my friend…
Unfortunately I find very little evidence to support such a view. In my opinion it seems as another means to diminish Peter’s role and his primacy. No offense,but to many want to make Christ Church to appear “democratic” in nature and structure.
R
rinnie
Guest
I know, and for the life of me I cannot understand this. Jesus gave the keys to the kingdom to Peter. He was quite clear when he said it.Unfortunately,many will argue that all the Apostles received the keys?
He said YOU are PETER and to YOU I give the keys to the kingdom. Wonder where they get they Jesus was talking to all of the Apostles?
We have the scripture to prove it was only Peter.
R
rinnie
Guest
Sure they are. Apostolic Succession is the line of Bishops stretching back to the Apostles to make sure that the teaching’s would be passed down after the death of the original Apostles.
This is written in 2 Tim 2:2 show us to make sure they continue to teach others.
But what does Apostolic Succession have to do with having the keys to the kingdom.
There is no where in the scripture where any Apostle claims the keys to the kingdom except Peter. And those words giving him the keys were straight from Jesus.
A
AdesteFideles
Guest
This comes partly from Matthew 18:18, and partly from imagination.
The argument is that what authority Jesus gave to St. Peter, was – and this verse is the “proof” – also extended to the rest of the Apostles. In this argument, the keys symbolize the binding and loosing, which is described in Matthew 18.
- Status