Christ Did NOT make Peter the head of the church

[ptisme]

No matter how many times I read them there still won’t be any reference to Peter declaring that he has any greater authority than any other apostle, nor acting with the authority that modern day popes claim to possess.

No. He acted as a prominent apostle, and was held accountable by another apostle.

You’ll either read this and question why you left or you’ll ignore it and carry on.
catholic-pages.com/pope/hahn.asp

 

[onenow1]

No matter how many times I read them there still won’t be any reference to Peter declaring that he has any greater authority than any other apostle, nor acting with the authority that modern day popes claim to possess.

No. He acted as a prominent apostle, and was held accountable by another apostle.

Acts 1

15 In those days Peter stood up among the brethren (the company of persons was in all about a hundred and twenty), and said,
16 “Brethren, the scripture had to be fulfilled, which the Holy Spirit spoke beforehand by the mouth of David, concerning Judas who was guide to those who arrested Jesus.
17 For he was numbered among us, and was allotted his share in this ministry.
18 (Now this man bought a field with the reward of his wickedness; and falling headlong he burst open in the middle and all his bowels gushed out.
19 And it became known to all the inhabitants of Jerusalem, so that the field was called in their language Akel’dama, that is, Field of Blood.)
20 For it is written in the book of Psalms, Let his habitation become desolate, and let there be no one to live in it'; and His office let another take.’
21 So one of the men who have accompanied us during all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us,
22 beginning from the baptism of John until the day when he was taken up from us – one of these men must become with us a witness to his resurrection.”
23 And they put forward two, Joseph called Barsab’bas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthi’as.
24 And they prayed and said, “Lord, who knowest the hearts of all men, show which one of these two thou hast chosen
25 to take the place in this ministry and apostleship from which Judas turned aside, to go to his own place.”
26 And they cast lots for them, and the lot fell on Matthi’as; and he was enrolled with the eleven apostles.

Read more: ewtn.com/ewtn/bible/search_bible.asp#ixzz3HUHfxfii

Maybe the above qualifies as taking charge . vs. 15

God Bless

 

[Randy_Carson]

No matter how many times I read them there still won’t be any reference to Peter declaring that he has any greater authority than any other apostle,

You’re right. Jesus declared Peter’s authority, not Peter.

nor acting with the authority that modern day popes claim to possess.

Peter didn’t use the word “trinity” or have a pocket New Testament, either, but so what?

The Church has grown and so has the office of the papacy in order to tend and feed the larger flock.

No. He acted as a prominent apostle, and was held accountable by another apostle.

Prominent? Well, that’s tecnically true.

Held accountable? Sure.

Nothing that denies anything Catholics believe in any of this, though.

 

[House_Harkonnen]

Jesus. He called it “my Church”.

Indeed. But “My Church” is not the name of any church.

When others – denominations, not churches, as it were – left, they took the Bible with them, but not the name; I guess it was more intellectually honest to name themselves after their human founders.

You need to bone up on church history. No denomination that started in the Reformation named themselves after their founders. Take the Lutherans for example. “Lutheran” was the name given to us by detractors.

 

[House_Harkonnen]

You still have the problem of the “keys” and “binding” etc….

How so? In scripture we see many apostles “binding”. That’s because they all had the authority to bind and loose. And all apostles and subsequent bishops have “the keys”.

 

[House_Harkonnen]

You’ll either read this and question why you left or you’ll ignore it and carry on.
catholic-pages.com/pope/hahn.asp

It’s long. I will read it when I have time and comment.

 

[ptisme]

How so? In scripture we see many apostles “binding”. That’s because they all had the authority to bind and loose. And all apostles and subsequent bishops have “the keys”.

If you read the “long” article you’ll see that in no other place are the other apostles given the “keys”. Take a time out from blogging and read it. Takes less than 5 min.

 

[onenow1]

You’re right. Jesus declared Peter’s authority, not Peter.

Peter didn’t use the word “trinity” or have a pocket New Testament, either, but so what?

The Church has grown and so has the office of the papacy in order to tend and feed the larger flock.

Prominent? Well, that’s tecnically true.

Held accountable? Sure.

Nothing that denies anything Catholics believe in any of this, though.

:thumbsup:I think if Peter declared himself no one would be following the one true Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.

 

[Randy_Carson]

So, because neither him nor any other apostle make mention of this special office that is necessary to submit to for salvation, that silence MUST mean that it was absolutely true?

Jesus established Peter as the rock, the keeper of the keys, the vicarious shepherd and the royal steward.

Have any of the modern popes or the popes throughout history claimed to be the leader?

Well, if by leader you mean head of the Church, sure.

First amongst equals. No problem with that. That was the teaching of the early church and scripture.

Oh.

Who were the others to walk on water? No one equaled Peter there.
Who paid Jesus’ temple tax acting in the place of Christ? No one equaled Peter there.
Who was named 197 times in the New Testament? No one equaled Peter there.
Who did Jesus give the keys to? No one equaled Peter there.
Who did Jesus rename? No one equaled Peter there?

Show me an example of an apostle who was greater than Peter and whose authority exceeded Peter’s.

Thanks.

 

[Randy_Carson]

How so? In scripture we see many apostles “binding”. That’s because they all had the authority to bind and loose. And all apostles and subsequent bishops have “the keys”.

Can you please give me the chapter and verse showing the apostles receiving keys and using that specific word?

Thanks.

 

[Gorgias]

Indeed. But “My Church” is not the name of any church.

Yet, “The Way” was Jesus’ name for it, and the name that the first Christians used.

You need to bone up on church history. No denomination that started in the Reformation named themselves after their founders. Take the Lutherans for example. “Lutheran” was the name given to us by detractors.

Indeed; as was the designation “Roman” to the Catholic Church. Thanks for recognizing that it goes both ways…

Incidentally, you might want to bone up on history yourself: Luther wanted to call his church “Evangelical”. The ‘Good News’ Church?

 

[Randy_Carson]

Indeed. But “My Church” is not the name of any church.

You need to bone up on church history. No denomination that started in the Reformation named themselves after their founders. Take the Lutherans for example. “Lutheran” was the name given to us by detractors.

So, why did you accept something that detracts from you?

We don’t call ourselves “fisheaters” or “papists”?

In the end, you call yourselves Lutherans with pride because you want to honor the man who founded your particular version of Protestantism. Just as Calvinists proudly bear the name of their spiritual father, John Calvin.

 

[Randy_Carson]

How so? In scripture we see many apostles “binding”. That’s because they all had the authority to bind and loose.

Of course. Catholics agree because they were apostles.

And all apostles and subsequent bishops have “the keys”.

Prove it. Luther said no, and Catholics are happy to say he got this one right.

 

[House_Harkonnen]

Yet, “The Way” was Jesus’ name for it, and the name that the first Christians used

That could be used for any church though.

Incidentally, you might want to bone up on history yourself: Luther wanted to call his church “Evangelical”. The ‘Good News’ Church?

Evangelical Catholic yes. That is the name some Lutherans still use to refer to themselves. Church of the Augsburg Confession as well.

 

[House_Harkonnen]

So, why did you accept something that detracts from you?

We don’t call ourselves “fisheaters” or “papists”?

You call yourselves “Roman Catholics”. Isn’t that a name detractors gave to your denomination? Why did my former catholic parish have “Roman Catholic” in bold letters above the door if it is so offensive?

In the end, you call yourselves Lutherans with pride because you want to honor the man who founded your particular version of Protestantism. Just as Calvinists proudly bear the name of their spiritual father, John Calvin.

Indeed. Just as Franciscans wear their name with pride because they want to honor the man who founded their particular flavor of Catholicism.

 

[Randy_Carson]

That could be used for any church though.

Really, House? :nope:

The early Church - the Church founded by Christ as promised in Matthew 16:18 - was that which was originally known as “the Way” (cf. Acts 24:14). Later, those individuals who followed Christ began to be called “Christians” beginning at Antioch (cf. Acts 11:26). As early as 107 A.D., those same individuals referred to themselves collectively as the “Catholic Church”. In a letter to the Church of Smyrna, Ignatius of Antioch wrote,

“You must all follow the bishop as Jesus Christ follows the Father, and the presbytery (priest) as you would the Apostles. Let no one do anything of concern to the Church without the bishop. Wherever the bishop appears, let the people be there; just as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church.” (Letter to the Smyrnaeans, A.D. 107, [8,1])

Notice that Ignatius does not introduce the term “Catholic Church”; instead he uses it in a manner suggesting that the name was already in use and familiar to his audience. This further suggests that the name, Catholic Church, had to have been coined much earlier in order to have achieved wide circulation by the time of this writing. In other words, the Christian assembly was calling itself the Catholic Church during the lifetime of the last Apostle, John, who died near the end of the first century. John, the beloved disciple, may have thought of himself as a member of the Catholic Church!

The Catholic Church began with Peter and the Apostles and continued without interruption or cessation through their disciples (Ignatius, Irenaeus, Polycarp, Clement, Justin Martyr, etc.) down to the present day. As a side note, it appears that the believers in Antioch may have coined both terms still in use today: “Christian” and “Catholic Church” – terms they used to describe the one body of believers in Christ.

 

[Randy_Carson]

You call yourselves “Roman Catholics”. Isn’t that a name detractors gave to your denomination? Why did my former catholic parish have “Roman Catholic” in bold letters above the door if it is so offensive?

I can’t speak for your parish, but I can say with confidence that the Church based in Rome is the Catholic Church.

Is it called the Catechism of the Roman Catholic Church?

But I’m okay with it either way. If anyone thinks they are insulting me by calling me a Roman Catholic, well, I’ve been called worse.

Indeed. Just as Franciscans wear their name with pride because they want to honor the man who founded their particular flavor of Catholicism.

Fair enough. So, when we start to point out some of the truly atrocious things your founder (a mere man) had to say about the Jews, you’ll own them to honor him?

 

[House_Harkonnen]

Really, House? :nope:

The early Church - the Church founded by Christ as promised in Matthew 16:18 - was that which was originally known as “the Way” (cf. Acts 24:14). Later, those individuals who followed Christ began to be called “Christians” beginning at Antioch (cf. Acts 11:26). As early as 107 A.D., those same individuals referred to themselves collectively as the “Catholic Church”. In a letter to the Church of Smyrna, Ignatius of Antioch wrote,

“You must all follow the bishop as Jesus Christ follows the Father, and the presbytery (priest) as you would the Apostles. Let no one do anything of concern to the Church without the bishop. Wherever the bishop appears, let the people be there; just as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church.” (Letter to the Smyrnaeans, A.D. 107, [8,1])

Notice that Ignatius does not introduce the term “Catholic Church”; instead he uses it in a manner suggesting that the name was already in use and familiar to his audience. This further suggests that the name, Catholic Church, had to have been coined much earlier in order to have achieved wide circulation by the time of this writing. In other words, the Christian assembly was calling itself the Catholic Church during the lifetime of the last Apostle, John, who died near the end of the first century. John, the beloved disciple, may have thought of himself as a member of the Catholic Church!

The Catholic Church began with Peter and the Apostles and continued without interruption or cessation through their disciples (Ignatius, Irenaeus, Polycarp, Clement, Justin Martyr, etc.) down to the present day. As a side note, it appears that the believers in Antioch may have coined both terms still in use today: “Christian” and “Catholic Church” – terms they used to describe the one body of believers in Christ.

He wasn’t using it as a proper name. As greek has no capitals.

It would be more honest to say:
“Wherever the bishop appears, let the people be there; just as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the catholic church .”*

Creating it capitalized like they saying its a proper name is a dishonest translation frequenly used by Catholic apologists.

Even so, lots of denominations claim to be the catholic church and almost all claim to be a part of it.

 

[House_Harkonnen]

Fair enough. So, when we start to point out some of the truly atrocious things your founder (a mere man) had to say about the Jews, you’ll own them to honor him?

No Lutheran accepts everything Luther wrote. Just like no Thomist accepts everythig. Thomas Aquinas wrote, or Basilian accepts everything Basil wrote, etc. They continue to honor those men despite not accepting everything they wrote.

Asking them to do so simply because of their namesake is silly, and against the rules of the forum to boot.

 

[Randy_Carson]

He wasn’t using it as a proper name. As greek has no capitals.

It would be more honest to say:
“Wherever the bishop appears, let the people be there; just as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the catholic church .”*

Creating it capitalized like they saying its a proper name is a dishonest translation frequenly used by Catholic apologists.

Oh, now I get it. You’re just fooling around. 'Cause we both know that while the renowned Protestant church historian J.N.D. Kelly dates the usage of the name “Catholic” after the death of the Apostle John, he also acknowledges that the original Church founded by Jesus called itself the “Catholic Church”.

“As regards ‘Catholic,’ its original meaning was ‘universal’ or ‘general’ … As applied to the Church, its primary significance was to underline its universality as opposed to the local character of the individual congregations. Very quickly, however, in the latter half of the second century at latest, we find it conveying the suggestion that the Catholic is the true Church as distinct from heretical congregations. . . . What these early Fathers were envisaging was almost always the empirical, visible society; they had little or no inkling of the distinction which was later to become important between a visible and an invisible Church” (J. N. D. Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines, 5th ed. [San Francisco: Harper, 1978], 190f).

Even so, lots of denominations claim to be the catholic church and almost all claim to be a part of it.

Sure. All the heretics want to be called “Catholic”. Augustine saw that in his day.