If Peter is first Pope should not his teachings be based on scriptures?

  • Thread starter Thread starter joclucsylv
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

joclucsylv

Guest
This is another question from my protestant friend.

If peter is the first Pope should not his teachings be based on scriptures, since through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit he penned the books of the bible?

And also did he not preach the first gospel message on the Day of Pentecost?
 
If Peter had a mother in law, then why can’t popes marry? That is another question from my non catholic friend.
 
Does not Peter predate Bible canon? (Please pardon my ignorance; I’m considering conversion and am still learning.)
 
joclucsylv said:
If Peter had a mother in law, then why can’t popes marry? That is another question from my non catholic friend.
Click to expand...
No one can marry after they are ordained. Peter was married long before he was Pope.
 
your friends question is based on the fallacy of sola scriptura. Where in Scripture does it say that it is the only source of the Truth? Now of course however, the apostles do quote the Septuagint fairly often. But again, where does it say that it is the only source for teaching?
 
joclucsylv said:
This is another question from my protestant friend.

If peter is the first Pope should not his teachings be based on scriptures, since through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit he penned the books of the bible?

And also did he not preach the first gospel message on the Day of Pentecost?
Click to expand...
Well . . . there are only two books that are attributed to Peter, AFAIK. That would be 1 Peter and 2 Peter (which is not widely believed to have been written by him). The rest were probably not written by Peter. This is especially the case in say, the letters of St. Paul.

As far as whether his teachings were scriptural, I don’t know. I would want specific examples of what Peter taught that wasn’t scriptural.

On Pentecost, sure he preached what I might describe as the first Gospel message Peter preached after the Resurrection that has been written down. Does it mean it was THE FIRST Gospel message? No. Christ already covered that one. Does it mean it was the first Gospel message preached by Peter? Not necessarily. The disciples were commissioned to go and spread the Word before the Resurrection (Matthew 10). I highly doubt that Peter never spoke of Jesus during this little episode.

Even if Pentecost were the first time the Gospel message was spread, what does it matter? Is this somehow supposed to bring down the Catholic Church while building up the Protestants?
If Peter had a mother in law, then why can’t popes marry? That is another question from my non catholic friend.
Click to expand...
Yes, he had a mother in law. It does not mean that:
(1) he was married at the time Jesus called him
(2) he was married at any point during the public ministry of the early Church
(3) that it has anything to do with current Church discipline.

The Church chooses to have celibate priests, bishops, and unmarried deacons. A number of the very early popes had wives and even children. Today, the Church has placed a rule that bars married men from the priesthood. The Eastern Churches (AFAIK) permit married priests, but not bishops. It’s all a discipline, and has nothing to do with the core of the faith.
 
The New Testament was assembled as one book around the year 400AD by St. Jerome, St. Ambrose, and St. Augustine and a few others.

Peter was the first pope hundreds of years before that.

However, there were some early writings such as the Didache. And there was an extremely strong oral tradition.

Mostly, St. Peter relied on Divine Inspiration and the oral tradition. and he did some writing of his own.

Wiki is not the world’s source, but this article is interesting:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulgate

historyguide.org/ancient/lecture16b.html
 
joclucsylv said:
This is another question from my protestant friend.

If peter is the first Pope should not his teachings be based on scriptures, since through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit he penned the books of the bible?

And also did he not preach the first gospel message on the Day of Pentecost?
Click to expand...
Thes are “fluff-balls”…easy to look up.

Peter was not interested in “writing” Scripture. He was more interested in preaching Christ crucified. But he did use the Scriptures of the day…what we call the “Old” Testament…the Septuagint, and he knew it well.

Yup, that was him at Pentecost: Acts 2, starting with Verse 14.
 
joclucsylv said:
This is another question from my protestant friend.

If peter is the first Pope should not his teachings be based on scriptures, since through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit he penned the books of the bible?

And also did he not preach the first gospel message on the Day of Pentecost?
Click to expand...
I find the question a little confusing, and wonder if you could clarify:

Do you mean that St. Peter himself should have based his teachings on Scripture - and did not? If so, which teachings of St. Peter were not based on Scripture?

Or - do you mean that the Popes who followed him, coming down to the Pope Benedict of today, and sometimes referred to as “Peter” or being in “Peter’s Chair”, should be basing their teachings on Scripture and do not (in your friend’s opinion)?

Thank you!
 
I fail to see what he is asking.
joclucsylv said:
This is another question from my protestant friend.

If peter is the first Pope should not his teachings be based on scriptures, since through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit he penned the books of the bible?
Click to expand...
If by “based on Scripture” he means the OT (since that was the only Scripture in St. Peter’s day), the answer is a reserved “yes.” Certainly, the Gospel has a basis in the OT but to it is added the teaching that Jesus directly gave to the Apostles. Those teachings, including St. Peter’s, eventually found their way into the NT and Tradition (“oral” teachings passed down from the Apostles).
And also did he not preach the first gospel message on the Day of Pentecost?
Click to expand...
It’s right in the beginning of Acts. I’m not sure why he’s asking about it.
joclucsylv said:
If Peter had a mother in law, then why can’t popes marry? That is another question from my non catholic friend.
Click to expand...
The current form of Canon Law prevents married men from being ordained beyond the diaconate in the West. It’s just something the Church chose for management purposes. In truth, there is nothing that absolutely prohibits a married man from being ordained a priest or bishop or even being elevated to the papacy. It’s just extraordinarily unlikely.

The Church has never allowed men who were already ordained to marry and continue in ministry. I think this is because an unmarried priest is seen as married to the Church so in order to marry he would therefore have to “divorce” (be laicized) first.
 
Vis_Fati said:
Does not Peter predate Bible canon? (Please pardon my ignorance; I’m considering conversion and am still learning.)
Click to expand...
Old Testament, no.

New Testament, some. The traditional year of Peter’s death is about 67 AD. Mark’s Gospel was written about that time. Luke’s Gospel, shortly thereafter. John’s Gospel and Revelation were later in the century, from maybe 70-90 AD. Matthew’s Gospel appears to be from around 50 AD. (newadvent.org/cathen/14530a.htm)

The letters come from a varied time frame, and I don’t have a good source on actual dates. Suffice it to say that the letters probably were contemporary with Peter, particularly Paul’s letters. Some were later.
 
First, Peter’s teaching do follow scripture, or rather, scripture follows Peter’s teaching (he wrote some of it!!!)

Second, although Holy Scripture is a marvelous gift from God, there is much more to Christianity than scripture.
 
Well, Peter’s first sermon (which came after the Pentecost)

[bibledrb]Acts 2:14-21[/bibledrb]

Is a quote from:

[bibledrb]Joel 2:28-32[/bibledrb]

He walked with Jesus and he is the rock upon Jesus founded His Church.

What exactly does Peter teach that is not Scripture based?
 
joclucsylv said:
This is another question from my protestant friend.

If peter is the first Pope should not his teachings be based on scriptures, since through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit he penned the books of the bible?

And also did he not preach the first gospel message on the Day of Pentecost?
Click to expand...
What Peter preached, and what the other Apostles preached, some of it was later put down into writing, which later became the Bible though the actions of the CC around AD 397 or so. Search for the councils of 1 Niceas, Rome, Hippo, Carthage.

The gospel of Mark is basically Peter’s gospel. Mark was a disciple of Peter. Mark wrote what Peter preached, whatever he could remember. I think Peter had been executed before Mark could complete the gospel.
 
joclucsylv said:
If Peter had a mother in law, then why can’t popes marry? That is another question from my non catholic friend.
Click to expand...
Through Tradition, the Church discerned/decided that only celibate men could become bishops. The pope comes from the rank of bishops.
 
joclucsylv said:
This is another question from my protestant friend.

If peter is the first Pope should not his teachings be based on scriptures, since through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit he penned the books of the bible?

And also did he not preach the first gospel message on the Day of Pentecost?
Click to expand...
The most urgent reason for writing the Gospels was that many of the eyewitnesses, like Peter, were dying and their authority was being lost. Writing the Gospels helped preserve the tradition. But would Peter use such a written text? Perhaps: it might help his memory. Would he feel he must be limited to such texts? I doubt it: why would he? He EXPERIENCED the actual teaching of Jesus.

Then there are other works, such as Paul’s letters (among other authors, including Peter himself). These were more often written to deal with certain problems, especially when the authority could not come himself. Again, would Peter, having known Jesus himself, found things in the New Testament that were valuable, perhaps for their felicity of wording? It’s likely. Would he feel the need to limit himself to such texts? Again, I doubt it.

And, yes, he was involved at the first open preaching of the Gospel on Pentecost, as recorded in the Book of the Acts of the Apostles.
 
Monte_RCMS said:
The New Testament was assembled as one book around the year 400AD by St. Jerome, St. Ambrose, and St. Augustine and a few others.

Peter was the first pope hundreds of years before that.

However, there were some early writings such as the Didache. And there was an extremely strong oral tradition.

Mostly, St. Peter relied on Divine Inspiration and the oral tradition. and he did some writing of his own.

Wiki is not the world’s source, but this article is interesting:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulgate

historyguide.org/ancient/lecture16b.html
Click to expand...
Well, along with early writings, the various books of the New Testament were all written in the period from 50 A.D., to maybe 100 or 120. However, they circulated alone, or in small collections (such as the letters of Paul) for some time, before being collected in the 100s. The final determination of the New Testament took some time–mostly whether such works as the Letter of Barnabas or the Shepherd of Hermas, or even the Apocalypse of John, should be included. But the basic form of the NT, along with most of the texts, came along surprisingly early. Just as many doctrines and dogmas are recognizable from very early in Church history.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top