In what ways can Protestants accept papal primacy today?

[AugustTherese]

My goodness. One could, but I very much hope one wouldn’t.

Well, many pious Christians view eternal damnation much more grave than physical death.

 

[JonNC]

If you were Catholic then there would be no ‘if I were to join the Catholic Church’. Being Catholic means being in full communion with the Catholic Church.

Okay. Out of respect for those here who do not care for the term, “Roman Catholic “ or “Roman Church “, I don’t use either. In light of this little word game here, for you I will make an exception.
Not all Catholics are Roman Catholic. I am fully Catholic not in communion with the Roman Catholic Church.

Jesus Christ did not found a Church that would splinter into fragmentations with each separated fragment claiming Catholicity and Oneness.

Indeed, yet here you are driving deeper wedges of fragmentation.

It’s one thing to hold to your own personal views

Which you do quite actively.

It’s one thing to hold to your own personal views, but to caricariturize the Church Christ founded into this mess of division is to call Him a liar when He promised schism and/or heresy, i.e. the gates of Hell, would not prevail.

And here is the cheapest, most divisive argument made by those who do not wish to discuss the topic. If, as you have here, wish to call Him a liar, I will not agree. If you wish to claim that the gates of Hell have triumphed because of human failings, go ahead.
Christ’s Church is not dependent on you and I agreeing. To say so is reveals a remarkable level of arrogance. Christ’s Church is dependent on His Passion death and resurrection.

The Apostles were not Anglican nor Lutheran.

And none of them were Romanists ( a term I hereby reserve for you).

Perhaps another question should be asked…“in what ways can Catholics accept papal primacy today?” My understanding is that the official Catholic position is that those not in communion with Rome are brothers and sisters in Christ and that their churches/ecclesial communities are a means of providing salvation. No longer is calling them “heretics” and all that accompanies that acceptable.

But that doesn’t fit the poster’s personal interpretation.

 

[JonNC]

I dont think you can be a Protestant and accept this papal primacy idea.

Depends on the meaning of papal primacy. I very much agree that the Bishop of Rome has been recognized as having primacy, but not supremacy.

 

[AugustTherese]

Not all Catholics are Roman Catholic.

You are correct. There are 23 Eastern Catholic Rites. But, guess what makes them Catholic! They are all in full communion with the Bishop of Rome. It doesn’t matter whether you like it, or define the Catholic Church predicated upon your personal ‘branch theory’ of combining Anglicanism, Lutheranism, and Eastern Orthodoxy into a one, yet divided Church and call it ‘Catholic’. The fact is, as stated before, to be Catholic and in full communion with the Catholic Church, you need to not reject papal supremacy and infallibility. You cannot have your cake and eat it too.

If, as you have here, wish to call Him a liar, I will not agree. If you wish to claim that the gates of Hell have triumphed because of human failings, go ahead.

But, they have not! The Catholic Church remains undivided in Her magisterial teaching. The very doctrine of papal infallibility prevents human failings from dividing this One Church.

I am fully Catholic not in communion with the Roman Catholic Church.

Look, I respect you as a baptized Christian and one who is 99%- of -the -time congenial, but to be fully Catholic one needs to be in full communion with the Catholic Church. And, the Catholic Church is ready to welcome you with open and loving arms at any time you’re ready and willing.

And none of them were Romanists ( a term I hereby reserve for you).

This only weakens anything you have to say.

 

[JonNC]

You are correct. There are 23 Eastern Catholic Rites. But, guess what makes them Catholic! They are all in full communion with the Bishop of Rome.

I will use Roman Catholic to you as an application of all those in communion with the Bishop of Rome.

The fact is, as stated before, to be Catholic and in full communion with the Catholic Church, you need to not reject papal supremacy and infallibility. You cannot have your cake and eat it too.

Andvyou, as a triumphalist, do not get to say what am or am not.

 

[AugustTherese]

Andvyou, as a triumphalist, do not get to say what am or am not.

I didn’t say you were anything. I think we have to call it quits here. You have called me a ‘Romanist’, and a ‘Triumphalist’ I don’t know how many times. This just indicates the reality of your situation and weakens your arguments. Thanks for the times you were cordial, however. Peace and love!

 

[JonNC]

I didn’t say you were anything. I think we have to call it quits here. You have called me a ‘Romanist’, and a ‘Triumphalist’ I don’t know how many times.

You have made comparisons to JWs.
When you decide that you have the power to claim what I am or am not, don’t be surprised when I respond in kind.

 

[JonNC]

This just indicates the reality of your situation and weakens your arguments. Thanks for the times you were cordial, however. Peace and love!

I am cordial up until the times you are not.
I promise you that I will discuss any topic and never resort to names if you don’t.
You tell me what you want to be called and I’ll do it. I just expect the same courtesy in return.

 

[steve-b]

Just because keys isn’t mentioned by Christ when He gives the disciples the exact same power as given St Peter doesn’t mean it isn’t there.

Jon,

when speaking to Peter in Mt 16, Jesus was speaking in the singular NOT plural when promising to give Peter the keys.

Plus Re: the reference to keys( Isaiah)

The king fires one servant, Shebna, and replaces him with another Eliakim

[Is 22:]

19 I will thrust you from your office, and you will be cast down from your station. 20 In that day I will call my servant Eliakim the son of Hilkiah, 21 and I will clothe him with your robe, and will bind your girdle on him, and will commit your authority to his hand; and he shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem and to the house of Judah. 22 And I will place on his shoulder the key of the house of David; he shall open, and none shall shut; and he shall shut, and none shall open. 23 AndI will fasten him like a peg in a sure place, and he will become a throne of honor to his father’s house. 24 And they will hang on him the whole weight of his father’s house, the offspring and issue, every small vessel, from the cups to all the flagons. 25 In that day, says the LORD of hosts, the peg that was fastened in a sure place will give way; and it will be cut down and fall, and the burden that was upon it will be cut off, for the LORD has spoken."*

how does this apply to Jesus giving Peter the keys?

• In Isaiah, the king gives Eliakim (one man) the keys of the kingdom
• what that man opens and shuts no one can close or open
• Jesus is King, from the house of David and gives Peter the keys of His kingdom
• when the king says Eliakim would be fastened like a peg it’s foreshadowing Peter’s crucifixion, which Jesus also said to Peter in John’s gospel (see quote below) Peter was crucified in Rome.
• Peter became a throne of honor to the Father’s house.
• He had the weight of the Father’s house on him right down to the cups and saucers…
• On him is all the promises Jesus gave him @ Ceserea Philippi AND the kingdom, and in extension, the office Peter is given, would continue through his successors because Jesus said, my kingdom will have no end.

Jesus talking to Peter
[Jn 21:]
18 Truly, truly, I say to you, when you were young, you girded yourself and walked where you would; but when you are old, you will stretch out your hands, and another will gird you and carry you where you do not wish to go." 19* This he said to show by what death he was to glorify God.

That said,
The purpose of giving the keys to one man, is the king establishes His prime minister on earth, over all the ministers, as the leader over the entire kingdom of God on earth

Also

Jesus answers an argument the apostles were having over who is the greatest among THEM. Jesus confirms it is Peter My post # 109 on another thread

 

[ConstantLearner]

I don’t know any Baptists that are even remotely interested in deferring to the pope out of any understanding of primacy. He is just another religious person like anyone else in their eyes. They might agree with something he says, but that bit of information does not carry any additional weight by virtue of his office.

That’s how I see the pope, and I have never been Protestant.

Why does it matter what other religions think of the pope as long as Catholics think as their religion dictates? I guess I don’t understand the argument.

 

[steve-b]

mrsdizzyd:

I don’t know any Baptists that are even remotely interested in deferring to the pope out of any understanding of primacy. He is just another religious person like anyone else in their eyes. They might agree with something he says, but that bit of information does not carry any additional weight by virtue of his office.

That’s how I see the pope, and I have never been Protestant.

Why does it matter what other religions think of the pope as long as Catholics think as their religion dictates? I guess I don’t understand the argument.

just a comment

Quoting an Eastern Catholic bishop emeritus, Bp Elya, when one is in ecumenical dialogue, he quotes this canon law for direction

Emphasis mine
CCEO canon 905
In fulfilling ecumenical work especially through open and frank dialogue and common undertakings with other Christians, due prudence has to be kept avoiding the dangers of false irenicism, indifferentism and immoderate zeal.

For clarification:
False irenicism = attempts at ecumenism that would allow Catholic doctrine to be distorted or clouded

If one stays within those lines, people should be just fine.

 

[MichelleGeorge]

Ok now that’s like asking how can a non-Christian accept Christ as Lord without actually becoming a Christian. Kind of defeats the purpose.

 

[ConstantLearner]

Why would anyone want Protestants to accept papal primacy? It’s not part of their faith, which is vitally important to them.

 

[AugustTherese]

Why would anyone want Protestants to accept papal primacy?

Oh, I don’t know, because they could be fully incorporated into the Body of Christ, have the fullness of Truth, and most importantly, licitly receive the Most Holy Eucharist.

 

[Hodos]

Already done. Since we believe all of what Ephesians 1:1-2:10 says, we are participants in Ephesians 2:11-22 even if a self-serving authority determines that they are not in communion with those who do. And as shown above, Christ is truly present in the Eucharist regardless of any defect in myself or the one administering the sacrament (1 Corinthians 11). And because I also confess that the true body and blood of Christ are present in the Eucharist, not only is Christ present but I proclaim his death and receive the full benefit of the promise inherent in the new covenant established in Christ.

 

[ConstantLearner]

Oh, I don’t know, because they could be fully incorporated into the Body of Christ, have the fullness of Truth, and most importantly, licitly receive the Most Holy Eucharist.

People need to be free to choose their own religion. I don’t think you’d like it if someone tried to get you to reject Catholicism. Protestants believe they have the fullness of truth, and that’s fine. I attend synagogue and believe the Jewish faith expresses the “fullness of truth,” but I’m not about to try to convince anyone. There are many paths to God, and each person must find his or her own.

 

[AugustTherese]

People need to be free to choose their own religion.

Amen!

I don’t think you’d like it if someone tried to get you to reject Catholicism.

This is Catholic Answers Forum, not my doorstep answering a knock at the door. You are a guest in our house. If you don’t like what we confess to believe, then move on. But, to project your sentiments simply because you’re a non-Catholic on CAF indicates much about your security, no offense.

Protestants believe they have the fullness of truth, and that’s fine

Perhaps, although I have yet to witness any Protestant claim that phrase considering it is what the Catholic Church promulgated.

I attend synagogue and believe the Jewish faith expresses the “fullness of truth,” but I’m not about to try to convince anyone.

And, I would never try to evangelize anyone of the Jewish faith. But, again, this is CAF, not JAF. The question was posed and I responsded.

 

[ConstantLearner]

This is Catholic Answers Forum, not my doorstep answering a knock at the door. You are a guest in our house. If you don’t like what we confess to believe, then move on.

I said in plain English I’d never never try to change someone’s religious beliefs. That includes Catholicism. I don’t see your problem. Sorry. You must have missed it, but I said NOTHING about Catholicism, so I’d appreciate it if you’d cease telling me what to do or putting words in my mouth. Thank you. Like @Hodos and @JonNC, who you also disagreed with, I, too, said nothing disparaging about the Catholic Church.

I still don’t understand why ANYONE would want to pull a happy, God-fearing, God-loving Protestant AWAY from his or her faith. I’ve had many Protestant friends who are warm, loving, polite, tolerant, etc. Their faith, for many, is their world. And, I know Anglicans, Episcopalians, and Lutherans, at least, believe they receive the Real Presence. Who among us is so presumptuous to say they do not?

There are a LOT of Jews on this forum.

 

[AugustTherese]

I said in plain English I’d never never try to change someone’s religious beliefs

Great! But do realize there is a time and place to constructively and charitably evangelize to those of differing beliefs. The Catholic Church strongly condemns false irenicism and proselytizing. This does not mean we should indifferently shy away from the opportunity to witness the fullness of Truth when it is appropriate. If you are convicted that your faith is the fullness of Truth, then you should want everyone, especially those whom you love most, to experience that fullness of Truth; not by jamming your beliefs down their throats through coercion and/or cajoling, but through genuine acts of love.

I still don’t understand why ANYONE would want to pull a happy, God-fearing, God-loving Protestant AWAY from his or her faith.

I would not necessarily call it ‘pull[ing] a happy, God-fearing, God-loving Protestant away from his or her faith’; rather, I would suggest that his or her faith would be brought to fruition through the teachings of the Church that Jesus Christ founded. No Protestant convert would lose anything or be pulled away from their faith, rather their faith would increase and grow stronger through their conversion. It’s not as if Protestants and Catholics (or Jews for that matter) believe in a different God. There have been some novel introductions of doctrine that have been presented about that same God about 500 years ago. To simply sweep that under the rug to prevent feelings from getting hurt would be a disservice to conscience.

And, I know Anglicans, Episcopalians, and Lutherans, at least, believe they receive the Real Presence. Who among us is so presumptuous to say they do not?

I would not use those precise words, but I would, if the opportunity came, emphasize the need for valid Holy Orders to confect the Real Presence in the Eucharist. This is not meant to be a domineering, we-are-better-than-you kind of retort. No, to rebuke error out of love is a work of mercy. Would you not reprimand your child if he or she thought it was okay to drink gasoline (who are you to tell me what is good or bad for my body)?! Why should it be any different for what is good or bad for your soul?! The Catholic Church condemns indifferentism among Christians. Truth is One and objective, not this relative whatever works for you mentality.

There are a LOT of Jews on this forum.

Salvation is from the Jews; and, no, that is not a pretext for false ecumenism, that is a fact. Also, Jesus Christ is a Jew. Notice: I said is and not was! I am in no position to attempt to evangelize to you nor any other Jew. However, when someone posts a question as you did, it is bound to get answered. I’m sorry you did not care for what was said, but I cannot help how you feel.

 

[AugustTherese]

even if a self-serving authority determines that they are not in communion with those who do

That is the entire problem.