P
Prodigal_Son1
Guest
Oh, but he, and the other Church fathers, are only right when you can seemingly read something else into their writings? How convenient for your apologetics.
- Status
T
TriuneUnity
Guest
I’m not reading him with a bias… It’s simply taking his words at face value. I am not sure if the source has a bias on the use of rocky.
He was chief among the apostles, there is no dispute about that. There is not, however, any evidence within the apostolic writings that that primacy continued past Peter.
“But whom say ye that I am? Peter answered, ‘Thou art the Christ, The Son of the living God.’ One for many gave the answer, Unity in many. Then said the Lord to him, ‘Blessed art thou, Simon Barjonas: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but My Father which is in heaven.’ Then He added, ‘and I say unto thee.’ As if He had said, ‘Because thou hast said unto Me, “Thou art the Christ the Son of the living God;” I also say unto thee, “Thou art Peter.” ’ For before he was called Simon. Now this name of Peter was given him by the Lord, and in a figure, that he should signify the Church. For seeing that Christ is the rock (Petra), Peter is the Christian people. For the rock (Petra) is the original name. Therefore Peter is so called from the rock; not the rock from Peter; as Christ is not called Christ from the Christian, but the Christian from Christ. ‘Therefore,’ he saith, ‘Thou art Peter; and upon this Rock’ which Thou hast confessed, upon this rock which Thou hast acknowledged, saying, ‘Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God, will I build My Church;’ that is upon Myself, the Son of the living God, ‘will I build My Church.’ I will build thee upon Myself, not Myself upon Thee.For men who wished to be built upon men, said, ‘I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas,’ who is Peter. But others who did not wish to built upon Peter, but upon the Rock, said, ‘But I am of Christ.’ And when the Apostle Paul ascertained that he was chosen, and Christ despised, he said, ‘Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?’ And, as not in the name of Paul, so neither in the name of Peter; but in the name of Christ: that Peter might be built upon the Rock, not the Rock upon Peter. This same Peter therefore who had been by the Rock pronounced ‘blessed,’ bearing the figure of the Church.” (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1956), Volume VI, St. Augustine, Sermon XXVI.1-4, pp. 340-341).
“And this Church, symbolized in its generality, was personified in the Apostle Peter, on account of the primacy of his apostleship. For, as regards his proper personality, he was by nature one man, by grace one Christian, by still more abounding grace one, and yet also, the first apostle; but when it was said to him, ‘I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth, shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, shall be loosed in heaven,’ he represented the universal Church, which in this world is shaken by divers temptations, that come upon it like torrents of rain, floods and tempests, and falleth not, because it is founded upon a rock (petra), from which Peter received his name. For petra (rock) is not derived from Peter, but Peter from petra; just as Christ is not called so from the Christian, but the Christian from Christ. For on this very account the Lord said, ‘On this rock will I build my Church,’ because Peter had said, ‘Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.’ On this rock, therefore, He said, which thou hast confessed, I will build my Church. For the Rock (Petra) was Christ; and on this foundation was Peter himself built. For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Christ Jesus. The Church, therefore, which is founded in Christ received from Him the keys of the kingdom of heaven in the person of Peter, that is to say, the power of binding and loosing sins.” (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1956), Volume VII, St. Augustin, On the Gospel of John, Tractate 124.5.)
“Among these it was only Peter who almost everywhere was given the privilege of representing the whole Church. It was in the person of the whole Church, which he alone represented, that he was privileged to hear, ‘To you will I give the keys of the kingdom of heaven’ (Mt 16:19). After all, it isn’t just one man that received these keys, but the Church in its unity. So this is the reason for Peter’s acknowledged pre–eminence, that he stood for the Church’s universality and unity, when he was told, ‘To you I am entrusting,’ what has in fact been entrusted to all.I mean, to show you that it is the Church which has received the keys of the kingdom of heaven, listen to what the Lord says in another place to all his apostles: ‘Receive the Holy Spirit;’ and straightway, ‘Whose sins you forgive, they will be forgiven them; whose sins you retain, they will be retained’ (Jn 20:22-23). This refers to the keys, about which it is said, ‘whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven’ (Mt 16:19). But that was said to Peter. To show you that Peter at that time stood for the universal Church, listen to what is said to him, what is said to all the faithful, the saints: ‘If your brother sins against you, correct him between you and himself alone’” (Source: John Rotelle, Ed., The Works of Saint Augustine (Hyde Park: New City, 1994), Sermons, III/8 (273-305A), On the Saints, Sermon 295.1-3, pp. 197-198).
M
MuddyRocker
Guest
Ok, the reason Christ chose that particular area for announcing his Church was because it was the same location where the Exile into Assyria began, the place where the Assyrians first moved into for the kill.
I know that you, as a Catholic, put a lot more credence in the writings of the early Fathers than I do. I respect them, I even love their writings, but I also find a lot more fault with some of their teaching than you. I am familiar with the passage where Peter hauls in the load and I know St. Augustine’s very Catholic (my interpretation) interpretation of it and I understand his and your views about it, and I respect that. But I do not place that much credence in it. (As I had stated earlier, John is focusing on the miraculous as a literary technique). Picture Jesus and Peter sitting down around the campfire eating the fish that Jesus had just cooked. Peter had abandoned the ministry and was back to fishing. Do you not think that Jesus could have asked him if he loved him more than he loved fishing?
M
MuddyRocker
Guest
Well, have a good night to you too, brother.Was that from the cradle?
Doesn’t matter, it’s half as long as I was a Protestant…
Enough for tonight, I’ll be back tomorrow afternoon or night.
P
Prodigal_Son1
Guest
Matthew and Mark use the term ‘Apostles’ once each. Luke uses the term seven times. John doesn’t use it in the plural sense at all. If you take it in the singular form, John uses it once. The other Gospel writers do not use it at all in their Gospels.
I’m posting it, again.
**Act 1:20 For it is written in the book of Psalms: Let their habitation become desolate, and let there be none to dwell therein. And his bishopric let another take. **
If they considered Judas Iscariots office to be a bishopric, I’m sure they recognized their own offices.
I have seven English translations of the Bible, including two King James Versions. They all use the term bishopric. The same as when Paul uses the term bishop.
I also have the Hebrew Interlinear, Greek Interlinear and the Latin Vulgate.
I use 4 commentaries, not counting the Ante-Nicene Fathers New Testament Verse references, St. Aquinas’ Cantena Aurea and of course the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
I only tell you that so you know, I’m serious about receiving the context as closely as possible.
It doesn’t offend me that you don’t agree. It is aggrevating to see some of the ‘biased’ arguments which appear to be stretching the bounds of common sense at times, like only things that can be made to appear to support your view by St. Augustine are correct, or did Peter love the fish more than he loved Christ. It also makes me wonder a person’s intent at an honest discussion, when they ‘overlook’ a lot of the points raised, or sources provided.
But, for the people who only read these forums and might have doubts, question their faith or just don’t know their faith well enough, I, and other Catholics, will be there to explain, in detail, the Catholic view.
P
Prodigal_Son1
Guest
The story of Caesarea Philippi ijs historical and not something I read from the early Church fathers.
Again, it seems to be a picking and choosing of what you put credence in, in reference to the early Church fathers. Also, your view of ‘literary techniques’ of how the Bible was written seems to be self serving. It makes me wonder what you’d say about the inspired word of God stating the Church of the living God is the pillar and ground of truth, instead of scriptures? Why does the inspired word of God tell us the manifold wisdom of God maybe made known through the Church, instead of scriptures? Why doesn’t the inspired word of God tell us that scriptures are the ONLY authority?
No, I do not think Christ asked Peter if He loved fishing more than Him. There were other Apostles with Peter, did Christ ask them the same? John barely mentions the other Apostles, but his mention let us know who was there. Just in that simple fact, we see a story focused on Christ and His discussion with Peter, exclusively. Even though the others were there, there was no instructions to them to tend to His flock.
Joh 10:16 And I have other sheep, that are not of this fold; I must bring them also, and they will heed my voice. So there shall be one flock, one shepherd.
Christ’s prime minister was about to become active in the earthly absence of the King.
P
Prodigal_Son1
Guest
Irenaeus
Augustine
Martin Luther, priest of the Catholic Church, did not object to the teachings of Apostolic succession. His objection was over corruption, specifically the selling of indulgences. Whether he did at a much later date, I cannot say. If he did at a later date, it would be suspect of being self serving after finding himself in the position he was in. The denial of Apostolic succession from those in his Church is confusing, to say the least.
F
flightkid
Guest
AMEN!
- Status