Papal authority -- the unbroken line

[Sailka]

:bigyikes:

Jesus established the church alright. But its anybody’s guess whether that church is indeed catholic because Peter never officiated any pontificates, neither did Linus. Anybody can quote names and claim themselves related or linked. That’s why there are so many ‘American’ illegal immigrants in USA.

All you need to do is check their credentials instead of just listening to their claims.

Matthew 23:9 And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.

.

Have not heard that Peter was already recognized as The Leader Apostle In his Time? Know what Period (First Century) markings are on Peter’s Burial tomb, rediscovered 50 years ago? Researched the Shroud of Turin site re Scientists only Confirmation of Authenticity during last 8 YEARS? Looked up Which scientists? Like the Chief Botanist (Jewish) of the State of Israel very few years Ago? Know What the Confirming Evidence was?
Know how often The Church has lied/misrepresented in 2000 years? Try to name One big lie in 2000 years? By The Church? Know what Catholic Means? Know what The Chief Liturgy/Rites, Beliefs of The Church have been, Literally since the Last Supper? Know Matt 23:9 does not mean don’t call your Actual or Figurative Male Father? The Context means not to Glorify someone falsely.
Etc. Etc, Etc. :hey_bud: :takeoff:

 

[Scientiphic]

:bigyikes:

Have not heard that Peter was already recognized as The Leader Apostle In his Time? Know what Period (First Century) markings are on Peter’s Burial tomb, rediscovered 50 years ago? Researched the Shroud of Turin site re Scientists only Confirmation of Authenticity during last 8 YEARS? Looked up Which scientists? Like the Chief Botanist (Jewish) of the State of Israel very few years Ago? Know What the Confirming Evidence was?
Know how often The Church has lied/misrepresented in 2000 years? Try to name One big lie in 2000 years? By The Church? Know what Catholic Means? Know what The Chief Liturgy/Rites, Beliefs of The Church have been, Literally since the Last Supper? Know Matt 23:9 does not mean don’t call your Actual or Figurative Male Father? The Context means not to Glorify someone falsely.
Etc. Etc, Etc. :hey_bud: :takeoff:

Okay, I found this and it says** Peter was NEVER in Rome**.:hammering:

aloha.net/~mikesch/peters-jerusalem-tomb.htm

Paul writing from Rome says in 2 Timothy 4:11 Only Luke is with me.

One wonders where is Peter??? (In Jerusalem?!)

.

 

[Scientiphic]

As you recall, Paul wrote much of the New Testament. They cover a tremendous number of years and that’s not all, one of the books (one of the major ones) was written to the Christians who lived in Rome. Also there were four written from Rome, during his first imprisonment and then a couple of more written from Rome during his last imprisonment shortly before he was killed because of his faith and preaching the Gospel. In all of these letters of Paul to the churches (to the Christians) either at Rome or from the city of Rome to others he mentions Christians in each of them. In fact he mentions by name a great number of them. And do you know what, he NEVER mentions Peter!

 

[MDK]

Okay, I found this and it says** Peter was NEVER in Rome**.:hammering:

aloha.net/~mikesch/peters-jerusalem-tomb.htm

Paul writing from Rome says in 2 Timothy 4:11 Only Luke is with me.

One wonders where is Peter??? (In Jerusalem?!)

If one is seeking truth, then one will be fair and just. Also, one will seek true authority. For your claim here, you are using someone’s article on the internet, which I glanced over and immediately found factual error. For instance, the article claims “the priests say that the tomb of Jesus is within the walls of the old Jerusalem, in a hole in the ground; whereas, the Bible says that the tomb where Jesus was laid was hewn out of rock and a stone was rolled in front and not on top of it. The Garden Tomb at the foot of Golgotha, outside the walls of old Jerusalem, meets the Biblical description perfectly.”

Contrary to this article, however, at the time of Jesus’ crucifixion and burial, the site under the Church of the Holy Sepulchre was outside the walls. Anyone examining this fairly and seeking truth would have caught this. There is no Godly Tradition linking the “garden tomb” to Christ’s burial site. I’ve been there in the current state of old city, and have been in the Holy Sepulchre, and have also seen the “garden tomb”. I’ve also studied this issue, and am completely comfortable with the Catholic Tradition here. Therefore, the article you are using as a reference is one of the factual error, and is this author really reliable in doing proper research?

Why should we believe anything you have posted here? Are your interpretations guaranteed to be infallible? Are your sources free from error? Are the traditions you claim man-made or Godly Traditions?

 

[Hajnalcsillag]

Good questions.

(1) The Holy Spirit is seen in the 2000 years results of those chosen to be Pope, not all elected. There is no significant dogmatic or teaching change in 2000 years: The Papacy did not control or operate the Inquisition, the Crusades, or selling indulgences. God lets all of us use Free Will throughout life.

(2) The Kings/Rulers of Isreal were political, inheritance chosen for the Ruling of Isreal, not the Faith. Not appointed by God.
:coffeeread:

So then wouldn’t it be possible for the early church leaders and later saints, in spite of being inspired by the Spirit, to write down anything that crossed their mind and claim it as inspired?

As for the kings, Saul and David were most certainly chosen directly; Samuel was ordered to anoint Saul when they met up, and he was later ordered to go to the house of Jesse and anoint David.

 

[Sailka]

As you recall, Paul wrote much of the New Testament. They cover a tremendous number of years and that’s not all, one of the books (one of the major ones) was written to the Christians who lived in Rome. Also there were four written from Rome, during his first imprisonment and then a couple of more written from Rome during his last imprisonment shortly before he was killed because of his faith and preaching the Gospel. In all of these letters of Paul to the churches (to the Christians) either at Rome or from the city of Rome to others he mentions Christians in each of them. In fact he mentions by name a great number of them. And do you know what, he NEVER mentions Peter!

The Apostles never mention each other casually. Their mission was to teach the World, and Begin the Leadership of the New Church The Saviour began.
Remember the Isreali who got World News coverage about 15/20 years ago for having ‘found the crypt’ in which the ‘Brother of Jesus’ was buried in, as ‘proven’ by the Inscriptions on it? Know what Happened to that historic relics Dealer? He was Tried by Isreali Court, sentenced to Prison for Routinelly Adding false inscriptions to increase the ‘value’ of religious old ‘finds’. . :banghead: uch: :dts:
And there is early Church historic documentation, 100% accurate, of St Peter In Rome, and the Sacred for 2000 years Burial crypt under St Peter’s Basillica dome/ main Altar, that was exposed to scientists with worldwide coverage, about 1950’s. Has the Documentation from Apostolic times establishing Is the Original Burial site of St Peter.

 

[CHESTERTONRULES]

So then wouldn’t it be possible for the early church leaders and later saints, in spite of being inspired by the Spirit, to write down anything that crossed their mind and claim it as inspired?

QUOTE]

I suppose it would be possible.

However, we have thorough records of the great care that went into selecting the canon of scripture.

Many of these early church fathers were brutally killed for their faith. What possible reason would they have for lying? Their primary goal in life was to defend and spread the truth they had been given.

 

[StMarina303ad]

Peter was told he was Rock and that the church would be built upon him. The gates of hell wouldn’t prevail against the church because of the authority given to Peter and passed down in an unbroken line of his successors.

When I see the way the pope is chosen by the College of Cardinals meeting together, it is hard for me to imagine the authority could ever have been lost. While they may have chosen a few bad popes, they never chose one that changed the faith and morals of the Catholic Church. This seems to me to be the Holy Spirit moving to protect the church from error. That has been going on for almost 2000 years. How can you expect to find this authority in any other church?

The Orthodox Church also has unbroken lines of succession back to the Apostles in the major Patriarchates and elsewhere, including to St. Peter.

St. Peter founded the Patriarchate of Antioch - still Orthodox - before ever going with St. Paul to establish the Church in Rome - now Roman Catholic, previous to 1054 was still considered Orthodox.

St. Andrew founded the Patriarchate of Byzantium, later to be renamed Constantinople - still Orthodox ec-patr.org/list/index.php?lang=en

St. Mark founded the Patriarchate of Alexandria - still Orthodox, called Coptic Orthodox today - their Patriarch, like the Patriarch of Rome is also called Pope - an endearment meaning father. A dear Coptic Orthodox friend of mine from Alexandria pronounces the word in English like “Bob” - too cute, she has a problem with making the sound of “P”.

St. James founded the Patriarchate of Jeruselem - still Orthodox - the only place where Holy Fire is found each year - more on this below

St. Paul establishes Churches all over Greece: Thessalonica, Ephesus and Corinth to name a few - all of them are still Orthodox.

St. Thomas established the Church in India - still Orthodox, called Oriental Orthodox today

Mary, the Mother of Jesus, has continued to appear and make miracles through out the centuries in both Orthodox & Catholic Churches and in various Nations - Per the Book of Revelation, we who are Christians are her children - most recent miracle I know of which has been approved by a Bishop is: the myrrh streaming icon in Hawaii. orthodoxhawaii.org/icons.html It visited our Church here is Sacramento and was absolutely amazing. Thanks be to God that He continues to allow the Theotokos (mother of God) to work in our lives both spiritually and physically!

The Holy Spirit on the other hand continues to bring the Holy Fire of Pentecost ever year - the fire that does not burn, but only when the Orthodox are there at the Holy Sepulchre (one year another group of Christians tried to get the miracle from the Holy Spirit and the Holy Fire did not come at their prayers!) each year before Orthodox Easter (which date is calculated differently than the Catholic Easter). holyfire.org/eng/ or for video of one year: youtube.com/watch?v=ys8hNr7BZ70 Jesus said that after He would Ascend into Heaven, He would ask the Father and the Father would send us, the true Church of Christ - the Orthodox Church, the Holy Spirit and that the Holy Spirit would led us in all Truth and that the gates of Hell would not prevail against us. To this day, the Holy Spirit has done just that - He has led us in all Truth in the Councils - the Creed of the Council of Nicea and Constantinople was created by the Bishops of the Council with the direction of the Holy Spirit - the Holy Spirit did not get it wrong in the Council as modern day Roman Catholics would have us believe, the Holy Spirit led those Bishops in the Truth, not in something that had to be “corrected” several centuries later by adding the “Filioque” clause. The Holy Spirit demonstrates every year before Orthodox Easter/Pascha that He is with and still leading the Orthodox Church through this consistent annual miracle of Holy Fire. youtube.com/watch?v=epeH_ZPfrzI&NR=1 Through this miracle each year for centuries and centuries even when Palestine was occupied by the Turks and now that it is occupied by the Israeli’s the Holy Spirit continues to reaffirm that He is with us and directing the Orthodox Church and He is confirming that the Orthodox continue to select the correct date of Easter unlike the Roman Catholic and Protestants.

 

[JMJ_coder]

Two questions.

1. If the Spirit were present in voting for a new pope, why would it ever take more than one vote to select one?
2. Would you argue for the authority of the kings of Israel? After all, it was a (mostly) dynastic line and the requirements of the office didn’t change…but there were still kings forsaking God and committing child sacrifice to other gods.

1. It takes time to discern the will of God.
2. The kings of Israel weren’t the High Priests or perform other clerical duties - that was given to the tribe of Levi. The kings were from the tribe of Judah (at least starting with David - can’t remember if Saul was from the tribe of Judah or not).

 

[Hajnalcsillag]

1. It takes time to discern the will of God.
2. The kings of Israel weren’t the High Priests or perform other clerical duties - that was given to the tribe of Levi. The kings were from the tribe of Judah (at least starting with David - can’t remember if Saul was from the tribe of Judah or not).

Saul was a Benjamite, but not the point I was getting to.

Saul was divinely appointed as king over Israel, and he forsook not only a dynasty but also his own kingship through rebellion. David was then divinely appointed, but (besides his own moral failings at times) his successors in the dynasty turned to various forms of idolatry and wickedness. Down the line, there was a split between Israel (with its divinely-appointed original leader) and Judah (interesting historical parallel, don’t you think?); then Judah also had wicked kings.

My point is that what if David ordained something, it would carry authority because he was upstanding before God. If Ahab ordained something, would it carry that same authority? Would we look at it and say, “Well, he’s the king, so it must be right in the eyes of God” or would we say, “This is one corrupt guy who’s abusing his power for personal and political gain”?

I am fairly confident that Peter, as an apostle in a unique position, would not abuse his power for personal or political gain. After that I’m not so confident; the office of Pope doesn’t (in my humble Catholic-turned-Protestant opinion) inherently prevent abuse of power any more than being ordained cardinal or bishop.

 

[JMJ_coder]

Saul was a Benjamite, but not the point I was getting to.

Saul was divinely appointed as king over Israel, and he forsook not only a dynasty but also his own kingship through rebellion. David was then divinely appointed, but (besides his own moral failings at times) his successors in the dynasty turned to various forms of idolatry and wickedness. Down the line, there was a split between Israel (with its divinely-appointed original leader) and Judah (interesting historical parallel, don’t you think?); then Judah also had wicked kings.

My point is that what if David ordained something, it would carry authority because he was upstanding before God. If Ahab ordained something, would it carry that same authority? Would we look at it and say, “Well, he’s the king, so it must be right in the eyes of God” or would we say, “This is one corrupt guy who’s abusing his power for personal and political gain”?

I am fairly confident that Peter, as an apostle in a unique position, would not abuse his power for personal or political gain. After that I’m not so confident; the office of Pope doesn’t (in my humble Catholic-turned-Protestant opinion) inherently prevent abuse of power any more than being ordained cardinal or bishop.

But, Pope and King of Israel are two fundamentally different offices. It’s comparing apples to oranges.

 

[Hajnalcsillag]

But, Pope and King of Israel are two fundamentally different offices. It’s comparing apples to oranges.

That’s beside the point. Both were to be shepherds for God’s chosen people (the Israelites, and then those who put their faith in Jesus Christ as Messiah), both are divinely ordained offices, and so on.

The issue I’m getting at is possibility of abuse of power. The difference is that with the kings of Israel and Judah, there were external enemies that could (and would) lay waste to those kings and prophets who would condemn them. With the pope, there’s really no challenging what he says or does unless it’s from a Protestant heathen.

 

[CHESTERTONRULES]

That’s beside the point. Both were to be shepherds for God’s chosen people (the Israelites, and then those who put their faith in Jesus Christ as Messiah), both are divinely ordained offices, and so on.

The issue I’m getting at is possibility of abuse of power. The difference is that with the kings of Israel and Judah, there were external enemies that could (and would) lay waste to those kings and prophets who would condemn them. With the pope, there’s really no challenging what he says or does unless it’s from a Protestant heathen.

There are challenges within the Church. The pope, as the servant of servants, must carefully weigh the (name removed by moderator)ut he receives from the magisterium and then wait for the Holy Spirit to intercede.

Jesus promised that the Holy Spirit would lead his apostles into all truth and that the gates of Hell would not prevail against his Church.

Do you believe these promises?

 

[Sailka]

That’s beside the point. Both were to be shepherds for God’s chosen people (the Israelites, and then those who put their faith in Jesus Christ as Messiah), both are divinely ordained offices, and so on.

The issue I’m getting at is possibility of abuse of power. The difference is that with the kings of Israel and Judah, there were external enemies that could (and would) lay waste to those kings and prophets who would condemn them. With the pope, there’s really no challenging what he says or does unless it’s from a Protestant heathen.

A couple Thoughts, Haj: (1) Didn’t the Kings of the Israelis fail in letting moral, spiritual evils take their people over? And didn’t God himself Rebuke Them powerfully, for same?

(2) The Pope is only the MoralSpititual ruler/Teacher/Governor of the Lord’s Church. Name One or a few instances of the Pope or Magesterium Ever abuse their Moral Power over the Church? ? Remember, Haj, the Big oft cited Crusades, Inquisitions, were not Papal or Magesterium operations, but by local Civil governors, leaders, including Each Crusade, And the Spanish inquisition was by the Spanish Monarchy, to control, reduce Popular/Political threats.
Please name Any big, or little Moral/Church “Abuse of Power, Authority” by the Pope or Magesterium in history. Threw Little abuse of Power in to give you a fair chance.

Haj, Who calls or even thinks of Protestants as *“Heathans”? *Not remotelly the Catholic Church! Other churches, especially some Protestants condemn entire Groups to Hell, for their own (Mis)readings of scripture, for instance.

 

[Hajnalcsillag]

A couple Thoughts, Haj: (1) Didn’t the Kings of the Israelis fail in letting moral, spiritual evils take their people over? And didn’t God himself Rebuke Them powerfully, for same?

(2) The Pope is only the MoralSpititual ruler/Teacher/Governor of the Lord’s Church. Name One or a few instances of the Pope or Magesterium Ever abuse their Moral Power over the Church? ? Remember, Haj, the Big oft cited Crusades, Inquisitions, were not Papal or Magesterium operations, but by local Civil governors, leaders, including Each Crusade, And the Spanish inquisition was by the Spanish Monarchy, to control, reduce Popular/Political threats.
Please name Any big, or little Moral/Church “Abuse of Power, Authority” by the Pope or Magesterium in history. Threw Little abuse of Power in to give you a fair chance.

A clever setup. If I say “I have nothing”, then I’ll be told to drop the issue. If I name something I believe to be erroneous or contrary to Scripture, then I’ll be told that, “The Magisterium and the Pope cannot be wrong on matters of faith or doctrine, so you speak lies.”

Haj, Who calls or even thinks of Protestants as *“Heathans”? *Not remotelly the Catholic Church! Other churches, especially some Protestants condemn entire Groups to Hell, for their own (Mis)readings of scripture, for instance.

traditioninaction.org/religious/m013rpProtestantsChristians.html

I use the term “Protestant heathen” in a sarcastic self-deprecatory manner; certainly there are those on this forum (not the majority, thankfully) who would share the opinions of Dr. Horvat.

 

[JMJ_coder]

A clever setup. If I say “I have nothing”, then I’ll be told to drop the issue. If I name something I believe to be erroneous or contrary to Scripture, then I’ll be told that, “The Magisterium and the Pope cannot be wrong on matters of faith or doctrine, so you speak lies.”

Go ahead and try. So what doctrines that the Church teaches that are contradicted by Scriptures.

Please note: Lack of an explicit reference of a doctrine in Scripture is not proof of contradiction.

 

[Sailka]

A clever setup. If I say “I have nothing”, then I’ll be told to drop the issue. If I name something I believe to be erroneous or contrary to Scripture, then I’ll be told that, “The Magisterium and the Pope cannot be wrong on matters of faith or doctrine, so you speak lies.”

traditioninaction.org/religious/m013rpProtestantsChristians.html

I use the term “Protestant heathen” in a sarcastic self-deprecatory manner; certainly there are those on this forum (not the majority, thankfully) who would share the opinions of Dr. Horvat.

What dogma, Teaching is contrary to Scripture?

Quite the opposite, Haj! We’ll give you the Correct answer, not sidestep that the Church says so. The RCC happens to be All Reason, all Facts, all reality, and all Scripture. All Humility, Respect too
And Remember, Haj, that God gave us The Church. Nowhere does He say he is giving us The Book. The Book says that Truth on Earth is In the Apostles, The Church. 1 Timothy 3:15.
And those who harrass you are AntiChrist. Are Opposite of Our Lord, Our Churches Teachings, which teach Love, Respect, Teach.
:grouphug:

 

[Sailka]

A clever setup. If I say “I have nothing”, then I’ll be told to drop the issue. If I name something I believe to be erroneous or contrary to Scripture, then I’ll be told that, “The Magisterium and the Pope cannot be wrong on matters of faith or doctrine, so you speak lies.”

traditioninaction.org/religious/m013rpProtestantsChristians.html

I use the term “Protestant heathen” in a sarcastic self-deprecatory manner; certainly there are those on this forum (not the majority, thankfully) who would share the opinions of Dr. Horvat.

 

[Sailka]

A clever setup. If I say “I have nothing”, then I’ll be told to drop the issue. If I name something I believe to be erroneous or contrary to Scripture, then I’ll be told that, “The Magisterium and the Pope cannot be wrong on matters of faith or doctrine, so you speak lies.”

traditioninaction.org/religious/m013rpProtestantsChristians.html

I use the term “Protestant heathen” in a sarcastic self-deprecatory manner; certainly there are those on this forum (not the majority, thankfully) who would share the opinions of Dr. Horvat.

Dr Horvath’s opinions are his own, and out of Touch with the Cath olic Church Views, which respect all Faiths. And if he would look Christian up in the dictionary, he would find it means Follower of Christ, not his definition. Free country, everybody has right to his own opinionsopcorn: :yup: :whacky: