Papal Infallibility Roundtable

[tqualey]

Hi, Cavaradossi,

Now quite … in fact … not even close!

It is the Holy Spirit that is moving the young Catholic Church to accept the Gentiles into membership. The Holy Spirit is doing this through the Apostles - with Peter making the decision and James giving his endorsement to what Peter has already done. Remember, this is the First Council - and things are not as organized and regimented as with later councils… but, the Holy Spirit is still guiding the process.

There really isn’t anything resembling ‘revisionist history’ - even if you do not like what is being said. There is nothing out of time sequence - as I had previously mentioned with at least three of the Early Church Fathers acknowledging the Bishop of Rome as the leader.

And, there was a major reason for a decision to be made by the leader at this time. The Judiazers - the first heretics of the Catholic Church - were tearing the Church with their demands that the new Gentile coverts first become Jews and then become Catholics (the Catholics were the only Christians around at the time). Peter made the decision and that ended the matter (‘Rome’ had spoken - but, in geographically in Jerusalem…)

God bless

[BIBLEDRB]acts 15:28[/BIBLEDRB]
Why even bother to mention the Holy Spirit and ‘us’ if Peter were vested with such authority? This seems a bit like some sort of revisionist history: reading anachronistic papal prerogatives into a situation where there clearly were none to be exercised, as the ‘office’ of the papacy did not yet exist.

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Steve b,

Well said!

God bless

Mickey,

James is the bishop of Jerusalem, not Peter, that’s true. And it is also true, that the reason for the council is because Judaizers from James party were causing trouble for gentile converts. This issue needed to be settled and James obviously couldn’t settle this issue himself with his own people or it wouldn’t have taken a council…true? So,*** What was the “cause”*** of James judgement that settled the matter? After all the discussion took place, Peter stood up and gave his answer. Peter ended the debate. James implemented Peter’s decision. What role did Peter play in this? Pope

As Chrysostom said, ’How then did James receive the throne of Jerusalem?,’ this I would answer thatHe (Jesus) appointed this man (Peter) teacher, not of that throne, but of the whole world.(Chrysostom, In John. Hom. 1xxxviii. n. 1, tom. viii)

 

[Cavaradossi]

Hi, Cavaradossi,

Now quite … in fact … not even close!

It is the Holy Spirit that is moving the young Catholic Church to accept the Gentiles into membership. The Holy Spirit is doing this through the Apostles - with Peter making the decision and James giving his endorsement to what Peter has already done. Remember, this is the First Council - and things are not as organized and regimented as with later councils… but, the Holy Spirit is still guiding the process.

There really isn’t anything resembling ‘revisionist history’ - even if you do not like what is being said. There is nothing out of time sequence - as I had previously mentioned with at least three of the Early Church Fathers acknowledging the Bishop of Rome as the leader.

And, there was a major reason for a decision to be made by the leader at this time. The Judiazers - the first heretics of the Catholic Church - were tearing the Church with their demands that the new Gentile coverts first become Jews and then become Catholics (the Catholics were the only Christians around at the time). Peter made the decision and that ended the matter (‘Rome’ had spoken - but, in geographically in Jerusalem…)

God bless

Rome did not have such power as it does now, so your version of events is indeed an anachronistic historical revision. If you’re going to convince me that the papacy is a divine office, which always possessed the powers it has in the modern day Catholic Church (that is, that your reading of Acts 15 is correct), then perhaps you might like to start by telling me who established it, where I might read about its founding, and where I might find the first millennium canons which regulated its functions within the Church during the first millennium and how it related to the other patriarchates within the first millennium Church.

 

[Shiranui117]

Hi, Cavaradossi,

Now quite … in fact … not even close!

It is the Holy Spirit that is moving the young Catholic Church to accept the Gentiles into membership. The Holy Spirit is doing this through the Apostles - with Peter making the decision and James giving his endorsement to what Peter has already done. Remember, this is the First Council - and things are not as organized and regimented as with later councils… but, the Holy Spirit is still guiding the process.

There really isn’t anything resembling ‘revisionist history’ - even if you do not like what is being said. There is nothing out of time sequence - as I had previously mentioned with at least three of the Early Church Fathers acknowledging the Bishop of Rome as the leader.

And, there was a major reason for a decision to be made by the leader at this time. The Judiazers - the first heretics of the Catholic Church - were tearing the Church with their demands that the new Gentile coverts first become Jews and then become Catholics (the Catholics were the only Christians around at the time). Peter made the decision and that ended the matter (‘Rome’ had spoken - but, in geographically in Jerusalem…)

God bless

You do realize that Peter was also one of the Judaizers for a while himself, right? See Galatians 2:11-14:

11 Now when Peter[a] had come to Antioch, I withstood him to his face, because he was to be blamed; 12 for before certain men came from James, he would eat with the Gentiles; but when they came, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing those who were of the circumcision. 13 And the rest of the Jews also played the hypocrite with him, so that even Barnabas was carried away with their hypocrisy.
14 But when I saw that they were not straightforward about the truth of the gospel, I said to Peter before them all, “If you, being a Jew, live in the manner of Gentiles and not as the Jews, why do you** compel Gentiles to live as Jews?**

 

[steve_b]

acts 15:28 (Douay Rheims)
28 For it hath seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us, to lay no further burden upon you than these necessary things:

Why even bother to mention the Holy Spirit and ‘us’ if Peter were vested with such authority? This seems a bit like some sort of revisionist history: reading anachronistic papal prerogatives into a situation where there clearly were none to be exercised, as the ‘office’ of the papacy did not yet exist.

Why do you come up with THAT conclusion from what is said?

From the Douay, Peter’s part, James part

Acts 15:

[6] And the apostles and ancients assembled to consider of this matter. [7] And when there had been much disputing, Peter, rising up, said to them: Men, brethren, you know, that in former days God made choice among us, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel, and believe. [[8] (Douay-Rheims Bible, Acts of Apostles Chapter 15)* And God,* who knoweth the hearts, gave testimony, giving unto them the Holy Ghost, as well as to us; [[9] (Douay-Rheims Bible, Acts of Apostles Chapter 15)* And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith*. [[10] (Douay-Rheims Bible, Acts of Apostles Chapter 15)* Now therefore, why tempt you God to put a yoke upon the necks of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear*? [[11] (Douay-Rheims Bible, Acts of Apostles Chapter 15)* But by the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, we believe to be saved, in like manner as they also.* [[12] (Douay-Rheims Bible, Acts of Apostles Chapter 15)And all the multitude held their peace; and they heard Barnabas and Paul telling what great signs and wonders God had wrought among the Gentiles by them. [13]And after they had held their peace,* James answered, saying: Men, brethren, hear me. [[14]* (Douay-Rheims Bible, Acts of Apostles Chapter 15)* Simon hath related how God first visited to take of the Gentiles a people to his name. [[15]* (Douay-Rheims Bible, Acts of Apostles Chapter 15)* And to this agree the words of the prophets, as it is written: [[16]* (Douay-Rheims Bible, Acts of Apostles Chapter 15)* After these things I will return, and will rebuild the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and the ruins thereof I will rebuild, and I will set it up: [[17]* (Douay-Rheims Bible, Acts of Apostles Chapter 15)* That the residue of men may seek after the Lord, and all nations upon whom my name is invoked, saith the Lord, who doth these things. [[18]* (Douay-Rheims Bible, Acts of Apostles Chapter 15)* To the Lord was his own work known from the beginning of the world. [[19]* (Douay-Rheims Bible, Acts of Apostles Chapter 15)* For which cause I judge that they, who from among the Gentiles are converted to God, are not to be disquieted. [[20]* (Douay-Rheims Bible, Acts of Apostles Chapter 15)* But that we write unto them, that they refrain themselves from the pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood.*

What just happened?

• Who is Peter calling to task for tempting God and putting a yoke on the necks of the gentiles? “Men, Bretheren” whoever they are…probably judaizers and sympathizers.
• What yoke are they ( Men and Bretheren) putting on Gentiles that Peter says is NOT to be done? Notice, Peter isn’t putting this yoke on them. But he’s condemning those who are doing it.
• James clearly made his judgement based on what Peter said. For whatever reason, James also adds refraining from things strangled, and from blood, which is a judaizer issue, which as I mentioned previously, didn’t last long. Paul post council, overturned what James added, in 1 Cor 8. But what Peter said remained, and is Church law.

 

[Shiranui117]

Why do you come up with THAT conclusion from what is said?

From the Douay, Peter’s part, James part

What just happened?

• Who is Peter calling to task for tempting God and putting a yoke on the necks of the gentiles? “Men, Bretheren” whoever they are…probably judaizers and sympathizers.
• What yoke are they ( Men and Bretheren) putting on Gentiles that Peter says is NOT to be done? Notice, Peter isn’t putting this yoke on them. But he’s condemning those who are doing it.
• James clearly made his judgement based on what Peter said. For whatever reason, James also adds refraining from things strangled, and from blood, which is a judaizer issue, which as I mentioned previously, didn’t last long. Paul post council, overturned what James added, in 1 Cor 8.

1: See my above response to tqualey.
2: 1 Corinthians 8 only talks about refraining from food offered to idols as being simply advised, not commanded, unless we confuse some other Christians. Nowhere in there does he revoke or tolerate those other things which James added (fornication, strangling, drinking blood,)

 

[steve_b]

You do realize that Peter was also one of the Judaizers for a while himself, right? See Galatians 2:11-14:

11 Now when Peter[a] had come to Antioch, I withstood him to his face, because he was to be blamed; 12 for before certain men came from James, he would eat with the Gentiles; but when they came, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing those who were of the circumcision. 13 And the rest of the Jews also played the hypocrite with him, so that even Barnabas was carried away with their hypocrisy.
14 But when I saw that they were not straightforward about the truth of the gospel, I said to Peter before them all, “If you, being a Jew, live in the manner of Gentiles and not as the Jews, why do you** compel Gentiles to live as Jews?**

Peter was NOT a Judaizer. No time did Peter teach what Judaizers believe. The only thing Peter might have done was choose who he was gong to eat with which is a matter of personal practice. Peter didn’t DO what Paul did for example. anyway, Jerome discussed this issue of Gal 2 with Augustine.

St Jerome responded to this charge of Paul rebuking Peter by observing that,

1. 
   *]Peter was well aware of the law of Moses, but was playing to those who were weak in their faith and out of fear that he might lose them, did what he did so like the Good Shepherd, would not lose ANYONE given to him. Now look at what Paul did
   *]In Acts 16:1-3 Paul took a disciple named Timothy… and on account of the Jews of that region, Paul had Timothy a gentile, circumcised. Then
   *]Acts 18:18, Acts 21: 18-26 Paul shaved his head, purified himself and made sacrifice according to the Mosaic law, which he had previously said is no longer to be followed.
   
   Catch that? PaulrebukesPeter while giving himself a pass on far more. But actually, Paul learned from Peter in this exercise that he would enjoin later in his ministry… Because Paul later in his travels explains HIS behavior by saying, to the Gentiles he becomes as a Gentile, to win them over, as to the Jews he became a Jew so that some might be saved. [1 cor 9:20]
   
   St Jerome points out.
   
   “O blessed Apostle Paul, who has rebuked Peter
   for hypocrasybecause he withdrew himself from the
   Gentiles for fear of the Jews who’ came from
   James, why are you, not withstanding your own
   doctrine, compelled to circumcise Timothy, the son of a
   **Gentile, for he was not a Jew, having not been circumcised? Will you answer, ‘Because of the Jews which are in these quarters.? If so, then forgive yourself the circumcision of a disciple coming from the Gentiles, and forgive Peter also, who has precedence above you, his doing some things of the same kind through fear of the believing Jews.”
   
   Jerome continues, “Why did you [Paul] shave your head, why did you walk barefoot according to the Jewish ceremonial law, why did you offer sacrifices, why were victims slain for you
   according to the law? Will you answer, ‘To avoid giving offense to those of the Jews who had believed.’ To gain the Jews, you did pretend to be a Jew”. [snip]
   
   I tried to highlight and compress ( albeit a poor job on my part) what Jerome writes to Augustine concerning this subject. I focused particularly starting with ch’s 3…. of his letter. Here is Jerome’s full letter. Please read it. Forget my inept job at trying to summarize. http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/1102075.htm**

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Shiranui117,

Seriously, this has about as much relevance as me telling you that Paul had Timothy circumcised (Acts 16:3).

The issue is not the strength, or intelligence or character or grace (or lack of it) of the person that God chooses to effect His Will. God selects the vessel and that is it. In Matthew 16, Christ acknowledges that His Heavenly Father selected Peter by giving him the answer to Christ’s question. Peter’s sinfullness, lack of courage, apparently not being the most intelligent of the 12 - were not issues (at least with God). Peter was chosen and after a rocky start - showed what a good instrument he was when he preached his first sermon on that First Pentecost Sunday.

God bless

You do realize that Peter was also one of the Judaizers for a while himself, right? See Galatians 2:11-14:

11 Now when Peter[a] had come to Antioch, I withstood him to his face, because he was to be blamed; 12 for before certain men came from James, he would eat with the Gentiles; but when they came, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing those who were of the circumcision. 13 And the rest of the Jews also played the hypocrite with him, so that even Barnabas was carried away with their hypocrisy.
14 But when I saw that they were not straightforward about the truth of the gospel, I said to Peter before them all, “If you, being a Jew, live in the manner of Gentiles and not as the Jews, why do you** compel Gentiles to live as Jews?**

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Shiranui117,

On a totally unrelated & off-topic subject… what is ACROD? I Googled it and got medical terms for a skin condition most would rather not have … guessing this is not what you have in mind … what is it?

God bless

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Steve b,

Great post!

I had forgotten about Paul shaving his head … ah, and didn’t James play some role in Paul fulfilling Jewish ceremonies?

In my opinion, the take home message from these great saints of God is that change is difficult. The bottom line, howerver, is that they changed enough to win over many souls for Christ - and us being here is a good reality to contemplate.

God bless

Peter was NOT a Judaizer. No time did Peter teach what Judaizers believe. Jerome discussed this issue of Gal 2 with Augustine.

St Jerome responded to this charge of Paul rebuking Peter by observing that,

1. 
   *]Peter was well aware of the law of Moses, but was playing to those who were weak in their faith and out of fear that he might lose them, did what he did so like the Good Shepherd, would not lose ANYONE given to him. Now look at what Paul did
   *]In Acts 16:1-3 Paul took a disciple named Timothy… and on account of the Jews of that region, Paul had Timothy a gentile, circumcised. Then
   *]Acts 18:18, Acts 21: 18-26 Paul shaved his head, purified himself and made sacrifice according to the Mosaic law, which he had previously said is no longer to be followed.
   
   Catch that? PaulrebukesPeter while giving himself a pass on far more. But actually, Paul learned from Peter in this exercise that he would enjoin later in his ministry… Because Paul later in his travels explains HIS behavior by saying, to the Gentiles he becomes as a Gentile, to win them over, as to the Jews he became a Jew so that some might be saved. [1 cor 9:20]
   
   *This is exactly what Peter did earlier with the gentiles and was rebuked by Paul for it. Then Paul embraces this behavior for himself… Paul learned a valuable lesson from Peter in how NOT to lose sheep he is trying to shepherd *
   
   St Jerome points out.
   
   “O blessed Apostle Paul, who has rebuked Peter
   for hypocrasybecause he withdrew himself from the
   Gentiles for fear of the Jews who’ came from
   James, why are you, not withstanding your own
   doctrine, compelled to circumcise Timothy, the son of a
   **Gentile, for he was not a Jew, having not been circumcised? Will you answer, ‘Because of the Jews which are in these quarters.? If so, then forgive yourself the circumcision of a disciple coming from the Gentiles, and forgive **Peter also, who has precedence above you, his doing some things of the same kind through fear of the believing Jews.”
   
   Jerome continues, “Why did you [Paul] shave your head, why did you walk barefoot according to the Jewish ceremonial law, why did you offer sacrifices, why were victims slain for you
   according to the law? Will you answer, ‘To avoid giving offense to those of the Jews who had believed.’ To gain the Jews, you did pretend to be a Jew”. [snip]
   
   I tried to highlight and compress ( albeit a poor job on my part) what Jerome writes to Augustine concerning this subject. I focused particularly starting with ch’s 3…. of his letter. Here is Jerome’s full letter. Please read it. Forget my inept job at trying to summarize. http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/1102075.htm

 

[Mickey]

Keep your shirt on, Mickey…

Never took it off Tom.

The part you seem to miss is that Peter makes the actual decision… and you can read this in Acts 15:7-12.

No Tom. There was discussion, consensus, and judgement. St James was the bishop of Jerusalem. St James makes the judgement.

If you don’t agree … fine.

You are trying to retroactively read some type of papal supremacy into the passage. That does not work for me. Read St John Chrysostom’s interpretation again.

But, you will have to do more then increase your pitch next time

What does it mean that you continuously write in a blue tinted pitch # 3?

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Mickey,

I am not screaming in pitch 3 - just easier to read.

God bless

Never took it off Tom.
No Tom. There was discussion, consensus, and judgement. St James was the bishop of Jerusalem. St James makes the judgement.
You are trying to retroactively read some type of papal supremacy into the passage. That does not work for me. Read St John Chrysostom’s interpretation again.
What does it mean that you continuously write in a blue tinted pitch # 3?

 

[Anthony_V]

Thanks for this thread. I’ve learned a lot about both faiths just by watching! Continuing to watch

Mary, mother of God, pray for us and our orthodox brothers and sisters, that we might one day be joined together in unity.
Thank you Father for giving us our orthodox sisters and brothers. Bring us all, namely Catholics and orthodox, closer to you so that one day we might sing praises and glory to your name in the one eternal banquet of Heaven. Amen!

 

[Shiranui117]

Hi, Shiranui117,

Seriously, this has about as much relevance as me telling you that Paul had Timothy circumcised (Acts 16:3).

Actually, interesting note there: Timothy was technically Jewish, since his mother was Jewish, according to Jewish law. Read 16:1-2 as well:
1 Then he came to Derbe and Lystra. And behold, a certain disciple was there, named Timothy, the son of a certain Jewish woman who believed, but his father was Greek. 2 He was well spoken of by the brethren who were at Lystra and Iconium.

The issue is not the strength, or intelligence or character or grace (or lack of it) of the person that God chooses to effect His Will. God selects the vessel and that is it. In Matthew 16, Christ acknowledges that His Heavenly Father selected Peter by giving him the answer to Christ’s question. Peter’s sinfullness, lack of courage, apparently not being the most intelligent of the 12 - were not issues (at least with God). Peter was chosen and after a rocky start - showed what a good instrument he was when he preached his first sermon on that First Pentecost Sunday.

Yes, and several other Apostles showed that as well, Paul in particular.

Peter was NOT a Judaizer. No time did Peter teach what Judaizers believe. The only thing Peter might have done was choose who he was gong to eat with which is a matter of personal practice. Peter didn’t DO what Paul did for example. anyway, Jerome discussed this issue of Gal 2 with Augustine.

I’ll let you try and explain exactly what Paul meant when he said Peter compelled Gentiles to live as Jews, and that he was to blame.

St Jerome responded to this charge of Paul rebuking Peter by observing that, Peter was well aware of the law of Moses, but was playing to those who were weak in their faith and out of fear that he might lose them, did what he did so like the Good Shepherd, would not lose ANYONE given to him.

And so he deferred to James and the Judaizers, and as Paul put it, “fear[ed] those who were of the circumcision”? Paul also quite literally said that Peter was to be blamed. Peter didn’t only do these things himself, but his example caused others, such as Barnabas who was mentioned, to be “carried away with their hypocrisy.”

Now look at what ]Paul did In Acts 16:1-3
Paul took a disciple named Timothy… and on account of the Jews of that region, Paul had Timothy a gentile, circumcised.
Then Acts 18:18, Acts 21: 18-26 Paul shaved his head, purified himself and made sacrifice according to the Mosaic law, which he had previously said is no longer to be followed.
Catch that? Paul rebukes while giving himself a pass on far more. But actually, Paul learned from Peter in this exercise that he would enjoin later in his ministry… Because Paul later in his travels explains HIS behavior by saying, to the Gentiles he becomes as a Gentile, to win them over, as to the Jews he became a Jew so that some might be saved. [1 cor 9:20]

Paul, being a Jew, doing Jewish things with other Jews isn’t really a problem. All the Council of Jerusalem said on that subject was, the Jewish Law was not necessary for the Gentiles or the Jews, and as long as everyone agreed on that, there was no problem. The issue with the Judaizers is they insisted that the Jewish Law was necessary for salvation.

St Jerome points out.

I tried to highlight and compress ( albeit a poor job on my part) what Jerome writes to Augustine concerning this subject. I focused particularly starting with ch’s 3…. of his letter. Here is Jerome’s full letter. Please read it. Forget my inept job at trying to summarize. http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/1102075.htm

Yeah, I’ll take a look at that and then give my thoughts on it, but I may be a while; ton of schoolwork and regular work on my plate.

 

[Shiranui117]

Hi, Shiranui117,

On a totally unrelated & off-topic subject… what is ACROD? I Googled it and got medical terms for a skin condition most would rather not have … guessing this is not what you have in mind … what is it?

God bless

ROFL. It stands for “American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese.”

 

[Shiranui117]

Hi, Cavaradossi,

Now quite … in fact … not even close!

It is the Holy Spirit that is moving the young Catholic Church to accept the Gentiles into membership. The Holy Spirit is doing this through the Apostles - with Peter making the decision and James giving his endorsement to what Peter has already done. Remember, this is the First Council - and things are not as organized and regimented as with later councils… but, the Holy Spirit is still guiding the process.

There really isn’t anything resembling ‘revisionist history’ - even if you do not like what is being said. There is nothing out of time sequence - as I had previously mentioned with at least three of the Early Church Fathers acknowledging the Bishop of Rome as the leader.

And, there was a major reason for a decision to be made by the leader at this time. The Judiazers - the first heretics of the Catholic Church - were tearing the Church with their demands that the new Gentile coverts first become Jews and then become Catholics (the Catholics were the only Christians around at the time). Peter made the decision and that ended the matter (‘Rome’ had spoken - but, in geographically in Jerusalem…)

God bless

Alright, let’s assume for a moment that Peter is truly the Rock Christ spoke of, and Peter alone. Even then, Rome is not the only Petrine See, as it were. Just see what St. Gregory the Great, Pope of Rome, says about the Chair of Peter:
"Your most sweet Holiness has spoken much in your letter to me about the chair of Saint Peter, Prince of the apostles, saying that he himself now sits on it in the persons of his successors. . .
“Wherefore though there are many apostles, yet with regard to the principality itself the See of the Prince of the apostles alone has grown strong in authority, which in three places is the See of one1722 (footnote right below here)”

1722 As to the view here expressed of the unity of the three Sees of Rome, Antioch, and Alexandria, see Prolegom., p. xii.

“He himself stablished the See in which, though he was to leave it, he sat for seven years. Since then it is the See of one, and one See, over which by Divine authority three bishops now preside, whatever good I hear of you, this I impute to myself.”

Source: ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf212.iii.v.vii.xxvi.html

St. Gregory is clearly affirming that the See of Peter is at once the sees of Rome, Antioch and Alexandria, all three sees forming one See of Peter. Rome does not hold this position any more than Alexandria and Antioch, and Gregory himself says that three bishops now preside over the See of Peter.

 

[steve_b]

No. St James listened to them all…added to the discussion…and then made the judgement. It is plain to see in the reading and cannot be spun any other way.
Huh?

James listened to and named the one he listened to. He was the one who said God made him the voice to the gentiles. He was the one who condemned those who were tempting God, and putting this yoke on the necks of the gentiles? Who was that ONE person, that led up to James ratifying his decision? It was Peter.

 

[Mickey]

James listened to and named the one he listened to.

James listened…spoke…and made the judgement. It’s quite simple and clear. You read it for yourself in Acts.

 

[steve_b]

James listened…spoke…and made the judgement. It’s quite simple and clear. You read it for yourself in Acts.

James implemented Peter’s answer.

 

[Mickey]

James implemented Peter’s answer.

Okay…that too. He listened…spoke…judged…and implemented.