Pentecostal pastor claims Jesus did NOT build his Church on Peter?

  • Thread starter Thread starter 7WatersDaughter
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The difficulty in recognizing the office of the Pope is that it is suppose to mirror the authority of Jesus. Protestants see this as blasphemy, and Catholics see this as our mystical image of Jesus on earth.

The truth which Protestants so desperately want to force against the Papacy, is actually supported in the Papacy. But the thing is, is that the greatness of the office does not make the holder of the office any greater than the least in the kingdom. The amount of servitude a person has is the amount of greatness he has.

Notice how Jesus addresses this, and immediately attends to the holder of the keys. Because he is most accountable for his actions.

24 A dispute also arose among them, which of them was to be regarded as the greatest. 25 And he said to them, “The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and those in authority over them are called benefactors. 26 But not so with you; rather let the greatest among you become as the youngest, and the leader as one who serves. 27 For which is the greater, one who sits at table, or one who serves? Is it not the one who sits at table? But I am among you as one who serves.

28 “You are those who have continued with me in my trials; 29** as my Father appointed a kingdom for me, so do I appoint for you **30 that you may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

Jesus Predicts Peter’s Denial

31 “Simon, Simon, behold, Satan demanded to have you,[d] that he might sift you[e] like wheat, 32 but I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail; and when you have turned again, strengthen your brethren.” 33 And he said to him, “Lord, I am ready to go with you to prison and to death.” 34 He said, “I tell you, Peter, the cock will not crow this day, until you three times deny that you know me.”
 
There is a very anti-Catholic (former cradle Catholic, whose family left the RC church when he was a child and converted to Pentecostalism) pastor that I know through my volunteer work at a program that takes place at his church (even though I do not go to that church). He once said that Jesus did NOT mean for Peter to run the Church. That it was not built on Peter at all and therefore the Catholic Church is wrong wrong wrong.

How could he, a sola scriptura, born again Protestant, believe this, when we read in the Bible:

Matthew 16:18: “And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church; and the powers of death shall not prevail against it.”

Matthew 16:19 “I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven . . .”
And no disrespect how could he accept this teaching, and the have a Church. I mean if he said as the word of God says yes Peter has the keys to the kingdom of God, why would anyone go to him and not the Pope.🤷
 
Hello RCwitness.
Simon was NOT the Rock. Jesus is the Rock. Peter is the rock which Jesus established His Mystical Body on. Peter was the first holder of the office of Prime Minister…We are all priests able to offer spiritual sacrifices to God directly, yes. Amen…Take away the rock which Jesus place with Peter and we are a divided house.
I’ve eliminated your others words to place an emphasis on the parts I’m a little troubled with In your comments since you list yourself a s Catholic. In the first part of your statement you repeat how others interpret this passage that Jesus didn’t mean to call Peter the rock but it was metaphorical. Then you add the notion Peter is only mystically endowed with leadership. You also include the whole of the Body in the Head and well, that is one of the true metaphors in Scripture and not a literal statement.

So far that means that what is literal you turn to a mystical metaphor and what is meant as a mystical metaphor is turned to literal. HUH?

I cannot fathom a Catholic taking such a position. It simply re-words the Protestant position. And thusly you have actually done exactly what you state in the third part of the comments I highlighted. You’ve reduced Peter’s sole leadership position to a placating “mystical” position and elevated the laity to the Priesthood. A Flip-flop.

No. Jesus didn’t “place a rock** with **Peter,” as you say but told all those witnessing this solitary moment in history that Peter was the rock upon which His Church would be built and endowed It with such Power and Authority that not even Hell could harm It or him, Peter! The Scripture cited is to be taken literally not metaphorically and I feel that you’re diminishing the Office of the Prince of Apostles by claiming it is a “mystical” endowment. Please correct me if you feel I’m misunderstanding what you state.

Glenda
 
rcwitness,

I like how you address the service aspect of the papal office for I think that this is something many people miss. We hear words like “authority” and think “power” - the power to impose - but the authority of the pope is not about power - but about responsibility. Few realize the tremendous responsibility that goes along with this authority.

Granted that the protestant view is largely a product of how the papal office was seen (and sometimes exercised) at the time of the reformation. It is something that we all need to try to overcome…the office of Pope is very different today than it was at that time.

I’m heartened when I hear protestants speak in much more gentle terms about the papacy. The more that Catholics and protestants together can come to understand this, the better off we will all be.

Peace
James
 
1 Peter:2 So put away all malice and all deceit and hypocrisy and envy and all slander.

2 Like newborn infants, long for the pure spiritual milk, that by it you may grow up into salvation –

3 if indeed you have tasted that the Lord is good.

4 As you come to him, a living stone rejected by men but in the sight of God chosen and precious,

5 you yourselves like living stones are being built up as a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.

6 For it stands in Scripture: "Behold, I am laying in Zion a stone, a cornerstone chosen and precious, and whoever believes in him will not be put to shame. "

7 So the honor is for you who believe, but for those who do not believe, "The stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone, " { Greek b the head of the corner b }

8 and "A stone of stumbling, and a rock of offense. " They stumble because they disobey the word, as they were destined to do.

9 But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for his own possession, that you may proclaim the excellencies of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light.

10 Once you were not a people, but now you are God’s people; once you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy.
I wonder if that Pentecostal preacher acknowledges the authority of Peter to write the quoted Scripture above? Did every first century Christian have authority to lay out instructions and teaching like this?
 
The difficulty in recognizing the office of the Pope is that it is suppose to mirror the authority of Jesus. Protestants see this as blasphemy, and Catholics see this as our mystical image of Jesus on earth.
Exactly. In the same vein, Jesus is the Good Shepherd, but he tells Peter (three times!) that he is to tend his sheep.
 
There can be no doubt Jesus renames Peter = Rock (Kephas, Cephas) and gives Peter the keys singularly while the apostles were present.

St.Paul confirms Peter’s new name and character in the New Testament, when St.Paul himself addresses Peter as Kephas =Rock.

The confession Peter makes that Jesus is the Son of the Living God, was made known to him by the Father in heaven, not flesh and blood. This profession was the sign, Jesus uses to begin to build His Church upon the one God Chose to reveal who the Son is. Thus Jesus asked the question, “Who do you say, that I am?”.

Non-Catholics make the mistake of thinking Jesus built his Church upon the faith of Peter ONLY, when scripture declares Peter’s faith of denying our Lord three times.

The CCC teaches that is was both, the confession of faith of Peter revealed from the Father, was the sign from heaven for Jesus to build His Church upon the person of Peter and give the keys to of the kingdom of God to Peter.

The name change from Simon bar Jona to Peter changes not only the name, but also his character and office of key holder to the kingdom of heaven on earth to bind and loose in communion with Jesus to bind and loose in heaven, with the promise to be with Peter till the end of time, thus apostolic succession of Peter’s office continues to today until Jesus Christ returns.

Peace be with you
 
I wonder if that Pentecostal preacher acknowledges the authority of Peter to write the quoted Scripture above? Did every first century Christian have authority to lay out instructions and teaching like this?
Yeah, probably.
 
Hello RCwitness.

I’ve eliminated your others words to place an emphasis on the parts I’m a little troubled with In your comments since you list yourself a s Catholic. In the first part of your statement you repeat how others interpret this passage that Jesus didn’t mean to call Peter the rock but it was metaphorical. Then you add the notion Peter is only mystically endowed with leadership. You also include the whole of the Body in the Head and well, that is one of the true metaphors in Scripture and not a literal statement.

So far that means that what is literal you turn to a mystical metaphor and what is meant as a mystical metaphor is turned to literal. HUH?

I cannot fathom a Catholic taking such a position. It simply re-words the Protestant position. And thusly you have actually done exactly what you state in the third part of the comments I highlighted. You’ve reduced Peter’s sole leadership position to a placating “mystical” position and elevated the laity to the Priesthood. A Flip-flop.

No. Jesus didn’t “place a rock** with **Peter,” as you say but told all those witnessing this solitary moment in history that Peter was the rock upon which His Church would be built and endowed It with such Power and Authority that not even Hell could harm It or him, Peter! The Scripture cited is to be taken literally not metaphorically and I feel that you’re diminishing the Office of the Prince of Apostles by claiming it is a “mystical” endowment. Please correct me if you feel I’m misunderstanding what you state.

Glenda
Glenda,
Thanks for raising this question for me. I am bringing a true and pure understanding which our brothers and sisters have in Jesus as the stone, which the builders rejected and thus became the cornerstone of the Church which He Himself perfects, into the more accurate and compatible understanding of Christ raising a priesthood of all His household in the image of Himself founded on Peter THROUGH his confession.

Lets use Ephesians 2:19-22 for example

19 So then you are no longer strangers and sojourners, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, 20 built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone, 21 in whom the whole structure is joined together and grows into a holy temple in the Lord; 22 in whom you also are built into it for a dwelling place of God in the Spirit.

There is the both/and theology which the Catholic faith reveals. The Apostles and Prophets together are the foundation stones which the builder (God) uses in forming His house (the Church). Jesus is both God and man, so He is both Builder and Stone. While He was among us during His ministry, He was the visible authority. But He gave His Apostles the office of His Authority for when He would not be with us in the flesh (though hidden in the Eucharist and dwelling in the Spirit). The first and prime Apostle being Peter. He was distinguished among the others for the sake of unity and Confirmation.

Peter is the first holder of the office of Vicar of Christ. Peter was bound to this office, so long as He remained in it. He was NOT Christ Himself, so He Himself was not the Cornerstone which the builders rejected. Yet in a mystical and Sacramental way, Peter was made by God the Cornerstone also, and thus he too was rejected by the builders. Just like when we are joined together in Holy Matrimony to our spouse, we are no longer two, but one, so was Peter no longer Peter, but Jesus the foundation stone of the Church. This is because Jesus, as God the Builder, anointed Simon into the Person of Peter, whom was given the keys of the kingdom of God.
So because Peter, or any of his successors are not Jesus Himself, but representatives of Him, they are members just like us, but appointed to a specific ministry and office. This office has the highest authority and so carries the highest accountability. Because their actions can fail the Teachings they give. Only Jesus Christ lived purely undefiled according to the Laws of God. Accordingly just before the passage above…

14 For he is our peace, who has made us both one, and has broken down the dividing wall[a] of hostility, 15 by abolishing in his flesh the law of commandments and ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace, 16 and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby bringing the hostility to an end. 17 And he came and preached peace to you who were far off and peace to those who were near; 18 for through him we both have access in one Spirit to the Father.

The old man who is before our Catholic anointing is dead, but still capable of influencing our deeds. The same is for the Pope all the way down to me. Protestantism (genuine Protestantism) desires to recognize the “faith in equal standing with the Apostles”.

2 Peter 1
Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition (RSVCE)

1 Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ,To those who have obtained a faith of equal standing with ours in the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ:[a]

Yet, just as Peter was given the keys and no one else, we all have a gift and ministry unique to our creation. We should not be scandalized in the office of the Chief Bishop, but let them do their job with joy…

Hebrews 13:17
Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition (RSVCE)
17 Obey your leaders and submit to them; for they are keeping watch over your souls, as men who will have to give account. Let them do this joyfully, and not sadly, for that would be of no advantage to you.
 
Exactly. In the same vein, Jesus is the Good Shepherd, but he tells Peter (three times!) that he is to tend his sheep.
👍
Good point.
I wonder if that Pentecostal preacher acknowledges the authority of Peter to write the quoted Scripture above? Did every first century Christian have authority to lay out instructions and teaching like this?
Sure he would. Just as he would acknowledge the authority of Paul to do the same thing.
In fact, I would guess that we probably have more “instructions” from Paul than we do from Peter.
So I really don’t think you would get very far with this argument…
More telling in this vein would be the fact that Paul went up after a time and laid out his teaching to Peter and James to make sure that he was not “running in vain”.
Perhaps a good question to ask the Pentecostal pastor would be - - who should you go to in order to make sure you are not running in vain?

Paul had Scripture…Paul had the Holy Spirit…why did he feel the need to get this assurance? What is the Spirit trying to teach here?

Just a thought.

Peace
James
 
Hello RCwitness.
I’ve eliminated your others words to place an emphasis on the parts I’m a little troubled with In your comments since you list yourself a s Catholic.

I cannot fathom a Catholic taking such a position.
Glenda
So, yes I am do my best to Conform myself to the faith of the Cat Church. But I have to do so in as much as I understand it. If I have understood wrong, its because Im not allowing the Spirit of my Savior to guide me… Forgive.
 
Think of it this way, perhaps.

If this Pentecostal preacher did realize and admit that the church was built on St Peter (and it is/was) he would quickly be out of a job.
 
Think of it this way, perhaps.

If this Pentecostal preacher did realize and admit that the church was built on St Peter (and it is/was) he would quickly be out of a job.
The Church was only built on Peter?
 
Sure. So the Church was built only on Peter and the other Apostles?
The Church is still being built up. The foundation stone, by Jesus as Builder, was Peter. This was so we have the unity of Christ in every generation while He is away.

At the council of Jerusalem, why did’t all the Apostles together declare the decision regarding the circumcision? Was it not because they were divided too? Why were they not all in one accord? What made them agree what was from God?
 
Glenda,
Thanks for raising this question for me. I am bringing a true and pure understanding which our brothers and sisters have in Jesus as the stone, which the builders rejected and thus became the cornerstone of the Church which He Himself perfects, into the more accurate and compatible understanding of Christ raising a priesthood of all His household in the image of Himself founded on Peter THROUGH his confession.

Lets use Ephesians 2:19-22 for example

19 So then you are no longer strangers and sojourners, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, 20 built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone, 21 in whom the whole structure is joined together and grows into a holy temple in the Lord; 22 in whom you also are built into it for a dwelling place of God in the Spirit.

There is the both/and theology which the Catholic faith reveals. The Apostles and Prophets together are the foundation stones which the builder (God) uses in forming His house (the Church). Jesus is both God and man, so He is both Builder and Stone. While He was among us during His ministry, He was the visible authority. But He gave His Apostles the office of His Authority for when He would not be with us in the flesh (though hidden in the Eucharist and dwelling in the Spirit). The first and prime Apostle being Peter. He was distinguished among the others for the sake of unity and Confirmation.

Peter is the first holder of the office of Vicar of Christ. Peter was bound to this office, so long as He remained in it. He was NOT Christ Himself, so He Himself was not the Cornerstone which the builders rejected. Yet in a mystical and Sacramental way, Peter was made by God the Cornerstone also, and thus he too was rejected by the builders. Just like when we are joined together in Holy Matrimony to our spouse, we are no longer two, but one, so was Peter no longer Peter, but Jesus the foundation stone of the Church. This is because Jesus, as God the Builder, anointed Simon into the Person of Peter, whom was given the keys of the kingdom of God.
So because Peter, or any of his successors are not Jesus Himself, but representatives of Him, they are members just like us, but appointed to a specific ministry and office. This office has the highest authority and so carries the highest accountability. Because their actions can fail the Teachings they give. Only Jesus Christ lived purely undefiled according to the Laws of God. Accordingly just before the passage above…

14 For he is our peace, who has made us both one, and has broken down the dividing wall[a] of hostility, 15 by abolishing in his flesh the law of commandments and ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace, 16 and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby bringing the hostility to an end. 17 And he came and preached peace to you who were far off and peace to those who were near; 18 for through him we both have access in one Spirit to the Father.

The old man who is before our Catholic anointing is dead, but still capable of influencing our deeds. The same is for the Pope all the way down to me. Protestantism (genuine Protestantism) desires to recognize the “faith in equal standing with the Apostles”.

2 Peter 1
Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition (RSVCE)

1 Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ,To those who have obtained a faith of equal standing with ours in the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ:[a]

Yet, just as Peter was given the keys and no one else, we all have a gift and ministry unique to our creation. We should not be scandalized in the office of the Chief Bishop, but let them do their job with joy…

Hebrews 13:17
Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition (RSVCE)
17 Obey your leaders and submit to them; for they are keeping watch over your souls, as men who will have to give account. Let them do this joyfully, and not sadly, for that would be of no advantage to you.
That’s a great exhortation rc:thumbsup:

Although Jesus gives the keys to the Kingdom of God to Peter singularly when He begins to build His Church… Jesus gives all of the apostles the key to bind and loose sin in forgiving and retaining sin on earth (see Jn. 20:22-23).

The Orthodox would correctly argue that all the apostles received the keys from Jesus. Biblical scholars point out that Peter received the Keys singularly from Jesus to bind and loose on earth for the whole Church, while the other apostles received the keys for the domestic Church, to bind and loose sin as scripture reveals.

When Peter’s brethren are in communion with Him, this is the One Church Jesus refers to as; “When they receive you, they receive me and the one who sent me”, in another place it reads; “Go tell the Church”, and another; “If they listen to you they listen to me” etc…

Really loved your post, I learned some new insights in regards to the High priesthood of Jesus Christ and His body the Church, thanks;

Gabe;
 
There is a very anti-Catholic (former cradle Catholic, whose family left the RC church when he was a child and converted to Pentecostalism) pastor that I know through my volunteer work at a program that takes place at his church (even though I do not go to that church). He once said that Jesus did NOT mean for Peter to run the Church. That it was not built on Peter at all and therefore the Catholic Church is wrong wrong wrong.

How could he, a sola scriptura, born again Protestant, believe this, when we read in the Bible:

Matthew 16:18: “And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church; and the powers of death shall not prevail against it.”

Matthew 16:19 “I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven . . .”
D.A. Carson (Protestant Evangelical)

"Although it is true that petros and petra can mean ‘stone’ and ‘rock’ respectively in earlier Greek, the distinction is largely confined to poetry. Moreover, the underlying Aramaic is in this case unquestionable; and most probably kepha was used in both clauses (‘you are kepha’ and ‘on this kepha’), since the word was used both for a name and for a ‘rock.’ The Peshitta (written in Syriac, a language cognate with Aramaic) makes no distinction between the words in the two clauses.

The Greek makes the distinction between petros and petra simply because it is trying to preserve the pun, and in Greek the feminine petra could not very well serve as a masculine name." (Carson, The Expositor’s Bible Commentary [Zondervan, 1984], volume 8, page 368, as cited in Butler/Dahlgren/Hess, page 17-18)

“The word Peter petros, meaning ‘rock,’ (Gk 4377) is masculine, and in Jesus’ follow-up statement he uses the feminine word petra (Gk 4376). On the basis of this change, many have attempted to avoid identifying Peter as the rock on which Jesus builds his church yet if it were not for Protestant reactions against extremes of Roman Catholic interpretations, it is doubtful whether many would have taken ‘rock’ to be anything or anyone other than Peter.” (Carson, Zondervan NIV
 
Sure. So the Church was built only on Peter and the other Apostles?
Jesus specifically said that the Church would be built upon Peter.

Peter – The Rock, Keeper of the Keys and Royal Steward

"When Jesus came to the region of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” They replied, “Some say John the Baptist; others say Elijah; and still others, Jeremiah or one of the prophets.” “But what about you?” he asked. “Who do you say I am?” Simon Peter answered, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven. And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.” (Matthew 16:13-19)

Peter’s understanding that Jesus was the Son of God did not come from working it out on his own; God the Father infused this revelation into Peter’s mind thus imprinting His seal of approval upon the humble fisherman. In turn, Jesus recognized that Simon had already been anointed by His Father in this way, and He declared, “Blessed are you” because the Father had already blessed Simon with knowledge of the Son. Speaking in His native tongue, Aramaic, Jesus gave Simon a new name, “Kepha”, the Aramaic word that means “rock”. Jesus declared, “You are kepha, and on this kepha I will build my church.”

Although Jesus spoke Aramaic, the New Testament was written in Greek, and “Kepha” would have been translated into the Greek words for “rock” which are “petra” or “petros”. “Petra” is the feminine form of the masculine word, “petros”, and obviously, “petros” is the more suitable form for a man’s name. From “petros” we derive the English name, “Peter”. For us modern readers then, Jesus’ pronouncement reads, “You are Peter and upon this rock I will build my church”, but we must never lose sight of the fact that in the original language used by Jesus, Simon is clearly identified as the rock upon which the Church would be built by Jesus. Jesus announced His intention to establish His Church (singular – not “churches” plural) and His choice of Peter as its leader.

What is it about Peter’s character that caused Jesus to compare him to something as solid as rock? Isn’t this the same Peter who Jesus called “Satan” just a few verses later? (cf. Mt 16:23) Isn’t this the same Peter who would deny the Lord three times after his arrest? (cf. Lk 22:34) Surely this unstable character is anything but solid rock upon which a Church could be built; yet, Jesus sees something deeper in Peter’s character, and His choice would be vindicated when Peter ultimately received a martyr’s crown via crucifixion.

Matthew also tells us that Jesus gave Peter the “keys of the kingdom of heaven”. In ancient times, a king might choose a second in command (known as the royal steward) who literally wore a large key as a symbol of his office and who spoke with the authority of the king. The prophet Isaiah confirms this:

"In that day I will summon my servant, Eliakim son of Hilkiah. I will clothe him with your robe and fasten your sash around him and hand your authority over to him. He will be a father to those who live in Jerusalem and to the house of Judah. I will place on his shoulder the key to the house of David; what he opens no one can shut, and what he shuts no one can open.” (Isaiah 22:22)

In the passage above, God is speaking, and He confirms the existence of the office, the key, and the continuation of the office despite the change of office holder. In other words, the office of the royal steward continued even when the man who held the office died or was replaced by someone else.

How does this relate to what we have learned from Matthew? In the New Testament, we learn that Jesus inherits the throne of his father, David.

Luke 1:31–33
And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus. He will be great, and will be called Son of the Most High; and the Lord God will give to him the throne of his father David, and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever; and of his kingdom there will be no end.

Thus, we know that Jesus is a king who will reign forever. Matthew tells us that that King Jesus named Peter as His royal steward and gave him the “keys to the kingdom of heaven" as the symbol of his authority to speak in His name. Since Jesus is an eternal king, the office of royal steward in His kingdom will never end. Although Peter died as a martyr (as Jesus foretold), the successors of Peter have taken his place in the eternal office of royal steward that Jesus established in His royal court.

In addition to the reference to a key or keys, note the following parallels:

"What he opens no one can shut, and what he shuts no one can open.” (Is. 22:22)

"Whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.” (Mt. 16:19)

Jesus was thoroughly familiar with the Old Testament scriptures, and He intentionally referenced the passage from Isaiah when He appointed Peter as His royal steward. Peter received authority from Jesus to speak in His name, and to do so faithfully, Peter must not teach error. Therefore, Peter (and his successors who are the leaders of Jesus’ Church) are protected by God from ever teaching error in matters of faith and morals. This is called “infallibility”.

Jesus reveals the infallible nature of the Church when he declares, “whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven." What does this curious passage mean? There are two possible interpretations.

First, if God reciprocates the binding and loosing of Church on earth with an identical binding or loosing in heaven, then the binding and loosing done on earth must of necessity be free from all error. If this were not so, God would have put Himself in the impossible situation of having to affirm that which is not true whenever the Church taught error.

A second interpretation would be that the authority of the church is to carry out the will and decisions of God upon earth as they have been established in heaven. This is in perfect accord with the way Jesus instructed us to pray: “Your will be done on earth as it is in heaven” (Matthew 6:10).

Thus, the Church must either be prevented from teaching error in order that God may ratify its decisions in heaven or the Church must be proclaiming here below those things that are already true in heaven. Either way, the decisions and actions of the Church can be seen to be infallible with regard to matters of faith and morals. Anything less would make Jesus a liar for He also declared, “But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth” (John 16:13) and “I am with you always till the end of the world.” (Matthew 28:20)

In conclusion, we have seen that Matthew has packed an incredible amount of information into one brief passage. We know that Jesus promised that He Himself would build a single Church with Peter as the rock upon which that Church would be built, that the office of head of the Church would be eternal, and that the Church itself must be protected from ever teaching error.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top