Protestant here with Some Words

[jpete79]

rbrooks:

Southern,

Well done!! Impressive for a southerner! jk brother
Very articulate and loving!

Rich

Thanks for the response Southern,

Now, Christ did say He would build His Church and that Church will indeed be perfect but that can’t happen until it is brought down as a Bride. To say the Church now is perfect would mean that the members inside of it were perfect as well. You can’t say the Church is perfect without saying that its members are as well.

The Church is considered the body of Christ correct? Well, if that is so then lets look at a human body as an example. When I wrestled in high-school I almost broke my neck. The top disc in my neck (the atlas disc) was inverted; nearly paralyzing the left side of my body. Now, not only was my neck imperfect but the whole body was as well. If the Church is a body it has to act the same way. It cannot be perfect if the members itself aren’t perfect and we cannot nor will not be perfect until we meet Jesus Christ face to face after living a life for Him.

As far as Scripture goes. It can be translated and taught different ways. Such topics as the use of charismatic gifts are debated highly in many Christian circles. Do many denominations disagree on something? Most disagree on things, I won’t lie but this is no different than Paul writing to the Churches in Corinth and Galatia. In Corinth they argued about who baptized whom and in Galatia they said that Gentile converts must be circumsized. Even in early Biblical times there were disputes about various teachings.

Now how can this be? It is true that we don’t always interpret Scripture correct…how is this if we are given the Spirit as a representative? Because we are still human. Look at Paul in Roman’s 7 about how he sinned and did what he didn’t want to. According to the Bible we have 3 enemies. The flesh, the world and the demons themselves. They work together to disrupt our relationship with God. Now, because one of them is along with us (the flesh) we are constantly battling our desires vs. God’s desires (the Spirit). One of them surrounds us and appeals to that flesh (the world), if you don’t believe me look at society. Evolution is talked about as if its a proven fact when its still speculative, abortion is legalized, prostitution is accepted in areas of the world, homosexual actions are accepted in the world, pornography is one of the top business practices today…and there are many more. Don’t forget as well, who is the Prince of this world. It is not Christ…He will be King but Earth as of right now is Satan’s domain. These all attribute to feelings and unless we are 100% in the Spirit, we cannot interpret Scripture correctly. This is why many protestants go to various sources; we read more than one translation of the Bible, we read books and commentaries, we look at various viewpoints of things. We know that ALL MAN IS UNDER SIN. The Magisterium and Pope and Priests and Bishops are all influenced by these same things.

Sorry this is long but we have to remember we are free in Christ but we live in a world of sin. Denominations are different because we recognize that each other are still influenced by sin but the one thing that brings us unity is Jesus Christ our Lord and Savior.

 

[rbrooks]

jpete,

WOW man! I’m getting a workout following you through the forums. lol Glad to see you’re still around, I thought everyone bailed for a bit there in the other threads.

I am going to ask for your forgiveness in advance, because I am about to say some things that may come across very brazen, but in my typical fashion, I do not know how else to put it. I was a cop for a long time, so my blunt and forward way of speaking is purely something that is now nature for me. I call it how I see it, so here goes…

jpete79:

So here’s the thing…as someone who has studied Islam (but is not close to being an expert), I know alot of the basics.

Mohommad is considered a high-prophet that the angel Gabriel revealed the true word of God to. Now in his revelation he twisted Scripture to become the Koran saying it was misinterpreted and corrupted through the years. The Koran is based on Scripture itself but has been changed from it.

Buddhists and Hindus I have not studied so I cannot give a basis for their beliefs.

So, how you understand Muslims and the koran, and how I understand you in your thoughts on the Catholic Church, essentially there is no difference in how you and a muslim think. You say the Churcdh is corrupted and man can not be trusted, only the bible. Muslims say the bible is corrupted and only mohammed and the koran can be trusted. Hope I’m making my point here. Your logic is no different than that of the muslims logic, so who is right? Can’t say everyone is right! Just like war, there is a winner and a looser, peace only comes through victory.

jpete, in your posts you say quite often, “I believe” or “I think”, you also said in a post, something on the line of, “I trust in myself” (not exact, I know), but my point here is. Are you infallible? I know your answer, so no need to argue. But do you see my point? You are saying you will follow what YOU believe or what YOU think, or how YOU interperet scripture, before you will give any thought that there may be some sort of authoritative body, on earth to help you with those thing that regard faith and morals, which ultimately lead to salvation.

So, I will ask something of you, that I am not sure or quite convinced of you doing as of yet. (I may be wrong though, so forgive me if I am.) Are you willing to put yourself aside, your thoughts, and your will, to seek truth?

You have made several statements in haste and without basis. You have made accusations that obviously were in error and without research and base your opinion upon those statements and accusations that you may have heard from unreliable or biased sources. I say, if truth is what matters most to you and you are truely seeking here, you have to do your homework brother! We all want to help, but you have to do the work man.

I definately don’t want to argue and keep going back and forth, I know you’re exhausted by that and frankly in my 8 years of being catholic, I am very worn out by all of the same old, worn out arguments people make to say the church is corrupted and flawed by men. Again, forgive me if I seem synical, I have been slightly jaded and am trying to be as blunt, yet loving as I can. Remember, I like to fire things up!

My next posts are going to be very long, I just ask you to open your heart and mind and see it for what it is.

God bless you brother! I hopw you don’t think of me as a horses %#&!

Rich

 

[mattrue]

through the Eucharist we accept Christ himself, his body, blood, soul and divinity. This can only strenghthen us on our journey, and thats why its so great because we can accept him every week, or every day for that matter. I hope you all have a great “Imaculate Conception” day. God Bless

 

[CatholicChef]

jpete79:

Are you going to tell me that the Church had nothing to do with the Crusades or the Inquisition? Many Jews also feel that the Church could have weilded power to assist them during the Holocaust instead of sitting idly by (granted there were many stories of Christians who assisted personally in those times).

If you say these things did happen; then would you say that the Catholic Church is headed by a loving body?

If you say they didn’t happen; are you going to say that the historians throughout time are mistaken?

What historians excatly? It is false that the Church sat idly by. You should do some research about the Jewish survivors who have said, in their own words, that the Church was there for them.

 

[rbrooks]

Peter’s primacy in Scripture,

Matt. to Rev. - Peter is mentioned 155 times and the rest of apostles combined are only mentioned 130 times. Peter is also always listed first except in 1 Cor. 3:22 and Gal. 2:9 (which are obvious exceptions to the rule).

Matt. 10:2; Mark 1:36; 3:16; Luke 6:14-16; Acts 1:3; 2:37; 5:29 - these are some of many examples where Peter is mentioned first among the apostles.

Matt. 14:28-29 - only Peter has the faith to walk on water. No other man in Scripture is said to have the faith to walk on water. This faith ultimately did not fail.

Matt. 16:16, Mark 8:29; John 6:69 - Peter is first among the apostles to confess the divinity of Christ.

Matt. 16:17 - Peter alone is told he has received divine knowledge by a special revelation from God the Father.

Matt. 16:18 - Jesus builds the Church only on Peter, the rock, with the other apostles as the foundation and Jesus as the Head.

Matt. 16:19 - only Peter receives the keys, which represent authority over the Church and facilitate dynastic succession to his authority.

Matt. 17:24-25 - the tax collector approaches Peter for Jesus’ tax. Peter is the spokesman for Jesus. He is the Vicar of Christ.

Matt. 17:26-27 - Jesus pays the half-shekel tax with one shekel, for both Jesus and Peter. Peter is Christ’s representative on earth.

Matt. 18:21 - in the presence of the disciples, Peter asks Jesus about the rule of forgiveness. One of many examples where Peter takes a leadership role among the apostles in understanding Jesus’ teachings.

Matt. 19:27 - Peter speaks on behalf of the apostles by telling Jesus that they have left everything to follow Him.

Mark 10:28 - here also, Peter speaks on behalf of the disciples by declaring that they have left everything to follow Him.

Mark 11:21 - Peter speaks on behalf of the disciples in remembering Jesus’ curse on the fig tree.

Mark 14:37 - at Gethsemane, Jesus asks Peter, and no one else, why he was asleep. Peter is accountable to Jesus for his actions on behalf of the apostles because he has been appointed by Jesus as their leader.

Mark 16:7 - Peter is specified by an angel as the leader of the apostles as the angel confirms the resurrection of Christ.

Luke 5:3 – Jesus teaches from Peter’s boat which is metaphor for the Church. Jesus guides Peter and the Church into all truth.

Luke 5:4,10 - Jesus instructs Peter to let down the nets for a catch, and the miraculous catch follows. Peter, the Pope, is the “fisher of men.”

Luke 7:40-50- Jesus addresses Peter regarding the rule of forgiveness and Peter answers on behalf of the disciples. Jesus also singles Peter out and judges his conduct vis-à-vis the conduct of the woman who anointed Him.

Luke 8:45 - when Jesus asked who touched His garment, it is Peter who answers on behalf of the disciples.

Luke 8:51; 9:28; 22:8; Acts 1:13; 3:1,3,11; 4:13,19; 8:14 - Peter is always mentioned before John, the disciple whom Jesus loved.

Luke 9:28;33 - Peter is mentioned first as going to mountain of transfiguration and the only one to speak at the transfiguration.

Luke 12:41 - Peter seeks clarification of a parable on behalf on the disciples. This is part of Peter’s formation as the chief shepherd of the flock after Jesus ascended into heaven.

Luke 22:31-32 - Jesus prays for Peter alone, that his faith may not fail, and charges him to strengthen the rest of the apostles.

Luke 24:12, John 20:4-6 - John arrived at the tomb first but stopped and waited for Peter. Peter then arrived and entered the tomb first.

Luke 24:34 - the two disciples distinguish Peter even though they both had seen the risen Jesus the previous hour. See Luke 24:33.

John 6:68 - after the disciples leave, Peter is the first to speak and confess his belief in Christ after the Eucharistic discourse.

John 13:6-9 - Peter speaks out to the Lord in front of the apostles concerning the washing of feet.

John 13:36; 21:18 - Jesus predicts Peter’s death. Peter was martyred at Rome in 67 A.D. Several hundred years of papal successors were also martyred.

John 21:2-3,11 - Peter leads the fishing and his net does not break. The boat (the “barque of Peter”) is a metaphor for the Church.

John 21:7 - only Peter got out of the boat and ran to the shore to meet Jesus. Peter is the earthly shepherd leading us to God.

John 21:15 - in front of the apostles, Jesus asks Peter if he loves Jesus “more than these,” which refers to the other apostles. Peter is the head of the apostolic see.

John 21:15-17 - Jesus charges Peter to “feed my lambs,” “tend my sheep,” “feed my sheep.” Sheep means all people, even the apostles.

 

[rbrooks]

continued…

Acts 1:13 - Peter is first when entering upper room after our Lord’s ascension. The first Eucharist and Pentecost were given in this room.

Acts 1:15 - Peter initiates the selection of a successor to Judas right after Jesus ascended into heaven, and no one questions him. Further, if the Church needed a successor to Judas, wouldn’t it need one to Peter? Of course.

Acts 2:14 - Peter is first to speak for the apostles after the Holy Spirit descended upon them at Pentecost. Peter is the first to preach the Gospel.

Acts 2:38 - Peter gives first preaching in the early Church on repentance and baptism in the name of Jesus Christ.

Acts 3:1,3,4 - Peter is mentioned first as going to the Temple to pray.

Acts 3:6-7 - Peter works the first healing of the apostles.

Acts 3:12-26, 4:8-12 - Peter teaches the early Church the healing through Jesus and that there is no salvation other than Christ.

Acts 5:3 - Peter declares the first anathema of Ananias and Sapphira which is ratified by God, and brings about their death. Peter exercises his binding authority.

Acts 5:15 - Peter’s shadow has healing power. No other apostle is said to have this power.

Acts 8:14 - Peter is mentioned first in conferring the sacrament of confirmation.

Acts 8:20-23 - Peter casts judgment on Simon’s quest for gaining authority through the laying on of hands. Peter exercises his binding and loosing authority.

Acts 9:32-34 - Peter is mentioned first among the apostles and works the healing of Aeneas.

Acts 9:38-40 - Peter is mentioned first among the apostles and raises Tabitha from the dead.

Acts 10:5 - Cornelius is told by an angel to call upon Peter. Angels are messengers of God. Peter was granted this divine vision.

Acts 10:34-48, 11:1-18 - Peter is first to teach about salvation for all (Jews and Gentiles).

Acts 12:5 - this verse implies that the “whole Church” offered “earnest prayers” for Peter, their leader, during his imprisonment.

Acts 12:6-11 - Peter is freed from jail by an angel. He is the first object of divine intervention in the early Church.

Acts 15:7-12 - Peter resolves the first doctrinal issue on circumcision at the Church’s first council at Jerusalem, and no one questions him. After Peter the Papa spoke, all were kept silent.

Acts 15:12 - only after Peter (the Pope) speaks do Paul and Barnabas (bishops) speak in support of Peter’s definitive teaching.

Acts 15:13-14 - then James speaks to further acknowledge Peter’s definitive teaching. “Simeon (Peter) has related how God first visited…”

Rom. 15:20 - Paul says he doesn’t want to build on “another man’s foundation” referring to Peter, who built the Church in Rome.

1 Cor. 9:5 – Peter is distinguished from the rest of the apostles and brethren of the Lord.

1 Cor. 15:4-8 - Paul distinguishes Jesus’ post-resurrection appearances to Peter from those of the other apostles. Christ appeared “to Cephas, then to the twelve.”

Gal.1:18 - Paul spends fifteen days with Peter privately before beginning his ministry, even after Christ’s Revelation to Paul.

1 Peter 5:1 - Peter acts as the chief bishop by “exhorting” all the other bishops and elders of the Church.

1 Peter 5:13 - Some Protestants argue against the Papacy by trying to prove Peter was never in Rome. First, this argument is irrelevant to whether Jesus instituted the Papacy. Secondly, this verse demonstrates that Peter was in fact in Rome. Peter writes from “Babylon” which was a code name for Rome during these days of persecution. See, for example, Rev. 14:8, 16:19, 17:5, 18:2,10,21, which show that “Babylon” meant Rome. Rome was the “great city” of the New Testament period. Because Rome during this age was considered the center of the world, the Lord wanted His Church to be established in Rome.

2 Peter 1:14 - Peter writes about Jesus’ prediction of Peter’s death, embracing the eventual martyrdom that he would suffer.

2 Peter 3:16 - Peter is making a judgment on the proper interpretation of Paul’s letters. Peter is the chief shepherd of the flock. Matt. 23:11; Mark 9:35; 10:44 - yet Peter, as the first, humbled himself to be the last and servant of all servants.

 

[rbrooks]

What the church fathers say…

I. Peter Built the Church in Rome

“Through envy and jealousy, the greatest and most righteous pillars [of the Church] have been persecuted and put to death. Let us set before our eyes the illustrious apostles. Peter, through unrighteous envy, endured not one or two, but numerous labours and when he had at length suffered martyrdom, departed to the place of glory due to him.” *Clement of Rome, The First Epistle of Clement, 5 (c. A.D. 96). *

“I do not, as Peter and Paul, issue commandments unto you.” Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to the Romans, 4 (c. A.D. 110).

'You have thus by such an admonition bound together the plantings of Peter and Paul at Rome and Corinth." Dionysius of Corinth, Epistle to Pope Soter, fragment in Eusebius’ Church History, II:25 (c. A.D. 178).

“Matthew also issued a written Gospel among the Hebrews in their own dialect, while Peter and Paul were preaching at Rome, and laying the foundations of the Church.” *Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 3:1:1 (c. A.D. 180). *

“As Peter had preached the Word publicly at Rome, and declared the Gospel by the Spirit, many who were present requested that Mark, who had followed him for a long time and remembered his sayings, should write them out.” Clement of Alexandria, fragment in Eusebius Church History, VI:14,6 (A.D. 190)

“It is, therefore, recorded that Paul was beheaded in Rome itself, and that Peter likewise was crucified under Nero. This account of Peter and Paul is substantiated by the fact that their names are preserved in the cemeteries of that place even to the present day. It is confirmed likewise by Caius, a member of the Church, who arose under Zephyrinus, bishop of Rome. He, in a published disputation with Proclus, the leader of the Phrygian heresy, speaks as follows concerning the places where the sacred corpses of the aforesaid apostles are laid: ‘But I can show the trophies of the apostles. For if you will go to the Vatican or to the Ostian way, you will find the trophies of those who laid the foundations of this church.’” Gaius, fragment in Eusebius’ Church History, 2:25 (A.D. 198).

“[W]hat utterance also the Romans give, so very near (to the apostles), to whom Peter and Paul conjointly bequeathed the gospel even sealed with their own blood.” Tertullian, Against Marcion, 4:5 (inter A.D. 207-212).

'We read the lives of the Caesars: At Rome Nero was the first who stained with blood the rising blood. Then is Peter girt by another (an allusion to John 21:18), when he is made fast to the cross." Tertullian, Scorpiace, 15:3 (A.D. 212).

“Peter…at last, having come to Rome, he was crucified head-downwards; for he had requested that he might suffer this way.” *Origen, Third Commentary on Genesis, (A.D. 232). *

“Thus Peter, the first of the Apostles, having been often apprehended, and thrown into prison, and treated with igominy, was last of all crucified at Rome.” *Peter of Alexandria, The Canonical Epistle, Canon 9 (A.D. 306). *

“[W]hich Peter and Paul preached at Rome…” Lactantius, The Divine Institutes, 4:21 (A.D. 310).

“Peter…coming to the city of Rome, by the mighty cooperation of that power which was lying in wait there…” *Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, II:14,5 (A.D. 325). *

“This man [Simon Magus], after he had been cast out by the Apostles, came to Rome…Peter and Paul, a noble pair, chief rulers of the Church, arrived and set the error right…For Peter was there, who carrieth the keys of heaven…” Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lectures ,6:14-15 (c. A.D. 350).

 

[rbrooks]

continued…

“And Peter, who had hid himself for fear of the Jews, and the Apostle Paul who was let down in a basket, and fled, when they were told, ‘Ye must bear witness at Rome,’ deferred not the journey; yea, rather, they departed rejoicing…” Athanasius, Defence of his Flight, 18 (c. A.D. 357).

“I think it my duty to consult the chair of Peter, and to turn to a church whose faith has been praised by Paul…My words are spoken to the successor of the fisherman, to the disciple of the cross.” *Jerome, To Pope Damasus, Epistle 15 (A.D. 377). *

“For if when here he loved men so, that when he [Peter] had the choice of departing and being with Christ, he chose to be here, much more will he there display a warmer affection. I love Rome even for this, although indeed one has other grounds for praising it, both for its greatness, and its antiquity, and its beauty, and its populousness, and for its power, and its wealth, and for its successes in war. But I let all this pass, and esteem it blessed on this account, that both in his lifetime he wrote to them, and loved them so, and talked with them whiles he was with us, and brought his life to a close there.” *John Chrysostom, Epistle to the Romans, Homily 32 (c. A.D. 391). *

“Which was mere to the interest of the Church at Rome, that it should at its commencement be presided over by some high-born and pompous senator, or by the fisherman Peter, who had none of this world’s advantages to attract men to him?” *Gregory of Nyssa, To the Church at Nicodemia, Epistle 13 (ante A.D. 394). *

“But some people in some countries of the West, and especially in the city, [Rome] not knowing the reason of this indulgence, think that a dispensation from fasting ought certainly not to be allowed On the Sabbath, because they say that on this day the Apostle Peter fasted before his encounter with Simon [Magus].” John Cassian, Institutes, X (ante A.D. 435). "The whole world, dearly-beloved, does indeed take part in all holy anniversaries [of Peter & Paul], and loyalty to the one Faith demands that whatever is recorded as done for all men’s salvation should be everywhere celebrated with common rejoicings. But, besides that reverence which to-day’s festival has gained from all the world, it is to be honoured with special and peculiar exultation in our city, that there may be a predominance of gladness on the day of their martyrdom in the place where the chief of the Apostles met their glorious end. For these are the men, through whom the light of Christ’s gospel shone on thee, O Rome, and through whom thou, who wast the teacher of error, wast made the disciple of Truth.” Pope Leo the Great (regn. A.D. 440-461), Sermon LXXXII (ante A.D. 461).

 

[rbrooks]

Primacy of Peter’s Apostolic See

“The church of God which sojourns at Rome to the church of God which sojourns at Corinth … But if any disobey the words spoken by him through us, let them know that they will involve themselves in transgression and in no small danger.” *Clement of Rome, Pope, 1st Epistle to the Corinthians, 1,59:1 (c. A.D. 96). *

“Ignatius, who is also called Theophorus, to the Church which has obtained mercy, through the majesty of the Mast High God the Father, and of Jesus Christ, His only-begotten Son; the Church which is sanctified and enlightened by the will of God, who farmed all things that are according to the faith and love of Jesus Christ, our God and Saviour; the Church which presides in the place of the region of the Romans, and which is worthy of God, worthy of honour, worthy of the highest happiness, worthy of praise, worthy of credit, worthy of being deemed holy, and which presides over love…” Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to the Romans, Prologue (A.D. 110).

"There is extant also another epistle written by Dionysius to the Romans, and addressed to Soter, who was bishop at that time. We cannot do better than to subjoin some passages from this epistle…In this same epistle he makes mention also of Clement’s epistle to the Corinthians, showing that it had been the custom from the beginning to read it in the church. His words are as follows: To-day we have passed the Lord’s holy day, in which we have read your epistle. From it, whenever we read it, we shall always be able to draw advice, as also from the former epistle, which was written to us through Clement.’ Dionysius of Corinth, To Pope Soter (A.D. 171).

“Since, however, it would be very tedious, in such a volume as this, to reckon up the successions of all the Churches, we do put to confusion all those who, in whatever manner, whether by an evil self-pleasing, by vainglory, or by blindness and perverse opinion, assemble in unauthorized meetings; [we do this, I say,] by indicating that tradition derived from the apostles, of the very great, the very ancient, and universally known Church founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul; as also [by pointing out] the faith preached to men, which comes down to our time by means of the successions of the bishops. For it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its pre- eminent authority, that is, the faithful everywhere, inasmuch as the apostolical tradition has been preserved continuously by those [faithful men] who exist everywhere.” Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 3:3:2 (A.D. 180).

"A question of no small importance arose at that time. For the parishes of all Asia, as from an older tradition, held that the fourteenth day of the moon, on which day the Jews were commanded to sacrifice the lamb, should be observed as the feast of the Saviour’s Passover. It was therefore necessary to end their fast on that day, whatever day of the week it should happen to be. But it was not the custom of the churches in the rest of the world to end it at this time, as they observed the practice which, from apostolic tradition, has prevailed to the present time, of terminating the fast on no other day than on that of the resurrection of our Saviour…Thereupon Victor, who presided over the church at Rome, immediately attempted to cut off from the common unity the parishes of all Asia, with the churches that agreed with them, as heterodox; and he wrote letters and declared all the brethren there wholly excommunicated.” Pope Victor & Easter (c. A.D. 195).

“And he says to him again after the resurrection, ‘Feed my sheep.’ It is on him that he builds the Church, and to him that he entrusts the sheep to feed. And although he assigns a like power to all the apostles, yet he founded a single Chair, thus establishing by his own authority the source and hallmark of the (Church’s) oneness. No doubt the others were all that Peter was, but a primacy is given to Peter, and it is (thus) made clear that there is but one flock which is to be fed by all the apostles in common accord. If a man does not hold fast to this oneness of Peter, does he imagine that he still holds the faith? If he deserts the Chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built, has he still confidence that he is in the Church? This unity firmly should we hold and maintain, especially we bishops, presiding in the Church, in order that we may approve the episcopate itself to be the one and undivided.” *Cyprian, The Unity of the Church, 4-5 (A.D. 251-256). *

 

[rbrooks]

“But he was not so eager as to lay aside caution. He called the bishop to him, and esteeming that there can be no true thankfulness except it spring from true faith, he enquired whether he agreed with the Catholic bishops, that is, with the Roman Church?” *Ambrose, The death of his brother Satyrus, 1:47 (A.D. 378). *

“Your grace must be besought not to permit any disturbance of the Roman Church, the head of the whole Roman World and of the most holy faith of the Apostles, for from thence flow out to all (churches) the bonds of sacred communion.” *Ambrose, To Emperor Gratian, Epistle 11:4 (A.D. 381). *

“To your inquiry we do not deny a legal reply, because we, upon whom greater zeal for the Christian religion is incumbent than upon the whole body, out of consideration for our office do not have the liberty to dissimulate, nor to remain silent. We carry the weight of all who are burdened; nay rather the blessed apostle Peter bears these in us, who, as we trust, protects us in all matters of his administration, and guards his heirs.” Pope Sircius [regn. A.D. 384-399], To Himerius, Epistle 1 (A.D. 385).

"Or rather, if we hear him here, we shall certainly see him hereafter, if not as standing near him, yet see him we certainly shall, glistening near the Throne of the king. Where the Cherubim sing the glory, where the Seraphim are flying, there shall we see Paul, with Peter, and as a chief and leader of the choir of the Saints, and shall enjoy his generous love. For if when here he loved men so, that when he had the choice of departing and being with Christ, he chose to be here…” John Chrysostom, Epistle to the Romans, Homily 32:24 (c. A.D. 391).

“Number the bishops from the See of Peter itself. And in that order of Fathers see who has succeeded whom. That is the rock against which the gates of hell do not prevail” *Augustine, Psalm against the Party of Donatus, 18 (A.D. 393). *

“I am held in the communion of the Catholic Church by…and by the succession of bishops from the very seat of Peter, to whom the Lord, after His resurrection commended His sheep to be fed up to the present episcopate.” Augustine, Against the Letter of Mani, 5 (A.D. 395).

“Carthage was also near the countries over the sea, and distinguished by illustrious renown, so that it had a bishop of more than ordinary influence, who could afford to disregard a number of conspiring enemies because he saw himself joined by letters of communion to the Roman Church, in which the supremacy of an apostolic chair has always flourished.” Augustine, To Glorius et.al, Epistle 43:7 (A.D. 397).

“The chair of the Roman Church, in which Peter sat, and in which Anastasius sits today.” Augustine, Against the Letters of Petillian, 2:51 (A.D. 402).

“In making inquiry with respect to those things that should be treated with all solicitude by bishops, and especially by a true and just and Catholic Council, by preserving, as you have done, the example of ancient tradition, and by being mindful of ecclesiastical discipline, you have truly strengthened the vigour of our religion, no less now in consulting us than before in passing sentence. For you decided that it was proper to refer to our judgment, knowing what is due to the Apostolic See, since all we who are set in this place, desire to follow the Apostle from the very episcopate and whole authority of this name is derived. Following in his footsteps, we know how to condemn the evil and to approve the good.” Pope Innocent [regn A.D. 401-417], To the Council of Carthage, Epistle 29 (A.D. 417).

“Although the tradition of the Fathers has attributed to the Apostolic See so great authority that none would dare to contest its judgments…For (Peter) himself has care over all the Churches, and above all that in which he sat nor does he suffer any of its privileges or decisions to be shaken” *Pope Zosimus [regn A.D. 417-418 ],To Aurelius and the Council of Carthage, Epistle 12 (A.D. 418). *

“For it has never been allowed to discuss again what has once been decided by the Apostolic See.” Pope Boniface [regn A.D. 418-422], To Rufus Bishop of Thessalonica, Epistle 13 (A.D. 422).

 

[rbrooks]

“The rising pestilence was first cut short by Rome, the see of Peter, which having become the head to the world of the pastoral office, holds by religion whatever it holds not by arms.” *Prosper of Aquitaine, Song on the Enemies of Grace, 1 (A.D. 429). *

“Joining to yourself, therefore, the sovereign of our See, and assuming our place with authority, you will execute this sentence with accurate rigour: that within ten days, counted from the day of your notice, he shall condemn his [Nestorius’] false teachings in a written confession.” Pope Celestine [regn. A.D. 422-432], To Cyril of Alexandria, Epistle 11 (A.D. 430).

“The Holy Synod said: 'Since most impious Nestorius will not obey our citation, and has not received the most holy and God-fearing bishops whom we sent to him, we have necessarily betaken ourselves to the examination of his impieties; and having apprehended from his letters, and from his writings, and from his recent sayings in this metropolis, which have been reported, that his opinions and teachings are impious, we being necessarily compelled thereto by the canons and by the letter of our most holy father and colleague, Celestine, bishop of the Roman Church, with many tears, have arrived at the following sentence against him:–'Our Lord Jesus Christ, Who has been blasphemed by him, defines by this present most holy synod that the same Nestorius is deprived of episcopal dignity and of all sacredotal intercourse.” *Council of Ephesus, Session I (A.D. 431). *

“Philip, presbyter and legate of the Apostolic See, said: There is no doubt, and in fact it has been known in all ages, that the holy and most blessed Peter, prince and head of the apostles, pillar of the faith, and foundation of the Catholic Church, received the keys of the kingdom from our Lord Jesus Christ, the Saviour and Redeemer of the human race, and that to him was given the power of loosing and binding sins: Our holy and most blessed Pope Celestine the bishop is according to due order his successor and holds his place…Accordingly the decision of all churches is firm, for the priests of the eastern and western churches are present…Wherefore Nestorius knows that he is alienated from the communion of the priests of the Catholic Church.” *Council of Ephesus, Session III (A.D. 431). *

“Peter in his successors has delivered what he received.” Pope Sixtus III [regn. A.D. 432-440], To John of Antioch, Epistle 6 (A.D. 433).

“For he [Pope Sixtus] wrote what was in accord with the holy synod [Council of Ephesus], and confirmed all of its acts, an is agreement with us.” Cyril of Alexandria, To Acacius of Meletine, Epistle 40 (A.D. 434).

“Once on a time then, Agrippinus, bishop of Carthage, of venerable memory, held the doctrine–and he was the first who held it --that Baptism ought to be repeated, contrary to the divine canon, contrary to the rule of the universal Church, contrary to the customs and institutions of our ancestors. This innovation drew after it such an amount of evil, that it not only gave an example of sacrilege to heretics of all sorts, but proved an occasion of error to certain Catholics even. When then all men protested against the novelty, and the priesthood everywhere, each as his zeal prompted him, opposed it, Pope Stephen of blessed memory, Prelate of the Apostolic See, in conjunction indeed with his colleagues but yet himself the foremost, withstood it, thinking it right, I doubt not, that as he exceeded all others in the authority of his place, so he should also in the devotion of his faith. In fine, in an epistle sent at the time to Africa, he laid down this rule: Let there be no innovation–nothing but what has been handed down.’” Vincent of Lerins, Commonitory for the Antiquity and Universality of the Catholic Faith, 6 (A.D. 434).

 

[rbrooks]

“And since these heretics were trying to bring the Apostolic See round their view, African councils of holy bishops also did their best to persuade the holy Pope of the city (first the venerable Innocent, and afterwards his successor Zosimus) that this heresy was to be abhorred and condemned by Catholic faith. And these bishops so great a See successively branded them, and cut them off from the members of the Church, giving letters to the African Churches in the West, and to the Churches of the East, and declared that they were to be anathematised and avoided by all Catholics. The judgment pronounced upon them by the Catholic Church of God was heard and followed also by the most pious Emperor Ho they had wandered, and are yet returning, as the truth of the right faith becomes known against this detestable error.” Possidius, Life of Augustine, 18 (A.D. 437).

“After the reading of the foregoing epistle [the Tome of Pope Leo], the most reverend bishops cried out: This is the faith of the fathers, this is the faith of the Apostles. So we all believe, thus the orthodox believe. Anathema to him who does not thus believe. Peter has spoken thus through Leo [regn. A.D. 440-461]. So taught the Apostles. Piously and truly did Leo teach, so taught Cyril. Everlasting be the memory of Cyril. Leo and Cyril taught the same thing, anathema to him who does not so believe. This is the true faith. Those of us who are orthodox thus believe. This is the faith of the fathers. Why were not these things read at Ephesus *? These are the things Dioscorus hid away.” Council of Chalcedon, Session II (A.D. 451).

“Wherefore the most holy and blessed Leo, archbishop of the great and elder Rome, through us, and through this present most holy synod together with the thrice blessed and all-glorious Peter the Apostle, who is the rock and foundation of the Catholic Church, and the foundation of the orthodox faith, hath stripped him of the episcopate, and hath alienated from him all hieratic worthiness. Therefore let this most holy and great synod sentence the before mentioned Dioscorus to the canonical penalties.” *Council of Chalcedon, Session III (A.D. 451). *

“The great and holy and universal Synod…in the metropolis of Chalcedon…to the most holy and blessed archbishop of Rome, Leo…being set as the mouthpiece unto all of the blessed Peter, and imparting the blessedness of his Faith unto all…and besides all this he [Dioscorus] stretched forth his fury even against him who had been charged with the custody of the vine by the Savior, we mean of course your holiness…” Pope Leo the Great, Chalcdeon to Pope Leo, Epistle 98:1-2 (A.D. 451).

“Who does not cease to preside in his see, who will doubt that he rules in every part of the world.” Pope Leo the Great [regn. A.D.440-461], Sermon 5 (A.D ante 461). “For the solidity of that faith which was praised in the chief of the Apostles is perpetual: and as that remains which Peter believed in Christ, so that remains which Christ instituted in Peter…The dispensation of Truth therefore abides, and the blessed Peter persevering in the strength of the Rock, which he has received, has not abandoned the helm of the Church, which he undertook. For he was ordained before the rest in such a way that from his being called the Rock, from his being pronounced the Foundation, from his being constituted the Doorkeeper of the kingdom of heaven, from his being set as the Umpire to bind and to loose, whose judgments shall retain their validity in heaven, from all these mystical titles we might know the nature of his association with Christ. And still to-day he more fully and effectually performs what is entrusted to him, and carries out every part of his duty and charge in Him and with Him, through Whom he has been glorified. And so if anything is rightly done and rightly decreed by us, if anything is won from the mercy of God by our daily supplications, it is of his work and merits whose power lives and whose authority prevails in his See.” *Pope Leo the Great [regn. A.D.440-461], Sermon 3:2-3 (A.D ante 461). **

 

[CatholicChef]

In no way do I mean this to be rude but, I’m confused by your questions and your comments. You obviously don’t agree with most of the things we believe, so why do you continue this debate?

I believe the Catholic Church to be the true Church established by Christ, so I have no desire to go to a protestant forum. I will never agree with them and most will never agree with me.

 

[rbrooks]

WHEWWW… lol

That’ll bake anyones noodle. Anyhow, I am interested in your thoughts of the office of the pope after seeing the pile that I just posted. I realize it will take some time. I look forward to your thoughts.

Rich

 

[Orionthehunter]

jpete79:

Kathleen:

I admit that I have not read Della’s answer but have not ignored it either. I am not able to get to all answers and respond to everyone in a timely fashion because I try to type at work. Because people post rather quickly I don’t get to everyone’s comments. Can you tell me what number post it was so I can look back at it?

**I want to know personal reasons that people would follow an institution such as the Church with Tradition rather than why they wouldn’t follow Scripture which does give us a distinct way to Heaven (Jesus Christ)? **

I admit I don’t understand fallibility because morals and actions are linked and to say you can be perfect in doctrine would mean that you would try and act out those morals in action (true you would not always succeed).

As far as history goes, I have been an avid studier of history (and not just Christian) as I feel history is a great tool for learning about mistakes and not letting them occur again.

Jpete, I notice how you have never really answered my questions. I think the reason is that you know what the next question is. Anyway, I bolded where your understanding of Catholics is most in error. It isn’t either or. We don’t follow the Pope in lieu of Scripture and don’t ascribe to the converse either. We have profound trust and faith in His revelation since the beginning of Time (even before the Genesis story of Adam and Eve). It is this trust and faith that gives us confidence in the Old Testament and New Testament, in the Sacred Traditions practiced by the Jews and now the Church instituted by Christ, and in the revelation he continues to bestow on us via His Church in the Magisterium.

For a Catholic, once we reject any part of this Love of God, the next logical step is to reject the next part. Similarly, once we accept one, we are required to accept them all as we see and understand them to be from our Creator, Savior, Redeemer, and Counselor.

And for this reason, I kept asking you the question “How do you know that the Bible is really inspired” and not “a clever compilation of really good writings by quacks deluded that they were inspired by God (ala Muhamed) all extolling a common theme”. Your acceptance of the Bible as “God-breathed” but rejection of all the Teachings, Interpretations and Traditions practiced and adhered to by the Bible’s “editors” as not also “God-breathed” is self-contradictory. To reject them is to reject their work (the Bible). To accept them and their work, is to accept they (meaning the Magisterium as an institution and not them as individuals) are legitimate emmissaries of our God.

I really urge you to read the Catechism Part One:Chapter 3:Article 9 asking the Holy Spririt to open your heart when you read it. You have the graces bestowed on you via your Baptism and Confirmation to pierce your heart and soul. I pray you allow the Spirit to “breath” into you. God Bless you on your journey.

 

[jpete79]

Orionthehunter:

Jpete, I notice how you have never really answered my questions. I think the reason is that you know what the next question is. Anyway, I bolded where your understanding of Catholics is most in error. It isn’t either or. We don’t follow the Pope in lieu of Scripture and don’t ascribe to the converse either. We have profound trust and faith in His revelation since the beginning of Time (even before the Genesis story of Adam and Eve). It is this trust and faith that gives us confidence in the Old Testament and New Testament, in the Sacred Traditions practiced by the Jews and now the Church instituted by Christ, and in the revelation he continues to bestow on us via His Church in the Magisterium.

For a Catholic, once we reject any part of this Love of God, the next logical step is to reject the next part. Similarly, once we accept one, we are required to accept them all as we see and understand them to be from our Creator, Savior, Redeemer, and Counselor.

And for this reason, I kept asking you the question “How do you know that the Bible is really inspired” and not “a clever compilation of really good writings by quacks deluded that they were inspired by God (ala Muhamed) all extolling a common theme”. Your acceptance of the Bible as “God-breathed” but rejection of all the Teachings, Interpretations and Traditions practiced and adhered to by the Bible’s “editors” as not also “God-breathed” is self-contradictory. To reject them is to reject their work (the Bible). To accept them and their work, is to accept they (meaning the Magisterium as an institution and not them as individuals) are legitimate emmissaries of our God.

I really urge you to read the Catechism Part One:Chapter 3:Article 9 asking the Holy Spririt to open your heart when you read it. You have the graces bestowed on you via your Baptism and Confirmation to pierce your heart and soul. I pray you allow the Spirit to “breath” into you. God Bless you on your journey.

Orion:

Why Christianity? Because its a relationship not a religion. The words that Christ spoke generations ago are as profound today as they were then. He also is the Savior that is still alive today. He has not died and stayed dead but He rose meaning He is alive today.

I would like to know, if you believe in Papal Tradition and infallibility what would you do when the Pope says something directly contradictory to Scripture? Who do you believe? For example, we are told that repentance and renewal are essential to Salvation. John the Baptist would say for others to repent before they were baptized. Now John Paul II (who I think was a Holy and great man) said in 1985, “that unless a man confesses to a Priest, God will not hear.” By logic if God will not hear my confession than I cannot be forgiven. Now that sounds like a wrathful God to me. That sounds like a God of vengeance to keep a barrier between me and Him.

God, in the Old Testament, was wrathful, vengeful and just. He did pour out anger quite often on Israel. But God is also, loving and in one act, He showed His divine love and released His anger on His only Son at Calvary. When we accept Christ, that wrath is no longer there because it was used on Golgotha. What is left than? THE LOVE.

If I believe in Christ I have access to God. This means in all attributes of life. It means I can confess to Him (as this is what He wants). The mediator is Jesus Christ and the representative is the Holy Spirit.

So, yes, I may not have answered your questions about the Bible being true and how I know. But that is where Faith comes in as
1Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see.

I can say that people have faith in Islam and in Judaism and in everything else. And yes only one can be correct…so how do I know its mine? Because the Universe can only be made by a God of love. Not one that preaches with the sword. Not one that abides by a brand new set of rules and regulations. One that allows us to come to Him, love Him and be guided by Him. By His words, His Spirit and His Son.

 

[mattrue]

of course its about a relationship. thats what our faith teached as well. its a relationship that is because of God himself. God gives us that relationship. go to Fr.Larry.com and go read some of his homilys, he talks about relationship all the time.

 

[Orionthehunter]

jpete79:

Orion:

Why Christianity? Because its a relationship not a religion. The words that Christ spoke generations ago are as profound today as they were then. He also is the Savior that is still alive today. He has not died and stayed dead but He rose meaning He is alive today.

I would like to know, if you believe in Papal Tradition and infallibility what would you do when the Pope says something directly contradictory to Scripture? Who do you believe? For example, we are told that repentance and renewal are essential to Salvation. John the Baptist would say for others to repent before they were baptized. Now John Paul II (who I think was a Holy and great man) said in 1985, “that unless a man confesses to a Priest, God will not hear.” By logic if God will not hear my confession than I cannot be forgiven. Now that sounds like a wrathful God to me. That sounds like a God of vengeance to keep a barrier between me and Him.

God, in the Old Testament, was wrathful, vengeful and just. He did pour out anger quite often on Israel. But God is also, loving and in one act, He showed His divine love and released His anger on His only Son at Calvary. When we accept Christ, that wrath is no longer there because it was used on Golgotha. What is left than? THE LOVE.

If I believe in Christ I have access to God. This means in all attributes of life. It means I can confess to Him (as this is what He wants). The mediator is Jesus Christ and the representative is the Holy Spirit.

So, yes, I may not have answered your questions about the Bible being true and how I know. But that is where Faith comes in as
1Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see.

I can say that people have faith in Islam and in Judaism and in everything else. And yes only one can be correct…so how do I know its mine? Because the Universe can only be made by a God of love. Not one that preaches with the sword. Not one that abides by a brand new set of rules and regulations. One that allows us to come to Him, love Him and be guided by Him. By His words, His Spirit and His Son.

I take it that you are not going to take my advice about reading the part of the Catechism as I proscribed (with a heart open to the Holy Spirit). I also take it that you aren’t even going to read it for information. That is too bad as you said that you came to this thread with a desire to better understand infallibility but you reject opportunities for a Catholic perspective on it. This issue is very complex and can’t be articulated with simple bromides in a CAF post. To refuse to give the issue the required study and discernment indicates both a heart and mind closed.

 

[jpete79]

rbrooks:

WHEWWW… lol

That’ll bake anyones noodle. Anyhow, I am interested in your thoughts of the office of the pope after seeing the pile that I just posted. I realize it will take some time. I look forward to your thoughts.

Rich

That is quite a bit.

First of all, Peter is mentioned alot. There is no doubt about that and I never said there would be. He was a devoted follower so people would go to him when looking for Jesus.

I can but will not for the sake of time (and argument) post a reply to every single comment.

What I will say is this, Jesus Christ is every bit alive today as he was 2000 years ago. It’s Christmas time which is a time symbolic of when he was born. He may be in Heaven but he knows and sees everything that goes on here. His Spirit has been left to us. The faith should be put into him alone and his teachings; his words. Let them breach your heart and pierce your mind and don’t blindly follow what others say or teach

See the difference is when I read the Bible, I see that Christ’s words are just as important today as they were back then. Because of the nature of the world Jesus Christ’s words will always have that effect.

What I don’t understand (and no matter how many times I see his name in Scripture and no matter how many Popes and Church fathers may have said it) is how one can put so much faith into someone on this world that is the same flesh and blood as themself.

Christ wanted us to be free…I want to ask are you all free? I have heard the same answers from various people on different topics but I have read them as versed and structured from the Catechism. Why not speak from your own hearts?

What I see is sad because my argument stands on the ground of Jesus Christ. The Holy Son of God. Many things I have heard and seen has you putting more emphasis on Peter and the Pope than Christ alone.

You say believing in one is believing in the other. No matter who God puts at the chair in Rome, no matter how immoral the actions it is who is in charge of your morality as they are infallible.

Does that make logical sense to you? Christ was humble, he practiced what he preached. He was perfect. That is why we should continue to look at him. I’m not saying the Church is bad and all the people fo the Church are bad (you are all very knowledgable and smart and do believe in Christ), I’m saying that the Church is not spotless (not until Christ returns will it be made that way), I’m saying that false doctrine can be found anywhere through anyone (even Popes, Bishops, Priests and others). I’m not saying there’s something wrong with being Catholic…there is not; just as I don’t say there’s something wrong with being Methodist, Presbyterian, Non-Denom, Lutheran, Calvinist, Pentecostal, etc. I don’t say this because there is a common thread in the belief of Jesus Christ.

I just want people to realize that we have a perfect mediator in Jesus Christ and don’t need other mediators to get to Him.

 

[jpete79]

Orionthehunter:

I take it that you are not going to take my advice about reading the part of the Catechism as I proscribed (with a heart open to the Holy Spirit). I also take it that you aren’t even going to read it for information. That is too bad as you said that you came to this thread with a desire to better understand infallibility but you reject opportunities for a Catholic perspective on it. This issue is very complex and can’t be articulated with simple bromides in a CAF post. To refuse to give the issue the required study and discernment indicates both a heart and mind closed.

Orion:

Did you read any of my posts in the past? I have indeed looked through it (though I have not had the time to get deep into it). I will be reading through it as well.