Successor to St. Peter's Universal Jurisdiction

[Nita]

I understand that line of thinking, but Peter prior to Pentecost was not the same as Peter after Pentecost. After Pentecost, Peter never backed down from anything.

I know, but he was still human. And as long as he was on earth, he was still able to err.

Acts 11:1 Now the apostles and the brothers who were throughout Judea heard that the Gentiles also had received the word of God. 2 So when Peter went up to Jerusalem, the circumcision party criticized him, saying, 3 “You went to uncircumcised men and ate with them.” 4 But Peter began and explained it to them in order: 5 “I was in the city of Joppa praying, and in a trance I saw a vision…the voice answered a second time from heaven, ‘What God has made clean, do not call common.’…15 As I began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell on them just as on us at the beginning. 16 And I remembered the word of the Lord, how he said, ‘John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.’ 17 If then God gave the same gift to them as he gave to us when we believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I that I could stand in God’s way?” 18 When they heard these things they fell silent. And they glorified God, saying, “Then to the Gentiles also God has granted repentance that leads to life.”
Paul already withstood Judaizer confrontation and didn’t back down. He didn’t care about human respect here.

I’m sure we’ve all had the experience of successfully resisting a temptation, perhaps often enough to even thinking we’ve finally conquered the sin or failing — only later, in a weak moment or under stronger pressure, to cave in.

 

[Catholic_Dude]

I know, but he was still human. And as long as he was on earth, he was still able to err.

I’m sure we’ve all had the experience of successfully resisting a temptation, perhaps often enough to even thinking we’ve finally conquered the sin or failing — only later, in a weak moment or under stronger pressure, to cave in.

Will you stop having all the right responses to my responses?

 

[Nita]

Will you stop having all the right responses to my responses?

How about “Happy first Sunday of Advent”. Is that better?

 

[ericc]

That’s a myth. Paul never rebuked Peter. The Greek text says Paul rebuked another disciple named Cephas, not the Apostle Peter:
Galatians 2: 7 On the contrary, when they saw that I had been entrusted with the gospel to the uncircumcised, just as Peter had been entrusted with the gospel to the circumcised 8 (for he who worked through Peter for his apostolic ministry to the circumcised worked also through me for mine to the Gentiles), 9 and when James and Cephas and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given to me, they gave the right hand of fellowship to Barnabas and me, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised. 10 Only, they asked us to remember the poor, the very thing I was eager to do. 11 But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned. 12 For before certain men came from James, he was eating with the Gentiles; but when they came he drew back and separated himself, fearing the circumcision party.
Notice that Paul shifts from talking about “Peter” to talking about “Cephas” in the same context, giving no indication they are the same person going by two different names. Around AD175, the Early Church Father Clement of Alexandria even confirms this, as recorded in Eusebius’ Church History:
[Clement of Alexandria] says that Cephas was one of the seventy disciples, a man who bore the same name as the apostle Peter, and the one concerning whom Paul says, “When Cephas came to Antioch I withstood him to his face.” (Church History 1.12.2)
The “seventy” refers to the seventy disciples who worked underneath the 12 Apostles.

We know that Peter had trouble being courageous in the Gospels, but after Pentecost we see a radically changed man. He was not afraid to be persecuted and confront the Jews, as he did throughout Acts, never once caving into error. So it’s inconceivable that Peter somehow got scared are caved in to Judaizing about 15-20 years after Pentecost because he had been standing up to Jewish persecution all that time. In fact, Peter’s testimony at the Council would be garbage if he was guilty of letting error spread. Lastly, there is no indication Peter was ever in Antioch at that time.

Coincidentally I asked about this topic last year.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=881604&highlight=cephas+ericc

Let it died a natural death. Seems like someone always have an answer to everything.

 

[Wildgraywolf]

I have one issue left before I’m convinced that the Catholic Church is the Only Church & that is the Authority of the Pope & whether it was Divinely Instituted or not?

Wow, Cassianus not only did you get an answer to your question about infallibility, but also how the Magisterium works and evidence of development of doctrine.

 

[steve_b]

Coincidentally I asked about this topic last year.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=881604&highlight=cephas+ericc

Let it died a natural death. Seems like someone always have an answer to everything.

Jerome and Augustine were talking about Gal 2 and Paul’s rebuke of Peter. Here’s how Jerome answers

#14

**From the RSV-CE

Gal 2:

**Paul Rebukes Peter at Antioch

11 But when Cephas came to Antioch I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned. 12 For before certain men came from James, he ate with the Gentiles; but when they came he drew back and separated himself, fearing the circumcision party. 13 And with him the rest of the Jews acted insincerely, so that even Barnabas was carried away by their insincerity. 14 But when I saw that they were not straightforward about the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas before them all, “If you, though a Jew, live like a Gentile and not like a Jew, how can you compel the Gentiles to live like Jews?” 15 We ourselves, who are Jews by birth and not Gentile sinners, 16 yet who know that a man is not justifieda] by works of the law**(“Gal 2 RSVCE - Paul and the Other Apostles - Then - Bible Gateway”)] but through faith in Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ, and not by works of the law, because by works of the law shall no one be justified. 17 But if, in our endeavor to be justified in Christ, we ourselves were found to be sinners, is Christ then an agent of sin? Certainly not! 18 But if I build up again those things which I tore down, then I prove myself a transgressor. 19 For I through the law died to the law, that I might live to God. 20 I have been crucified with Christ; it is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me; and the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. 21 I do not nullify the grace of God; for if justificationc] were through the law, then Christ died to no purpose.