The Supremacy of Peter

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cleopas
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

Cleopas

Guest
I deny, for a number of reasons, the supremacy of Peter (or the Papal office) over other bishops.
  1. Peter declares in his epistle, by his own hand, and under divine inspiration no less, that he was only one among the bishops (sumpresbuteros). See 1 Peter 5:1
Note the use of sumpresbuteros, a variant of presbuteros, implying “part of the whole” or “one among equals.” Peter thus denies any supremacy of his role as a bishop or elder in the church. In fact Peter references the only shepherd of supremacy in the church, whom he calls the Chief Shepherd and Bishop of our souls – our Lord, Jesus Christ.
  1. Though following the ascension of Christ Peter evidently served as acting leader of the infant church in Jerusalem, he is later clearly shown operating in another and seemingly less authoritative role when he is sent by the apostles with John to Samaria where Phillipp was seeing numbers converted.
  2. Likewise, it is James, Our Lord’s brother, who is shown to rise to any level of primacy (yet likely not supremacy) among the apostles and elders in the NT church throughout the book of Acts. Not Peter.
 
Matthew 20:23 And he saith unto them, Ye shall drink indeed of my cup, and be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with: but to sit on my right hand, and on my left, is not mine to give, but it shall be given to them for whom it is prepared of my Father.
 
Cleopas said:
I deny, for a number of reasons, the supremacy of Peter (or the Papal office) over other bishops.
  1. Peter declares in his epistle, by his own hand, and under divine inspiration no less, that he was only one among the bishops (sumpresbuteros). See 1 Peter 5:1
Note the use of sumpresbuteros, a variant of presbuteros, implying “part of the whole” or “one among equals.” Peter thus denies any supremacy of his role as a bishop or elder in the church. In fact Peter references the only shepherd of supremacy in the church, whom he calls the Chief Shepherd and Bishop of our souls – our Lord, Jesus Christ.
  1. Though following the ascension of Christ Peter evidently served as acting leader of the infant church in Jerusalem, he is later clearly shown operating in another and seemingly less authoritative role when he is sent by the apostles with John to Samaria where Phillipp was seeing numbers converted.
  2. Likewise, it is James, Our Lord’s brother, who is shown to rise to any level of primacy (yet likely not supremacy) among the apostles and elders in the NT church throughout the book of Acts. Not Peter.
Click to expand...
Your,…eh…“denial”…is unnecessary! Peter was a ‘servant of the servants’ of Christ. A ‘title’ JP2 has been heard to proclaim for himself. I seem to recall some of the past Popes use the same ‘title’ also.

Peter was ‘just’ another bishop. The ‘supremacy’ bit is that he is FIRST among equals, having been given The Keys of Heaven by Christ. He is the only Apostle who was given this authority. All were given the power and authority to forgive sin, which is a Divine Power in itself, but only one was given The Keys.

If you are denying that he was Pope, leader of the Apostles, etc, etc…there are numerous threads already in existence.

If you are claiming that he is always equal with the other bishops of The Church, you’ll have to take up your argument with all the Popes and bishops of Catholicism from Christ until now, who seem to have been quite mistaken for so long, and no one EVER thought to think along the lines you have!!!

There is a collection of bishops to the East who will probably ‘entertain’ you on your views for awhile.

Catholicism (Roman Bishopric) are quite settled on the subject; as are we who submit to Peter’s Leadership, under Christ.

I could always be wrong though…

:cool:
 
Cleopas said:
I deny, for a number of reasons, the supremacy of Peter (or the Papal office) over other bishops.
  1. Peter declares in his epistle, by his own hand, and under divine inspiration no less, that he was only one among the bishops (sumpresbuteros). See 1 Peter 5:1
Note the use of sumpresbuteros, a variant of presbuteros, implying “part of the whole” or “one among equals.” Peter thus denies any supremacy of his role as a bishop or elder in the church. In fact Peter references the only shepherd of supremacy in the church, whom he calls the Chief Shepherd and Bishop of our souls – our Lord, Jesus Christ.
  1. Though following the ascension of Christ Peter evidently served as acting leader of the infant church in Jerusalem, he is later clearly shown operating in another and seemingly less authoritative role when he is sent by the apostles with John to Samaria where Phillipp was seeing numbers converted.
  2. Likewise, it is James, Our Lord’s brother, who is shown to rise to any level of primacy (yet likely not supremacy) among the apostles and elders in the NT church throughout the book of Acts. Not Peter.
Click to expand...
And with all due respect, I deny your denial.
  1. St. Peter is mentioned 155 times in the NT. The other Apostles are mentioned only 130 times combined.
  2. St. Peter is always mentioned first among the apsostles except in 1 Cor 3:22 & Gal 2:9
  3. Mat 16:18 - Jesus declares St. Peter the Rock upon which the Church will be built.
  4. Only St. Peter is given the Keys (represents authority over the Church).
  5. Throughout the NT St. Peter is singled out from the other apostles (Ex - Mark 16:7)
  6. Jesus prays for St. Peter a lone to be strengthened so that he can then strengthen the other apostles (Luke 22:31-32).
  7. In John 21:15-17 Jesus charges St. Peter to “feed my lambs”, “tend my sheep”, “feed my sheep”.
  8. Acts 15:7-12, St. Peter resolves the first doctrinal issue on circumcision at the council of Jerusalem. After St. Peter speaks, the matter is immediately closed.
  9. We see St. Paul going to St. Peter and staying with him for 15 days prior to him beginning his ministry. (Gal 1:18)
etc., etc., etc.
God bless.
 
First, I don’t think the Title is “SUPREMACY” but Primacy of Peter.😃

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

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.
 
But that’s just it, the Popes so called primacy is such that it makes him supreme above all other bishops (that is supremacy). He is not the first among equals. In fact he is considered the Vicar of Christ.

Yet, Peter obviously did not feel this way, based on his own epistle.

No doubt Peter was called to feed the lambs of Christ. But then he alone was not called to do so. Others were called to that same vocation.

The point is, the elevated status of the seat of Rome is contrary to the very words of Peter himself. I’m gonna believe what peter said of himself over what others years later developed to support their claims and station to ecclesiastical power.
 
Others were called by Jesus to feed His sheep? I’d like to see that verse in the Bible please.
 
Cleopas said:
I deny, for a number of reasons, the supremacy of Peter (or the Papal office) over other bishops…
Click to expand...
That’s cute considering you call yourself a “Senior Pastor” in your profile. In light of the scripture verses given above in some of the replies, what title would you give St Peter?

Have you considered the parallels between Matthew 16:19 and Isaiah 22:22?
 
Cleopas said:
There are several passages that speak to this. To mention a few…

Acts 20:28

1 Peter 5:1-2
Click to expand...
Interesting citations, if a little untruthful of you.

The first passage has Paul telling the bishops to rule over the flock, not feed them.

The second passage has Peter, not Jesus, ordering the elders to feed the flock.

Neither of which has Jesus Himself giving the order (three times no less) to anyone else.
 
Cleopas said:
But that’s just it, the Popes so called primacy is such that it makes him supreme above all other bishops (that is supremacy). He is not the first among equals. In fact he is considered the Vicar of Christ.

Yet, Peter obviously did not feel this way, based on his own epistle.

No doubt Peter was called to feed the lambs of Christ. But then he alone was not called to do so. Others were called to that same vocation.

The point is, the elevated status of the seat of Rome is contrary to the very words of Peter himself. I’m gonna believe what peter said of himself over what others years later developed to support their claims and station to ecclesiastical power.
Click to expand...
**Are you going to believe what Peter say’s or Jesus says?

Jesus gave Peter the keys to the kingdom of God singular, Jesus gave Peter the power of binding and loosing on earth singular. Do you know what Jesus did here with Peter?

Look, Peter is equal among the apostles period as far as his apostolate is concerned. Just like the Pope today is the Bishop of Rome, the same as all the other Bishops in the world, and all these are the successors of the Apostles.

The difference is Peter has the keys to open and close the store while Jesus is away building our Mansions. Now when the body of Jesus Christ, his Catholic church comes across a problem in his teachings or doctrine. Guess what, all the bishops council to hear the disputes. And if they cannot all agree, Peter will finally decide the issue.
Read Acts 15 after Peter spoke, all fell silent.
Peter only excersises his authority to bind and loose with Jesus in heaven when he has to or it is death to him.

Ever since the first centuries, it was Peter the enemies of God sought out, all of our first 3? something Popes were all Martyred. Why? because the Emperors thought if the Killed Peter the leader of the Catholic church, they will put an end to Jesus teachings. But the Peter’s successor’s took his chair at the risk of their lives.

When ever the teachings of Jesus Christ become under attack, It is always the Pope they look to Know one else in Christendom.

Take for today for example, Our present Pope just got received another death threat from Bin Ladden, because a Muslim was baptised into the Catholic faith. How many baptisms do all the other Bishops do around the world with out a death threat. Only Peter’s chair is recognized as the authority of Jesus Christ on earth to the world, nations and governments. It has always been this way.

So you are only half right, because yes, our present day Pope calls himself a servant of the Lord in the Lords vineyard. He does not raise himself over the bishops. But Jesus gave him the authority, and the task, to bring back his brothers when they have fallen away, prior to himself repenting of his denial 3 times of our Lord.

Remember Peter is the only human being to ever walk on water with Jesus. The only one to be crucified upside down, because he wasnt worthy to be crucified Like his Lord Jesus.**

I hope you read these posts that many are given you with a reasonble mindset. Peace be with you.
 
PinoyCatholic said:
Interesting citations, if a little untruthful of you.

The first passage has Paul telling the bishops to rule over the flock, not feed them.
Click to expand...
And part of the function of elders/overseers is tending and feeding the congregation. That’s probably why these elders are told not only to lead but to feed the church of God (and that is taken directly from the English text. It says “feed the church of God”).

Besides that, Paul notes that it was the Spirit of God who had made these overseers. That’s on equal footing with Jesus appointing Peter to the same vocation, unless of course you are denying the co-equality and divinity of the Spirit of God with the other members of the Godhead.
The second passage has Peter, not Jesus, ordering the elders to feed the flock.
Click to expand...
Neither of which has Jesus Himself giving the order (three times no less) to anyone else.
Click to expand...
Yet, Paul tells us in his epistle to the Ephesians that it is the ascended Christ who gives to some the gifts of pastoral oversight and teaching, as well as of apostleship, evangelism, and the prophetic.

This aligns rather well with His statement in Acts 20:28 that the Spirit (as the true Vicar and representative of Christ to the church) had appointed various men to the eldership.

Thus, it is Christ through His Spirit who calls and enables all who are to serve as Bishops. Hence, Christ called every other bishop as well, not just Peter.
 
Charlie_Zeaiter said:
That’s cute considering you call yourself a “Senior Pastor” in your profile. In light of the scripture verses given above in some of the replies, what title would you give St Peter?

Have you considered the parallels between Matthew 16:19 and Isaiah 22:22?
Click to expand...
What’s more interesting is what follows Isaiah 22:22 and the reference to the keys:

23 I will drive him like a peg into a firm place; he will be a seat a] of honor for the house of his father. 24 All the glory of his family will hang on him: its offspring and offshoots—all its lesser vessels, from the bowls to all the jars.
25 “In that day,” declares the LORD Almighty, “the peg driven into the firm place will give way; it will be sheared off and will fall, and the load hanging on it will be cut down.” The LORD has spoken.

If this prophesy refers to the Chair of Peter, then it seems to project that the Holy See will fail or become vacant (sedevacantism) and many souls will be lost.
 
FaithofAbraham said:
Matthew 20:23 And he saith unto them, Ye shall drink indeed of my cup, and be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with: but to sit on my right hand, and on my left, is not mine to give, but it shall be given to them for whom it is prepared of my Father.
Click to expand...
FOA, you crack me up LoL, Jesus is talking to James and John not Peter here.

Your interjections of the Christian scriptures are always way off in their understanding. They may work for non Catholics, but I dont think you are convincing any Catholics here with your interjections, they seem to have no foundation what so ever.

Have you ever thought about converting to Catholicism, or learning the teachings of Jesus Christ from his Church he built on Peter from his own foundation? Maybe then your interjections will make sense here. I dont intend to be offensive, I just thought I’d let you know how I percieve your Christian interjections, sometimes they can be comical, sad, or just… way out there. for lack of a better word.

Peace and keep up the Faith of Abraham, and when your tired of the desert, come to the rock and get refreshed in the Waters that you will never thirst from ever again.
 
Cleopas said:
And part of the function of elders/overseers is tending and feeding the congregation. That’s probably why these elders are told not only to lead but to feed the church of God (and that is taken directly from the English text. It says “feed the church of God”).

Besides that, Paul notes that it was the Spirit of God who had made these overseers. That’s on equal footing with Jesus appointing Peter to the same vocation, unless of course you are denying the co-equality and divinity of the Spirit of God with the other members of the Godhead.

Yet, Paul tells us in his epistle to the Ephesians that it is the ascended Christ who gives to some the gifts of pastoral oversight and teaching, as well as of apostleship, evangelism, and the prophetic.

This aligns rather well with His statement in Acts 20:28 that the Spirit (as the true Vicar and representative of Christ to the church) had appointed various men to the eldership.

Thus, it is Christ through His Spirit who calls and enables all who are to serve as Bishops. Hence, Christ called every other bishop as well, not just Peter.
Click to expand...
And there lies your untruth yet again.

I asked where in the Bible Jesus called others to feed His sheep. You danced your way around it and provided verses pertaining to feeding the flock in general. Then you accuse me of denying the co-equality and divinity of the Spirit of God with the other members of the Godhead.

Ad hominems are not appreciated in these forums sir.

Your interpretation is interesting. But by what authority should I accept it? By rights if it’s the Holy Spirit inspiring you to deny the primacy of Peter, couldn’t I by the same Holy Spirit affirm the same with multiple verses, not a few of which are spoken by Jesus Christ Himself?

Lastly the Holy Spirit does guide, but what words has He spoken? If Jesus and the Holy Spirit truly are one and They cannot contradict each other, the Holy Spirit’s saying that Peter is not prime means that they have gainsaid each other. I don’t know about you, but I rather find that unacceptable.
 
Cleopas, I’d just like to add that all the posts were done in charity (love). Reading through, I can sense the frustration in trying to help you understand the Catholic position. There is afterall one Truth, and with Truth, there is no compromise.

Take the time to digest all that was said. The “primacy” of St. Peter is important to understand, and has proven very difficult.
 
Gabriel_of_12 said:
Are you going to believe what Peter say’s or Jesus says?

I do not believe the inerrant word of God is any less divinely inspired in any part than the other. Thus I take Peter’'s words, recorded as Scripture, to be complementary with the words of Christ. Anything else makes one or both a liar, and makes the word of God to be in error.

It’s all God’s word, and hence what Peter speaks here is simply a further clarification of what Jesus taught.
Look, Peter is equal among the apostles period as far as his apostolate is concerned. Just like the Pope today is the Bishop of Rome, the same as all the other Bishops in the world, and all these are the successors of the Apostles.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Cleopas said:
I do not believe the inerrant word of God is any less divinely inspired in any part than the other. Thus I take Peter’'s words, recorded as Scripture, to be complementary with the words of Christ. Anything else makes one or both a liar, and makes the word of God to be in error.

It’s all God’s word, and hence what Peter speaks here is simply a further clarification of what Jesus taught.

Not hardly.

Rather, it was after James, the Lord’s brother, spoke that a consensus was reached.
Click to expand...
**Cleopas, Peter explained the problem, and gave them the authoirty to go by,Then they all fell silent:, then paul and barnabas gave gentile testimony to Peters proclamation to the council in support of Peter.

James after the paul and barnabas tesitmonies, after they fell silent, THEN James speaks, who is the Bishop of Jerusalem, who where the council was held, and this decision of Peter affected James christian Jewish communities, so James gives credence to the decision of Peter, and confirms it by saying “THUS SAYS THE LORD” and gives testimony from the prophets to support Peters vision and decision to stop troubling the new gentile converts with Jewish laws such as circumcision.

Please read All of Acts 15. and see how the Chair of Peter and the council decisions is done infalliblly.**
 
OHCA_XP said:
Cleopas, I’d just like to add that all the posts were done in charity (love). Reading through, I can sense the frustration in trying to help you understand the Catholic position. There is afterall one Truth, and with Truth, there is no compromise.

Take the time to digest all that was said. The “primacy” of St. Peter is important to understand, and has proven very difficult.
Click to expand...
Not a problem. I suppose I did come in here with a bit of flare. I was hoping to coax out a good friend who I know posts (or at leasts lurks here). He goes by the handle vz71. He recently “encouraged” me to start posting more here at CA.

Likewise, I desire to walk in charity towards you all as well. Words can be passionate, they can be pointed, they can be disagreeable, but they they should be truth – truth spoken in love, and seasoned with grace.🙂
 
Cleopas said:
Not a problem. I suppose I did come in here with a bit of flare. I was hoping to coax out a good friend who I know posts (or at leasts lurks here). He goes by the handle vz71. He recently “encouraged” me to start posting more here at CA.

Likewise, I desire to walk in charity towards you all as well. Words can be passionate, they can be pointed, they can be disagreeable, but they they should be truth – truth spoken in love, and seasoned with grace.🙂
Click to expand...
hehe, all these semi-heated words to get your friend to post when you coulda just sent him an pm…hehe…either way, it gives us Catholics an avenue to practice our apologetics 😃
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top