The Universal Church

[MichaelP3]

rule my sheep?

Maybe just an observation but where was that specific part spoken.

Sorry to question but you shoud check that deception part you are apparently against.

 

[steve-b]

rule my sheep?

Maybe just an observation but where was that specific part spoken.
Sorry to question but you shoud check that deception part you are apparently against.

Thanks for asking

Jn 21:16 from the Greek translation of poimaino
Jesus says to Peter, “ ποίμαινε my sheep"
as in ποίμαινε poimaino = shepherd, tend, rule, govern my sheep (present imperative active 2nd person singular)
As in Jesus (first person singular) is directing this to Peter (second person singular) to do ALL that.

AND

Does Jesus restrict which sheep He means for Peter to shepherd, tend, rule, govern? NO
Do the keys of the kingdom that Jesus gives Peter alone, have jurisdiction restrictions (as in Peter can only shepherd, tend, rule, govern, ) only certain sheep and not the entire flock of Our Lord’s? NO

Does that help?

BTW, I can show other references as well

 

[MichaelP3]

Thanks for asking

Jn 21:16 from the Greek translation of poimaino
Jesus says to Peter, “ ποίμαινε my sheep"
as in ποίμαινε poimaino = shepherd, tend, rule, govern my sheep ( present imperative active 2nd person singular )
As in Jesus (first person singular) is directing this to Peter (second person singular ) to do ALL that.

Okay Steve-b. You answered this with much pomp and self confidence (and the rest of your answer is just waffling) but some key things are still lacking

There is first of all a question on the greek words you referenced. Because you may give a link but some of us actually open them. I see it has already been directed to some version of PAR. Although any other version I choose does not give your explination. So what is PAR and WHAT MAKES IT BETTER? And even then a pretty far stretch which still bares the question on deception?

 

[steve-b]

steve-b:

Thanks for asking

Jn 21:16 from the Greek translation of poimaino
Jesus says to Peter, “ ποίμαινε my sheep"
as in ποίμαινε poimaino = shepherd, tend, rule, govern my sheep ( present imperative active 2nd person singular )
As in Jesus (first person singular) is directing this to Peter (second person singular ) to do ALL that.

Okay Steve-b. You answered this with much pomp and self confidence (and the rest of your answer is just waffling) but some key things are still lacking

There is first of all a question on the greek words you referenced. Because you may give a link but some of us actually open them. I see it has already been directed to some version of PAR. Although any other version I choose does not give your explination. So what is PAR and WHAT MAKES IT BETTER? And even then a pretty far stretch which still bares the question on deception?

In your view are Strong’s and Thayer’s lexicons and concordances not valid ?

Are you using “PAR” (parallel verses), correctly? Do you see the arrow to use and scroill down to a word in [ word 4165 Poimaino] the parallel description like “ruling” or “Shepherd” and see where those words are also used ?

 

[mcq72]

Yet It didn’t remain that way. Paul and Barnabas worked together in Antioch.

correct, yet

“For I suppose I was not a whit behind (inferior) the very chiefest apostles.” 2 Cor 5:11

This shows that indeed some apostles were more famous, accomplished, or eminent or “chiefest”, yet all in equality somehow. Paul does not cite one chief apostle and hence cites none above him or over him.

 

[mcq72]

Jn 21:16 from the Greek translation of poimaino
Jesus says to Peter, “ ποίμαινε my sheep"
as in ποίμαινε poimaino = shepherd, tend, rule, govern my sheep ( present imperative active 2nd person singular )
As in Jesus (first person singular) is directing this to Peter (second person singular ) to do ALL that.

again, shepherding is several things, such as feeding and guiding , even ruling, which I do not deny except for the highlighting of it (the pursuit/justification of it). Indeed the history of some popes shows the same pursuit, in sharp contrast to some others, even Peter. (are there any translations that say, “rule over my sheep” , instead of feed or tend?)

You insist that Peter is singled out here, therefore his office must be singular, as apart from other apostles and all other “shepherds”. Patristic fathers cite his restoration as an apostle, after his thrice denial, the lead spokesman falling harder than the others. In his restoration is the exemplary restoration of all the others who fell I suppose. The others were not ignorant of the implication for themselves also, even responsibility. Peter was back to being their lead spokesperson again, even leader but Peter was not their shepherd, for Christ is that. Jesus calls the other apostles in relation to Peter as “brethren”, to be strengthened, not sheep to be ruled, for they were commissioned shepherds for and by Christ also.

So any pastor commissioned by the Head Shepherd has a lesson and anchoring in this gospel dialogue.

 

[steve-b]

steve-b:

Yet It didn’t remain that way. Paul and Barnabas worked together in Antioch.

correct, yet

“For I suppose I was not a whit behind (inferior) the very chiefest apostles.” 2 Cor 5:11

This shows that indeed some apostles were more famous, accomplished, or eminent or “chiefest”, yet all in equality somehow. Paul does not cite one chief apostle and hence cites none above him or over him.

Why should Paul get in the same argument the others got into … then get corrected by Jesus

 

[steve-b]

steve-b:

Jn 21:16 from the Greek translation of poimaino
Jesus says to Peter, “ ποίμαινε my sheep"
as in ποίμαινε poimaino = shepherd, tend, rule, govern my sheep ( present imperative active 2nd person singular )
As in Jesus (first person singular) is directing this to Peter (second person singular ) to do ALL that.

again, shepherding is several things, such as feeding and guiding , even ruling, which I do not deny except for the highlighting of it (the pursuit/justification of it). Indeed the history of some popes shows the same pursuit, in sharp contrast to some others, even Peter. (are there any translations that say, “rule over my sheep” , instead of feed or tend?)

You insist that Peter is singled out here, therefore his office must be singular, as apart from other apostles and all other “shepherds”. Patristic fathers cite his restoration as an apostle, after his thrice denial, the lead spokesman falling harder than the others. In his restoration is the exemplary restoration of all the others who fell I suppose. The others were not ignorant of the implication for themselves also, even responsibility. Peter was back to being their lead spokesperson again, even leader but Peter was not their shepherd, for Christ is that. Jesus calls the other apostles in relation to Peter as “brethren”, to be strengthened, not sheep to be ruled, for they were commissioned shepherds for and by Christ also.

So any pastor commissioned by the Head Shepherd has a lesson and anchoring in this gospel dialogue.

The NT keys reference and Jesus giving Peter the keys, goes back to the OT example of the king making one person prime minister over the king’s kingdom. I gave the reference. The prime minister job goes to one person. It doesn’t mean there are no other ministers, But there is a prime minister over the other minsters in the kingdom

Jesus changes the tense of “you” plural when talking to all the apostles, to “you” singular when talking to Simon changing Simon’s name to Rock, then giving Rock the keys

 

[Wannano]

This is a spinoff from a topic in another thread.

Are those that have faith in Christ, have been made new creations, are indwelled with the Holy Spirit and worship and serve God by loving God and loving others, members of the universal church/the body of Christ? Even if they are not part of the Catholic church and worship/serve elsewhere?

Pope Francis invited Christians of every denomination to join in prayer today. Christians from every church and community.

Is this not the Universal Church?

 

[lanman87]

Is this not the Universal Church?

Yes, Biblically the catholic/universal church is all who are God’s People. The “called out ones”. As given evidence by a living faith in Christ and displaying the indwelling and power of the Holy Spirit.

I know I’m part of the catholic/universal church because “The Spirit testifies with my spirit that I am a Child of God”. Romans 8:16. No matter what any pope or preacher or prophet says they can’t take that away from me. And that is how I know the Roman church is wrong in its definition of “Catholic church”. What Pope Francis did today was acknowledge that fact, in his actions, even if his words contradict what he is doing.

 

[steve-b]

mcq72:

And I like C.S.Lewis , who I think came to faith , choosing Protestantism over Catholicism, who had history teach him that,

“the unhistorical, without knowing it, are usually enslaved to a fairly recent past”.

You probably see it as a protestant problem where I see more as a Catholic problem. The more I study history, the more I understand the reformers, and the more I understand Orthodox opposition to Catholic papacy. The popes of our “recent past” give a very narrow image of what they were in the past. It seems some medieval popes didn’t study or understand the earliest popes either.

Historical acuity is in eyes of the beholder.

I am inspired by both C.S. Lewis and St John Henry Newman. For myself, I resonated with C.S. Lewis ecumenical view of everyone having the choice (door) to choose what they believe in, after a deep period of consideration (gathering room). However, coming from a similar background of faith as he is, I would consider him to no longer be a part of the Anglican church in present time. I am generally of the opinion that he might go towards the traditional anglican church or the orthodox church, there’s of course the slim possibility of him going into the ordinariate church. With the change in times of the anglican church to suit the world, it is tough to hold on to the anglo-catholic faith.

Re: Lewis

Excerpted from Why didn't C.S. Lewis and other Christian intellectuals become Catholic? | Catholic Answers

… Take C. S. Lewis as an example. A former pupil and long-time friend of Lewis’s, Christopher Derrick, noted in C. S. Lewis and the Church of Rome that while Lewis was a creative defender of Christianity in general, his reasons for not being a Catholic, to the extent Lewis made these known, were pedestrian.…

gohjedrek:

As for St John Henry Newman, I think he is being very general with his viewpoint. He witnessed many that studied early church history and left Protestantism. He might have been absolute in his statement, because he felt strongly that it is difficult to remain a practicing protestant after studying early church. His view resonated a lot with me, because I have never came across early church history, except the reformers during my journey as protestant. In fact, churches of numerous denominations I been to, were only concerned with biblical truth, there was no history of the church except the mention of different denominations. My history was probably 500 years old. So, it was only with more study, that I came to rationalise with St John Henry Newman. Of course, not everyone will have to agree with him.

ergo after study of history, you make Newman’s point… true?

 

[steve-b]

Wannano:

Is this not the Universal Church?

Yes, Biblically the catholic/universal church is all who are God’s People. The “called out ones”. As given evidence by a living faith in Christ and displaying the indwelling and power of the Holy Spirit.

I know I’m part of the catholic/universal church because “The Spirit testifies with my spirit that I am a Child of God”. Romans 8:16. No matter what any pope or preacher or prophet says they can’t take that away from me. And that is how I know the Roman church is wrong in its definition of “Catholic church”. What Pope Francis did today was acknowledge that fact, in his actions, even if his words contradict what he is doing.

The HS isn’t behind division from the Only Church Jesus established on Peter and those in perfect union with Peter. Only one Church qualifies. The Catholic Church

Don’t take my word for it.

Jesus said Re: the HS

The HS doesn’t speak on His own John 16:12-15 RSVCE - “I have yet many things to say to - Bible Gateway

Jesus wants perfect unity John 17:20-23 RSVCE - “I do not pray for these only, but - Bible Gateway

Therefore the HS only teaches what Jesus gives Him to say.

So

Once anyone becomes knowledgeable of the truth

THAT

is why scripture condemns schism and heresy etc FROM our Lord’s Church and ALL those who are in these sins … Ergo no heaven for them when/ if, they die in those sins.

 

[lanman87]

The HS isn’t behind division from the Only Church Jesus established on Peter and those in perfect union with Peter. Only one Church qualifies. The Catholic Church

Like I said, The Spirit testifies with my Spirit that I am a Child of God. I know this to be a fact. I have felt and seen God move in my heart and life. And honestly, it doesn’t matter what the Roman church says, God tells me different and I trust in God, not the Roman Church.

 

[Isaac14]

the Only Church Jesus established on Peter and those in perfect union with Peter.

As an Orthodox Christian, I am not in union with the Pope.

is why scripture condemns schism and heresy etc FROM our Lord’s Church and ALL those who are in these sins … Ergo no heaven for them when/

And yet Canon 844 and the USCCB allows us Orthodox to receive communion, despite being in what you assume is a state of mortal sin.

 

[steve-b]

steve-b:

The HS isn’t behind division from the Only Church Jesus established on Peter and those in perfect union with Peter. Only one Church qualifies. The Catholic Church

Like I said, The Spirit testifies with my Spirit that I am a Child of God. I know this to be a fact. I have felt and seen God move in my heart and life. And honestly, it doesn’t matter what the Roman church says, God tells me different and I trust in God, not the Roman Church.

Since Peter’s see is Rome, and Jesus wants perfect union with Peter and those in perfect union with Peter, then THAT is what the HS will teach.

I gave the references from scripture.

 

[steve-b]

steve-b:

the Only Church Jesus established on Peter and those in perfect union with Peter.

As an Orthodox Christian, I am not in union with the Pope.

And that is your decision you freely make. It’s also the definition of schism

is why scripture condemns schism and heresy etc FROM our Lord’s Church and ALL those who are in these sins … Ergo no heaven for them when/

Isaac14:

And yet Canon 844 and the USCCB allows us Orthodox to receive communion, despite being in what you assume is a state of mortal sin.

Stop using exceptions as the general rule.

 

[Isaac14]

Stop using exceptions as the general rule.

Why does the Catholic Church make exceptions for those who you assert are objectively in mortal sin?

 

[steve-b]

steve-b:

Stop using exceptions as the general rule.

Why does the Catholic Church make exceptions for those who you assert are objectively in mortal sin?

No one in mortal sin should, receive the Eucharist. They need to go to confession first.

 

[Isaac14]

No one in mortal sin should, receive the Eucharist. They need to go to confession first.

Since the Catholic Church does not object to the Orthodox receiving communion, the only reasonable conclusion is that the Catholic Church does not view the Orthodox as being guilty of the mortal sin of schism. But you assert above that is the case.

 

[steve-b]

Isaac14:

No one in mortal sin should, receive the Eucharist. They need to go to confession first.

Since the Catholic Church does not object to the Orthodox receiving communion, the only reasonable conclusion is that the Catholic Church does not view the Orthodox as being guilty of the mortal sin of schism. But you assert above that is the case.

The issue is over one’s “disposition”" at the time of receiving.

If one is properly disposed. THAT is the main point. If one is insistent on being in schism, that is a bad disposition to be in.

One can’t just walk off the street and receive the Eucharist licitly. If one is in mortal sin they should NOT receive the Eucharist.