Which church is God's true church? Is it the Roman Catholic Church?
- Status
S
savedsinner
Guest
Activity and death in Rome; burial place
It is an indisputably established historical fact that St. Peter laboured in Rome during the last portion of his life, and there ended his earthly course by martyrdom. As to the duration of his Apostolic activity in the Roman capital, the continuity or otherwise of his residence there, the details and success of his labours, and the chronology of his arrival and death, all these questions are uncertain, and can be solved only on hypotheses more or less well-founded. The essential fact is that Peter died at Rome: this constitutes the historical foundation of the claim of the Bishops of Rome to the Apostolic Primacy of Peter.
St. Peter’s residence and death in Rome are established beyond contention as historical facts by a series of distinct testimonies extending from the end of the first to the end of the second centuries, and issuing from several lands.
It is an indisputably established historical fact that St. Peter laboured in Rome during the last portion of his life, and there ended his earthly course by martyrdom. As to the duration of his Apostolic activity in the Roman capital, the continuity or otherwise of his residence there, the details and success of his labours, and the chronology of his arrival and death, all these questions are uncertain, and can be solved only on hypotheses more or less well-founded. The essential fact is that Peter died at Rome: this constitutes the historical foundation of the claim of the Bishops of Rome to the Apostolic Primacy of Peter.
St. Peter’s residence and death in Rome are established beyond contention as historical facts by a series of distinct testimonies extending from the end of the first to the end of the second centuries, and issuing from several lands.
Code:
* That the manner, and therefore the place of his death, must have been known in widely extended Christian circles at the end of the first century is clear from the remark introduced into the Gospel of St. John concerning Christ's prophecy that Peter was bound to Him and would be led whither he would not — "And this he said, signifying by what death he should glorify God" (John 21:18-19, see above). Such a remark presupposes in the readers of the Fourth Gospel a knowledge of the death of Peter.
* St. Peter's First Epistle was written almost undoubtedly from Rome, since the salutation at the end reads: "The church that is in Babylon, elected together with you, saluteth you: and so doth my son Mark" (5:13). Babylon must here be identified with the Roman capital; since Babylon on the Euphrates, which lay in ruins, or New Babylon (Seleucia) on the Tigris, or the Egyptian Babylon near Memphis, or Jerusalem cannot be meant, the reference must be to Rome, the only city which is called Babylon elsewhere in ancient Christian literature (Revelation 17:5; 18:10; "Oracula Sibyl.", V, verses 143 and 159, ed. Geffcken, Leipzig, 1902, 111).
* From Bishop Papias of Hierapolis and Clement of Alexandria, who both appeal to the testimony of the old presbyters (i.e., the disciples of the Apostles), we learn that Mark wrote his Gospel in Rome at the request of the Roman Christians, who desired a written memorial of the doctrine preached to them by St. Peter and his disciples (Eusebius, Church History II.15, 3.40, 6.14); this is confirmed by Irenaeus (Against Heresies 3.1). In connection with this information concerning the Gospel of St. Mark, Eusebius, relying perhaps on an earlier source, says that Peter described Rome figuratively as Babylon in his First Epistle.
* Another testimony concerning the martyrdom of Peter and Paul is supplied by Clement of Rome in his Epistle to the Corinthians (written about A.D. 95-97), wherein he says (chapter 5): "Through zeal and cunning the greatest and most righteous supports [of the Church] have suffered persecution and been warred to death. Let us place before our eyes the good Apostles — St. Peter, who in consequence of unjust zeal, suffered not one or two, but numerous miseries, and, having thus given testimony (martyresas), has entered the merited place of glory". He then mentions Paul and a number of elect, who were assembled with the others and suffered martyrdom "among us" (en hemin, i.e., among the Romans, the meaning that the expression also bears in chapter 4). He is speaking undoubtedly, as the whole passage proves, of the Neronian persecution, and thus refers the martyrdom of Peter and Paul to that epoch.
* In his letter written at the beginning of the second century (before 117), while being brought to Rome for martyrdom, the venerable Bishop Ignatius of Antioch endeavours by every means to restrain the Roman Christians from striving for his pardon, remarking: "I issue you no commands, like Peter and Paul: they were Apostles, while I am but a captive" (Epistle to the Romans 4). The meaning of this remark must be that the two Apostles laboured personally in Rome, and with Apostolic authority preached the Gospel there.
* Bishop Dionysius of Corinth, in his letter to the Roman Church in the time of Pope Soter (165-74), says: "You have therefore by your urgent exhortation bound close together the sowing of Peter and Paul at Rome and Corinth. For both planted the seed of the Gospel also in Corinth, and together instructed us, just as they likewise taught in the same place in Italy and at the same time suffered martyrdom" (in Eusebius, Church History II.25).
* Irenaeus of Lyons, a native of Asia Minor and a disciple of Polycarp of Smyrna (a disciple of St. John), passed a considerable time in Rome shortly after the middle of the second century, and then proceeded to Lyons, where he became bishop in 177; he described the Roman Church as the most prominent and chief preserver of the Apostolic tradition, as "the greatest and most ancient church, known by all, founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious Apostles, Peter and Paul" (Against Heresies 3.3; cf. 3.1). He thus makes use of the universally known and recognized fact of the Apostolic activity of Peter and Paul in Rome, to find therein a proof from tradition against the heretics.
* In his "Hypotyposes" (Eusebius, Church History IV.14), Clement of Alexandria, teacher in the catechetical school of that city from about 190, says on the strength of the tradition of the presbyters: "After Peter had announced the Word of God in Rome and preached the Gospel in the spirit of God, the multitude of hearers requested Mark, who had long accompanied Peter on all his journeys, to write down what the Apostles had preached to them" (see above).
* Like Irenaeus, Tertullian appeals, in his writings against heretics, to the proof afforded by the Apostolic labours of Peter and Paul in Rome of the truth of ecclesiastical tradition. In De Præscriptione 36, he says: "If thou art near Italy, thou hast Rome where authority is ever within reach. How fortunate is this Church for which the Apostles have poured out their whole teaching with their blood, where Peter has emulated the Passion of the Lord, where Paul was crowned with the death of John". In Scorpiace 15, he also speaks of Peter's crucifixion. "The budding faith Nero first made bloody in Rome. There Peter was girded by another, since he was bound to the cross". As an illustration that it was immaterial with what water baptism is administered, he states in his book (On Baptism 5) that there is "no difference between that with which John baptized in the Jordan and that with which Peter baptized in the Tiber"; and against Marcion he appeals to the testimony of the Roman Christians, "to whom Peter and Paul have bequeathed the Gospel sealed with their blood" (Against Marcion 4.5).
* The Roman, Caius, who lived in Rome in the time of Pope Zephyrinus (198-217), wrote in his "Dialogue with Proclus" (in Eusebius, Church History II.25) directed against the Montanists: "But I can show the trophies of the Apostles. If you care to go to the Vatican or to the road to Ostia, thou shalt find the trophies of those who have founded this Church". By the trophies (tropaia) Eusebius understands the graves of the Apostles, but his view is opposed by modern investigators who believe that the place of execution is meant. For our purpose it is immaterial which opinion is correct, as the testimony retains its full value in either case. At any rate the place ofexecution and burial of both were close together; St. Peter, who was executed on the Vatican, received also his burial there. Eusebius also refers to "the inscription of the names of Peter and Paul, which have been preserved to the present day on the burial-places there" (i.e. at Rome).
* There thus existed in Rome an ancient epigraphic memorial commemorating the death of the Apostles. The obscure notice in the Muratorian Fragment ("Lucas optime theofile conprindit quia sub praesentia eius singula gerebantur sicuti et semote passionem petri evidenter declarat", ed. Preuschen, Tübingen, 1910, p. 29) also presupposes an ancient definite tradition concerning Peter's death in Rome.
* The apocryphal Acts of St. Peter and the Acts of Sts. Peter and Paul likewise belong to the series of testimonies of the death of the two Apostles in Rome.
C
catholiconce
Guest
I from time to time read these posts to this web site and i am shocked. Some folks seem to have a great deal of time on their hands to spend all day posting replies to this medium. Why all the hatred for those of us who are not Roman Catholic? I mean it is you Protestants this and "you protestants that. I am not a protestant I do not protest the lord I Joined a lutheran Church after forty two years of being a Cradle Roman Catholic and have never felt more at home or closer to God, I am allowed to get involved in groups and take part in an active Church life and do not feel judged or put down. You can post all the negative remarks you want and tell me I am going to pugatory for 1000 years and it is not going to change one thing. God will not send good christians Lutheran or Methodist to Purgatory just because they are not Roman Catholics. Leaving the Catholic church is not leaving Christ, You DO NOT have TO BE A ROMAN CATHOLIC TO BE A GOOD CHRISTIAN AND HAVE “THE FULLNESS OF THE FAITH” .
D
donalddon5
Guest
“Why all the hatred for those of us who are not Roman Catholic?”
Concern for your soul is not hatred, it is charity…rather done with love or not is another issue.
" being a Cradle Roman Catholic"
Sounds like a confession of a former christian who refuse too accept grace by not evolving into adulthood. Too bad this is open and not a close confession…you would have been forgiven in the former.
“have never felt more at home or closer to God, I am allowed to get involved in groups and take part in an active Church life and do not feel judged or put down.”
Sounds like you want too be petted by people, instead of suffering for the lord…
" You can post all the negative remarks you want and tell me I am going to purgatory for 1000 years and it is not going to change one thing"
You call the truth negative and yet claim that the same folks are willing to give your purgatory…skip purgatory…your statement has said you rejected even that…
"God will not send good Christians Lutheran or Methodist to Purgatory just because they are not Roman Catholics.:
You are not Christians but rebellious children…as far as purgatory, please read above statement.
“Leaving the Catholic church is not leaving Christ,”
Can a bride leave a wedding and say that the bridegroom was not left?
"You DO NOT have TO BE A ROMAN CATHOLIC TO BE A GOOD CHRISTIAN AND HAVE “THE FULLNESS OF THE FAITH”
“OH YES, YOU DO INDEED.”
P
PerryJ
Guest
We have people of all faiths that are not charitable. This includes Catholics. It also includes Protestants and Lutherans.
I am concerned that you left the faith and make statements that one can be in purgatory for a 1000 years. This shows that you do not understand the Catholic Faith. I hope you will learn the Faith and give it another chance.
With that said one needs to know that if one is an atheist and becomes a Protestant that is good as one is closer to the teachings of Christ. If one goes from being a Protestant to being Catholic that is good as one is closer to the teachings of Christ. If one goes from being Catholic to another religion it is a departure from Christ teachings. This is not good. I am not God and will not judge another person. One should know though that they are weakening there faith and that is never good.
I am also concerned that I gave you post with charity and your response on this post is to attack Cathlocism again. Do you have that much hatred for the Church? Do not give into hatred it only hurts you.
C
Cinette
Guest
Hi Sola - you and Justasking and a few others are among my favourite anti-Catholics.I think a discussion regarding the role Peter played in the early church (particularly in the early Roman church) is a difficult one, since we really don’t much about it (accept of course Peter was killed in Rome). It’s one of those discussions that no one can win and both sides will become inevitably frustrated … I say why bother?
Why not just keep it to theology so we all learn something? At least that provides a basis for fruitful discussion & I dare even say decent relations.
Only if Jesus himself whispered in your ear will you believe that He appointed Peter to be the first Pope. Of course he didn’t use that word. He spoke in Aramiac and he said “You are Peter and upon this Rock I will build my Church” In French Pierre (Peter) means rock or stone. In Portuguese we have Pedro which is the masculine version of Pedra (rock - a rock is female). Peter was the rock. Hey, I am wasting my time because you are as stubborn as a mule.
So it is useless trying to explain to you because you will never accept this teaching. You are asking for proof. Can you give me proof of the Trinity? Can you prove that God exists? Can you prove that God does not exist?
Sola don’t quote from Bible. How can you trust it? It was compiled by the Catholics. That won’t do. Please - I want concrete proof and don’t quote me the CC. I don’t want to hear it if it enamates from the CC.
I want PROOF!
You are welcome to quote from your own “Scripture” and recommend a Bible that was not compiled or emanated from the CC.
I’m waiting
:yup:
O
O.S.Luke
Guest
Another baiting post. Way to go, Cinette. 
A
aboabo
Guest
It doesn’t say that at all.
One of the most endlessly debated subjects involves Jesus Christ’s “keys of the kingdom” statement to Peter:
“I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” (Matthew 16:19 RSV)
Was Jesus talking to Peter alone, or was He answering a question, that Peter asked, to all of the others who were standing there with Peter? The answer is found in the very next verse:
“Then He strictly charged the disciples to tell no one that He was the Christ.” (Matthew 16:20 RSV)
Peter was a great Christian, a man to be highly respected, but he *never *claimed, or had any right to claim, authority over all of the church (Peter would have some very blunt advice for those who contend that he was the “first pope,” or that Roman Catholic popes have been his “successors”), or over any of the other apostles, nor was he ever beyond correction from any of the others:
"When Peter entered, Cornelius met him and fell down at his feet and worshiped him. But Peter lifted him up, saying, “Stand up; I too am a man.” (Acts 10:25-26 RSV)
In the words of the apostle Paul, who God used to write a very large part of the New Testament:
“And from those who were reputed to be something, what they were makes no difference to me; God shows no partiality - those, I say, who were of repute added nothing to me; but 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 *, for He who worked through Peter for the mission to the circumcised worked through me also for the Gentiles, and when they perceived the grace that was given to me, James and Cephas and John, who were reputed to be pillars, gave to me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised.” *(Galatians 2:6-9 RSV)
The matter is made more clear, in the Book of Revelation, when Jesus Christ is plainly stated as the holder of the keys to everything:
“'The words of The Holy One, The True One, Who has the key of David, Who opens and no one shall shut, Who shuts and no one opens.” (Revelation 3:7 RSV)
“Fear not, I am the first and the last, and The Living One; I died, and behold I am alive for evermore, and I have the keys of Death and Hades.” (Revelation 1:17-18 RSV)*
S
sola_scriptura
Guest
S
sola_scriptura
Guest
I’m not one to say we ought to ignore history – however, as far as I know not much is known about Peter’s actual role in the Roman Christian community. We know Peter followed Paul to Rome & met his same fate. We also know that the church Paul built in Rome stood the test and was alive and flourishing when Peter emerged in Rome. Moreover, it seems obvious to think Peter was made leader of that community immediately upon his arrival.
However, the conversion of these facts into the idea of a primacy at Rome was done by the Catholic Church, beginning around the time of Clement. There is absolutely no proof anywhere that Peter endorsed such an idea, simply stated we may assume Peter stood silent on this issue. We can further assume that Peter was silent over this issue because he never imagined that such an elaborate episcopal structure headed by one man would emerge, thus he never felt a need to enumerate anything with regard to church governance beyond what Paul had already spoken about.
That Peter followed Paul, however, is an important fact that we can read into. He mediated between the Church at Jerusalem headed by James and Paul. However, ultimately his heart led him to follow Paul. We can at least know that this signifies Peter’s assent to Pauline theology and rejection of justification by works.
C
Cinette
Guest
Sola I said that first greeting with tongue in cheek and with no malice.
I do believe that my invitation was too much for you. You could not come up to the challenge.
I am not tossing mud as you say and make false accusations. You ***are ***anti-Catholic but that is OK it is your choice and doesn’t offend me at all.
Truce?
:bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown:
P
PerryJ
Guest
P
PerryJ
Guest
Since you just joined the thread I want to draw your attention to the below:
Here is an additional example of the Pope having authority over the Church. St. Clement’s first letter to the Corinthians discusses Christians of Corinth rebelling against their hierarchy when they drove out their presbyter “If any disobey what he says through us, let them know that they will be involved in no small offence and danger.” Here is the Bishop of Rome sending orders to Greece to discipline Christians. They are across the sea, they are not Italians yet the Bishop of Rome gives judgment. Note this Bishop is actually found in our Bible. He saw the apostles and lived with them. In addition when this statement is made it is believed that the apostle John was still alive. This is irrefutable evidence that the Bishop of Rome has authority. The matter was not taken to John. The matter was settled by Rome and the Pope. I do not believe that one that actually lived with the apostles misunderstood the authority. I certainly wouldn’t take exegesis from people reading a Bible 2000 years later as being more authoritative than an eyewitness.
W
wisdomseeker
Guest
St Peter was a leader over the whole Church. there were no protestants churches back then. there were only CC everywhere.
nobody else can claim what the CC claims, nobody. get this through your head.
i wonder if you will ever get it.
:knight2: :knight2:
D
distracted
Guest
maybe s/he does get it… but doesn’t want to admit it??? i mean give the poster a break… Would you like to admit you have been wrong all your life about all-important things?? :hypno:
uch: :dts:
T
thecourt
Guest
There are fundamental characteristics that set apart the Church of Jesus Christ and other churches. Understanding that from the Bible is helpful. Being guided by the Holy Ghost will certainly tell someone seeking to know.
J
justasking4
Guest
The CC can claim all it wants to. Lets look for facts to back these claims up. Again, where do we see Peter ruling from Rome? Where in Scripture do we see the other apostles supporting the idea that Peter is the leader of the entire church? In all their writing not one makes such a claim about him like this.
Not if you can’t support it with facts or Scripture.
View attachment 3837
J
justasking4
Guest
What if 2 or 3 people claim to being guided by the HS but come to different conclusions? Who is right in such situations?
T
Thinks4Himself
Guest
so is the FACT that apostles (first priests) were MARRIED
S
sola_scriptura
Guest
- Status