First of all, the issue of a sinning hierarchy was not meant to inflame and I am sorry you took it that way. But it is very much related to the discussion at hand. If we are going to discuss Peter, infallibilty, and apostolic succession, the failures of the hierarchy are very much related to the discussion. I realize however it is an uncomfortable issue for many Catholics. So I won’t lose any sleep over your threat to have me banned if you feel the need to. It’s a good way to make the community smaller I guess. Which btw no I don’t believe Christ wanted a smaller, purer church…
The problem is, in reference to your ‘sinning hierarchy’ statement, what Church has sinless people to teach and preach the Gospel? We cannot forget Christ’s Church because of sinful people. Even Christ chose Judas Iscariot. Christ had disciples leave Him and walk with Him no more, in John 6.
The Christ I follow is not that exclusive and the earliest church communities were not without differences.
Scriptures tell us Christ cannot be divided and there was only ONE Christ for ALL people. If there were acceptable differences between the earliest Churches, why did Paul write letters of correction? Why did Paul write letters with emphasis on all being ONE, of the same mind and judgement?
Yet flourished nonetheless. A bit of history: Power grew. It was not until later when structure and male dominated power began to reign greater and greater. Btw before anyone says that was meant to inflame or agitate, it was not. Just a fact. Yes the 12 Apostles were men. But male domination was a custom of the times. Much as women could not speak in church and needed to cover their heads. The Church today thankfully does not adhere to that custom today and women speak freely in church today with uncovered heads. Anyway as just one example, in the 400s AD another bishop challenged the Pope and by the Roman emperor’s decree the Pope was given more power.
Again, I have to ask, what parts of the Bible can we ‘ignore’ because the times have changed? The inspired word of God was written for ALL, from all generations. If the message was different for different generations, then it places the Bible in the position of contradicting itself, in my opinion. It seems it would almost be the same for a drunkard to claim that drinking was limited by those times and now it’s ok to drink until drunk.
Of course much earlier Paul challenged and corrected Peter.
Ok, we hear the hierarchy is a power position and we hear Peter took counsel from Paul. The statement seems to contradict itself. Of course Peter took counsel from his bishops, the same as any good Pope does.
And as I already explained, when Christ tells the Apostles the greatest must make himself the least, then yes I believe that is Christ telling not only me but all of his followers that he did not mean for such an infalliible and powerful papacy to develop.
Yet Christ said offenses should be taken to the Church, which is an assignment of authority to the Church. Christ told His Apostles, ‘whatsoever they bound and loosed on earth would be bound and loosed in heaven’. He also told them, ‘He would be with them always, even until the consummation of the world’. These were mortal men who would soon die and not be here on earth until the consummation of the world.
He taught the multitudes to do whatsoever was told to them by those who sat upon the chair of Moses, but do not as they do. That shows confidence by our Lord that God can protect His truth and keep it infallible, even through mortal and sometimes sinful men.
Popes, themselves, are not infallible.
In fact the early believers expected Christ to come again soon. Even perhaps in their lifetimes. So there would not have been a need for them to believe in a lengthy apostolic succession.
Yet Peter called for the replacement of Judas, in Acts 1. Was that not an ‘Apostolic succession’?
But the gates of hell will not prevail. Read about false teachers and how we will know them by their fruits. Not only by what they say but by what they do. Blind faith may not be the best prescription.
Being taught to beware of false teachers and how we will know them by their fruits is short of the gates of hell. Our faith is in Christ and I don’t consider that to be blind faith. He established a Church and history tells us of only ONE Church for over a thousand years. There is no documentation of other Churches through this time period. There were other sects, but I doubt any you would be willing to claim an affliation with because of their incorrect teachings, which did not survive time.
Nevertheless Christ’s church prevails. Perhaps thru reform, perhaps thru new teachers. But it nevertheless prevails.
During the time of the reformation, a reform was admittedly needed, but you cannot reform what you walk away from.
I thought CF was for all of us, practicing Catholics, non practicing, and others of any faith to discuss what we each believe as truth at wherever we are on our walks with Christ today. We don’t have to agree but that’s what discussion is all about it seems to me, as we learn about what we each believe as truth, and most importantly hopefully grow in our love and tolerance for one another. Each as a child of God. But perhaps not. So peace and may God bless each of us.
CF is for all to discuss, with Christian charitability foremost. Condemning an entire Church for the acts of a few, or some, sinful people is not being charitable, in my honest opinion.
We have some agreement. I’m realistic enough to know people are going to have sex before marriage. And I prefer not to judge. But I agree with you it would be better if more virgins were getting married. God bless you Lapey on your work.
Regardless of whether Peter or his faith or Jesus Himself is the rock, I’m not sure how you can say faith was not mentuioned. Peter did make a statement about his faith in Christ being Messiah, Son of God.
:clapping: 