Who was the Rock in Matthew 16:18?

[Prodigal_Son1]

It’s plain to see the Lord was addressing His disciples and telling them how to handle disputes. So, yes we can learn from it, but we are not the authority. The Church is.

 

[Bill_Pick]

I’m just trying to paint a picture of what existed before the CC canonized the Bible.

For 400 years there was no Bible.

That fact kind of boggles my mind when I put it in terms of Pilgrims/present day.

I dunno–I thought you’d be impressed by that.

For 400 years the early Christians relied on Sacred Tradition only. Not Sacred Scripture only. (Yes, I understand that Sacred texts existed, and these early Christians used these writings in their liturgy, but it was only through the Oral Preservation of the Teachings of the Apostles that Christianity was able to be preserved for the first 400 years–for there was no Bible.) For 400 years. Amazing!!

PRmerger, Please do not get up set with rev he gets cofused at times his profie said NON_denominanation but He is a Baptist
The Bible was to come much later in the 4th century so the early Christins had the teaching Of Our Lord and apostle
You see Rev is useing rev ,why he does not tell why may be one day he will tell us,it must ba a secret

 

[rev_kevin]

PRmerger, Please do not get up set with rev he gets cofused at times his profie said NON_denominanation but He is a Baptist
The Bible was to come much later in the 4th century so the early Christins had the teaching Of Our Lord and apostle
You see Rev is useing rev ,why he does not tell why may be one day he will tell us,it must ba a secret

Bill
I have asked you nicely to stop putting me in your conversations. You seem to not want to listen so you have left me with no choice but to report you, which I have already done about a week ago. I have not done or said anything about you since we had that disagreement. Why do you insist on bad mouthing me to others? I don’t understand what you hope to accomplish. If you must know the reason to the rev thing that seem to crawl at you. I have already explaned it. It not my fault that you did not see it. I also explained to you why I use non-denomination and I’m Baptist.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

This is not for us???
Matthew 18:
15 ¶ "Moreover if your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault between you and him alone. If he hears you, you have gained your brother.
16 "But if he will not hear, take with you one or two more, that ‘by the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.’​

If this is not for us, how are we to handle it when someone sins against us?

Dokimas,

I wanted to clarify my post, which was in response to the one I’ve quoted.

Christ taught the Apostles/disciples those things He wanted them to teach the people.

Mat 28:18 And Jesus coming, spoke to them, saying: All power is given to me in heaven and in earth.
Mat 28:19 Going therefore, teach ye all nations: baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost.
Mat 28:20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you. And behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world.

When you read Matthew 18, it’s clear to see He was addressing His disciples, teaching them their authority and what they were to teach people. Christ appointed 12. Christ never authorized multitudes, the people, and we shouldn’t be authorizing ourselves today.

 

[CentralFLJames]

Are you saying the average catholic church goer doesn’t get the host only, they get the Bread to eat and the Wine to drink just like Jesus instituded 2000 years ago? I only see a host!!

Actually Jesus only told his apostles to eat the transformed bread AND drink the transformed wine at the Last Supper. And this is what EVERY single Catholic Priest does every day in the Catholic Church world wide for those that offer daily mass (most do). Only the Priest MUST take both species - body and blood. The truth is that Jesus is identically present in both species though. Bishops have the authority to offer both species to the congregation or just one or the other. In the USA some of the largest parishes do not offer the sacred blood as a practical matter so: there are less occasions for spillage and for health considerations and for time to serve so many people. In my dioceses I can go to any parish under my Bishop’s control and be sure to have both species except for a few rare times (like when they had the recent swine flue pandemic) but its only a temporary condition.

It is also very rare but it does happen - some will drink only the precious blood and not partake of the Eucharist since there is a wheat component to the host that presents a medical/allergic condition to some very few people.

So rest assured the rubrics of the Holy Mass require the priest to cofect both species and to eat and drink both. The priest does this to honor Jesus memorial request on behalf of God’s People but also offers at least one species to the congregation. Most Protestants do not know it but everytime we conduct a Catholic Mass those who are informal members of the Catholic Church (e.g. Protestants) and are not in grave post-baptismal sin will spiritually benefit from the Church’s Sacrifice of the Mass and Eucharistic offering to the degree that their souls are ready accept the grace and grow from it.

James

 

[CentralFLJames]

This is not for us???
Matthew 18:
15 ¶ "Moreover if your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault between you and him alone. If he hears you, you have gained your brother.
16 "But if he will not hear, take with you one or two more, that ‘by the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.’​

If this is not for us, how are we to handle it when someone sins against us?

Yes it is for the laity - that’s why we go to church to hear the gospel it at least each Sunday during the homily. But it is the apostolically ordained Bishop, Priest or Deacon’s anointing to teach the gospel authoritatively. The verse you mention refers to each of us to forgive personal offenses of our brothers. We have the power to forgive personal offenses but only a priest has the spiritual authority to forgive the offense of those sins to God. No sin is ever made in a lone vacuum. Each sin effects: 1) The individual’s relationship with himself and his fellow man at large, 2) The Church, 3) God and 4) Creation itself. We can pardon a personal transgression but that is only forgiving the temporal or “here and now” aspects of sin. But every sin even committed against fellow creatures is also an eternal transgression against God since God loves both sinner and victim. It’s the offense to God that needs to be forgiven through the authority of apostolic office. The only alternative is for transgressor to perform a perfect contrition before God. In other words just mouthing the words “I am sorry” to a fellow creature one has sinned against is in and of itself NOT sufficient for God. God requires REPENTANCE and real change of heart with the intention to never do that particular kind of sin again. I am talking here about grave/mortal sins - things like harming another person’s reputation in a way it can’t be restored or grievous bodily harm with the intention of seriously harm or adultury etc. One must do their best to make restitution as well. Less grievous sins (venial/small sins) can be forgiven by a sincere admission of fault, personal apology and simple prayer to God.

The best we can do when when we are the victim is to be gracious in accepting apologies and also by asking God to forgive the person who sinned against you; since otherwise God WILL hold the other person accountable (“Father forgive them for the know now what they do”).

James

 

[tweetymom]

It’s plain to see the Lord was addressing His disciples and telling them how to handle disputes. So, yes we can learn from it, but we are not the authority. The Church is.

Here’s another snappy answer, we are all Christ’s disciples.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Here’s another snappy answer, we are all Christ’s disciples.

Technically, that’s true. Just not in an authoritative way to make ecumenical decisions.

 

[Dokimas]

Take it to the Church…

That’s not the progression in context. That’s the last stage.

 

[Dokimas]

Actually Jesus only told his apostles to eat the transformed bread AND drink the transformed wine at the Last Supper. And this is what EVERY single Catholic Priest does every day in the Catholic Church world wide for those that offer daily mass (most do). Only the Priest MUST take both species - body and blood. The truth is that Jesus is identically present in both species though. Bishops have the authority to offer both species to the congregation or just one or the other. In the USA some of the largest parishes do not offer the sacred blood as a practical matter so: there are less occasions for spillage and for health considerations and for time to serve so many people. In my dioceses I can go to any parish under my Bishop’s control and be sure to have both species except for a few rare times (like when they had the recent swine flue pandemic) but its only a temporary condition.

James

Tell your doctrine to Paul.

1 Corinthians 11:
17 ¶ Now in giving these instructions I do not praise you, since you come together not for the better but for the worse.
18 For first of all, when you come together as a church, I hear that there are divisions among you, and in part I believe it.
19 For there must also be factions among you, that those who are approved may be recognized among you.
20 Therefore when you come together in one place, it is not to eat the Lord’s Supper.
21 For in eating, each one takes his own supper ahead of others; and one is hungry and another is drunk.
22 What! Do you not have houses to eat and drink in? Or do you despise the church of God and shame those who have nothing? What shall I say to you? Shall I praise you in this? I do not praise you.
23 ¶ For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you: that the Lord Jesus on the same night in which He was betrayed took bread;
24 and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, “Take, eat; this is My body which is broken for you; do this in remembrance of Me.”
25 In the same manner He also took the cup after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood. This do, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me.”
26 For as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death till He comes.

 

[tweetymom]

Oh?

Can you consecrate the elements of the Eucharist like those to whom Jesus gave this authority?

Or are those verses not for all believers?

We believers are Christ Church and I have never read in the Bible that only certain people ca consecrate the Eucharist. That is a CC doctrine not mine.

Jesus didn’t die for only Catholics He died and rose again for all.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Are you saying the average catholic church goer doesn’t get the host only, they get the Bread to eat and the Wine to drink just like Jesus instituded 2000 years ago? I only see a host!!

Dokimas-

I don’t know where you live, but I can assure you that if you go into any Catholic Church on any given Sunday throughout the United States, you will see the congregation receiving under both species. Technically, we are not receiving bread and wine, of course. We receive the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus under either species.

The only possible reason you might not see this is if the Bishop of that diocese has temporarily suspended the offering of the cup due to the Swine flu scare. Beyond that, I’m not aware of any diocese in the US that does not offer the Chalice.

Why does this surprise you?

If you don’t believe me, post a poll asking Catholics whether they are receiving both species.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Matthew 28:
18 And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, "All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth.
19 "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
20 “teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.” Amen.​

Looks like Jesus wanted us to be taught the things Jesus told His disciples. Wouldn’t that mean the ‘you’ is for us?

The authority given to Jesus by the Father was given to the Apostles who were sent to disciple the rest of us. The full authority of God was not given to everyone.

 

[Randy_Carson]

We believers are Christ Church and I have never read in the Bible that only certain people ca consecrate the Eucharist. That is a CC doctrine not mine.

If you personally were to say the words of consecration, would the bread and wine become the body and blood of Jesus?

Jesus didn’t die for only Catholics He died and rose again for all.

Agreed. And He founded the Church upon Peter, the rock, just as He promised.

Within a few short years, that Church had begun calling itself the Catholic Church.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

And that’s not what I was referring to; I’ll repost the comment.​

[SIGN]Randy: Jesus, of course. The king retains full authority and possession of the “key” even though He may delegate authority to the Royal Steward. After all, if the king were to walk into the room, none of his subjects would ignore him simply because the Royal Steward was present. However, in the king’s absence, the Royal Steward acts with the full authority of the King.

Since Jesus has ascended into heaven and is no longer physically present on earth, His Royal Steward acts on His behalf with His full authority. [/SIGN][/QUO

His Royal Steward is the Holy Spirit who works in Jesus behalf, and Authority:thumbsup:

Why didn’t Jesus say, and the Holy Spirit will hold the keys to the kingdom of heaven and the Holy Spirit will have the power to bind and loose on earth?

Because God is ONE; the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Jesus was not giving Himself the keys, He confirmed that what was bound and loosed on earth, He would bind and loose in heaven.

There is such an unbelievable twist being added to what was said and the form it was spoken.

**Joh 15:16 You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit and that your fruit should abide; so that whatever you ask the Father in my name, he may give it to you.

Mat 16:18 And I tell you**, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it.
Mat 16:19 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."

Mat 28:18 And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.
Mat 28:19 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
Mat 28:20 teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age.”
[/quote]

 

[schaick]

If the Bible is the only authority, why doesn’t it list those letters and epistles that should have been included in the New Testament canon?

“Early Church fathers wrote what they learned about the Gospels through oral tradition,” Yes and the writings of the eyewitnesses and their students. I have the date 100AD as when 27 books of the New Testament were in common use and accepted, excluding Hebrews, 2 Peter, James, 2 John, 3 John and Revelation. The canon only confirmed what GOD had already shown man.

Just as you seem to try and prove the Bible is the only authority, it seems you lack the scripture and verse that teaches that.

I mention just a few of them here: forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=6188903&postcount=892

Why did God inspire it written that the Church of the living God is the pillar and ground of truth, instead of scriptures?

Of course all Trinitarian Christians members of the Church of the Living GOD are to uphold the TRUTH revealed by GOD. Scripture is the TRUTH. It is what the church=pillar is supposed to be holding up or preaching.

Why did God inspire it be written that the Church may make known the manifold wisdom of God, instead of scriptures?

The Church is not to hide and more importantly not corrupt the Scripture, Gospel and teachings of Jesus.

Why did God inspire it be written to hold to traditions whether by word or epistle, instead of scriptures alone?

The Holy Bible and Trinitarian Protestant Christians by the way are for tradition when that tradition follows the Gospel, teachings from Jesus. Jesus speaks adamantly against the traditions of man.

I think this might be where Catholics are very confused about what Protestants say about sola scriptus. It is not that we consider tradition evil but does a new tradition follow the teachings of the Gospel?

Does the proposed doctrine follow the Gospel, teachings of Jesus? Over the years the Catholic Church has taught things that do not follow Jesus’ teaching.

I ask the question after the time of the apostles was there need for new doctrine, is there need for new doctrine today?

I then get the answer well what do we do about these and am shown a list that I know all Catholics don’t agree on. Which leads to:

I do not assume one’s disposition with God. It is my hope and prayer that all will be made worthy of the promises of Christ. It seems some attempt to use disagreements between Catholics as a justification of their own faiths. Does two wrongs make a right?

Some people probably do “attempt to use disagreements between Catholics as a justification” but my thought is that a person can’t force another person to believe something, either they do or don’t.

I know that some Catholics don’t and wondered if these were considered hypocrites- which would be very sad because - If all the Protestants were forced to join the Catholic Church it would be full of people that just don’t believe in the doctrines being taught, would they be hypocrites?

Jesus was very much against hypocrites.

Keys open and allow entry; authority to bind and loose is authority to set doctrines. Chrst spoke specifically to His Apostles, the authority of His Church, and told them they had the authority to forgive and retain sins.

"Keys open and allow entry; how and why? But then you say “authority to bind and loose is authority to set doctrines.”

I really thought Catholics believed that the authority of the Keys of Heaven would be setting doctrine, because binding and loosing is the discipline and forgiving of sins and Priests do this.

In the rest of the answer you say the Apostles received these Keys also? When did they receive the Keys of Heaven in Matthew 18:18 and John 20:23?

Nice post: forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=3334343&postcount=54
“I believe that Priests today do have these spiritual keys and are deputized and commanded to use them for the purpose of unlocking our hearts and souls through the professing of God’s teachings from the pulpit and personal counseling.”

I of course would go step further and say that any called and ordained servant of the Lord holds the ability to bind and loose and the Keys to the Kingdom of Heaven.

74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:qRCGrLeTn3IJ:www.christusrex.org/www1/CDHN/healing.html+catholic+catechism+and+the+keys+of+heaven&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us 1444 In imparting to his apostles his own power to forgive sins the Lord also gives them the authority to reconcile sinners with the Church. This ecclesial dimension of their task is expressed most notably in Christ’s solemn words to Simon 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.”[45] “The office of binding and loosing which was given to Peter was also assigned to the college of the apostles united to its head.”[46]

According to this then do Priests hold the Keys?

 

[Rachel_Malloy]

This thread is now closed. Thanks for your participation.

God bless-

Rachel