S
steve_b
Guest
New Advent then went on to explain what was meant.Wow! According to newadvent, vicar means “instead of”.
Instead of Christ!!! Oh my!
God said to Peter,
“in His place” i.e. in His stead, i.e. instead.
- Status
God said to Peter,
M
Mickey
Guest
Sorry bud–it is disturbing. Those verses do not point to a replacement Jesus. I think it is a shame that the RCC adopted such language.
“Vicar of Peter” is much more palatable.
S
steve_b
Guest
Sorry bud, it’s NOT about what is disturbing. If Jesus was concerned with making His message non disturbing, most of His disciples wouldn’t have left Him over another “disturbing” reality Jn 6:66]
replacement is not used. It’s not there.
neither in Vicar
newadvent.org/cathen/15401a.htm
or in Vicar of Christ
newadvent.org/cathen/15403b.htm
The Father through Jesus is saying to Peter
“Feed my lambs. . . . Feed my sheep” (John 21:16-17),
IOW, be my vicar.
It’s not either vicar of Chirst or vicar of Peter, but both.“Vicar of Peter” is much more palatable.
I
Ignatios
Guest
The priest has the authority to celebrate the EUCHARIST and absolve sins through the power that it was invested in him by CHRIST, but never ever to take the Place of Christ( Dogmaticly), and likewise for the priesthood, they are to SERVE the LORD.
At times, yes they did, and that is when he was Orthodox( such as the case with Pope Leo I), and at times they also knew that he was heretic and they didnt hasitate to call him so and anathemitize him as such ( such as the case with Pope Honorius).
Amen, the gates of hell shall never and never prevailed against the Church. but as far as Peter goes, well… many can argue, that the Scriptures shows it did few times.
Please do, Since I just showed you one( Pope Honorius) in the above, you claim is locked, untill you proove that Pope Honorius was not anathematized as heretic.
I
Ignatios
Guest
steve b:
This hardly support the RCC claims as your comment in the red above, as we see the LORD here is telling him If we were to say it in plain 21st century English it would be( None of your business) now what would that do to the word “instead” or “Vicar” as your church define it Dogmaticly?.. use your imagination
So therefore “Mickey” was not wrong when he said the word replacement.
Or lets get it from the book of the late pope (JPII)
catholic.net/RCC/POPE/HopeBook/chap1.html
Read the following from that book :
" Confronted with the Pope, one must make a choice. The leader of the Catholic Church is defined by the faith as the Vicar of Jesus Christ (and is accepted as such by believers). The Pope is considered the man on earth who represents the Son of God, who “takes the place” of the Second Person of the omnipotent God of the Trinity"
…Again " Mickey " was right on target with everything he said.
When the newadvent becomes part of the Bible then I will consider their opinion, they are RCs anyhow, why would they say anything that would oppose their belief?.
And Just a few verses down we see that your claim falls short >>>John 21:20 Peter turning about, saw that disciple whom Jesus loved …21 Him therefore when Peter had seen, he saith to Jesus: Lord, and what shall this man do? 22 Jesus saith to him: So I will have him to remain till I come, what is it to thee?.
This hardly support the RCC claims as your comment in the red above, as we see the LORD here is telling him If we were to say it in plain 21st century English it would be( None of your business) now what would that do to the word “instead” or “Vicar” as your church define it Dogmaticly?.. use your imagination
There will not be play on words here, let us take a look at what “Replacement” means …dictionary.reference.com/browse/replacement
- the act of furnishing an equivalent person or thing in the place of another; “replacing the star will not be easy”
- someone who takes the place of another person [syn: surrogate]
- an event in which one thing is substituted for another; “the replacement of lost blood by a transfusion of donor blood”…
So therefore “Mickey” was not wrong when he said the word replacement.
Or lets get it from the book of the late pope (JPII)
catholic.net/RCC/POPE/HopeBook/chap1.html
Read the following from that book :
" Confronted with the Pope, one must make a choice. The leader of the Catholic Church is defined by the faith as the Vicar of Jesus Christ (and is accepted as such by believers). The Pope is considered the man on earth who represents the Son of God, who “takes the place” of the Second Person of the omnipotent God of the Trinity"
…Again " Mickey " was right on target with everything he said.
A
anthony022071
Guest
The priests and bishops preach the gospel,celebrate the Eucharist and give absolution in his stead. They do the work Christ commisioned them to do until he returns.
A
anthony022071
Guest
Vatican 1 said that the pope is infallible when he teaches doctrine ex cathedra. In other words,the official teachings on Church doctrine of the pope are always orthodox. The Eastern clergy would not have had reason to doubt that.
V
Volodymyr
Guest
Sorry, but that is not consistent with Church Fathers on such Holy Scripture. For instance, Our Lord does not address"Peter" at all, rather he addresses, “Simon”. This is name of the apostle before he becomes primary apostle - this is very great clue what Christ is doing. He asks Simon three times - just as Peter denied Him three times. This dialogue between Christ and Simon son of Ioann is a kind оглаждение or penance for the betrayal of Simon called Peter. Peter no longer is so bold to say he loves Christ more than the others - simply realizing that he loves Christ perhaps as much as others. So Christ says to him to pasture Christ’s sheep. That is Simon is to pasture the sheep of Christ. It is not saying Peter is to pasture his own sheep. You have tried to make this penitential act into the coronation of the first Pope. It took 1870 years for such a distortion to be realized.
A
anthony022071
Guest
E
elts1956
Guest
We believe Christ continues to work “through” his priests here on Earth. I think your priests have the same belief do they not? If not where does their authority to teach come from?Sorry bud–it is disturbing. Those verses do not point to a replacement Jesus. I think it is a shame that the RCC adopted such language.
“Vicar of Peter” is much more palatable.
M
Mickey
Guest
Calling your pope “the Vicar of Christ” is not analogous to the “Real Presence” of Jesus Christ in the Holy Eucharist.
Oh well, at least you guys dropped the title “Vicar of God”.
M
Mickey
Guest
M
Mickey
Guest
**The Sixteenth Session of the Third Council of **Constantinople
**”**To Honorius, the heretic, anathema!****”
[/quote]
S
steve_b
Guest
The claim doesn’t fall short. Peter inquired if John would be martyred also.
Ig:
In 21st century English, Peter, who loved John, out of concern, was asking Jesus if John would be martyred too. Jesus said to Peter, don’t worry about how/when John will die.the LORD here is telling him If we were to say it in plain 21st century English it would be( None of your business) now what would that do to the word “instead” or “Vicar” as your church define it Dogmaticly?.. use your imagination
M
Mickey
Guest
S
steve_b
Guest
*]There’s great sorrow on Peter’s part, that’s for sure. This exchange is to remind Peter what he said in the upper room at the last supper when he said even if the others leave you I won’t. (paraphrased)
*]Jesus said in the upper room, all will dessert me. And you Peter will deny me before the rooster crows. And Jesus said, Satan demanded to sift all of you like wheat, (and Satan DID and keeps doing it) but Jesus said I have prayed for you Peter, so that when you turn back strengthen your brothers. There were no suprises here.
Now we are here after the resurrection [Jn 21:15], and Jesus is having this meeting with Peter and the others over a charcoal fire. And Jesus is reminding Peter with His commission to Peter, that all the promises He made to Peter, in front of the others, that nothing has changed from before. All those promises are still in place. Peter is the Rock, Peter has the keys, Peter is the one in charge of the entire Church. Peter is to feed and tend the entire Church
*]Re: your last comment, before Orthodoxy my friend, which is 1000 years old, there was the papacy. Before the patriarchal system in the 4th century, there was the papacy. Before the death of the last apostle, Clement of Rome, successor to Peter, was settling sedition among bishops in Cornith. The Father keeps His promise
V
Voco_proTatiano
Guest
The problem with the ‘Filioque’ clause lies in languages other than Greek and Latin.
In both of these languages, the clause can be understood to mean, by source of the Father and by agency of the Son. both senses satisfying the ‘Ablative case’, which is common to both Father and Son.
It does not mean that the Son shares sourceship of the Spirit with the Father, but it does mean that the Son shares ‘agency’ with the Father.
This interpretation is in full concord with both Latin and Greek, and is also supported by the Gospels.
Misinterpretation and mistranslation of the Greek and Latin are the cause of this overblown dispute.
A
anthony022071
Guest
Same thing. The Church of Rome is the fount of orthodoxy.
“In truth we have seen that a manifest successor of the prince of the Apostles presides over the Roman Church. We truly believe that Christ has not deserted the Church here (Constantinople), for assistance from you has been our one and only aid from of old and from the beginning by the providence of God in the critical times. You are, indeed the untroubled and pure fount of orthodoxy from the beginning, you the calm harbor of the whole Church, far removed from the waves of heresy, you the God-chosen city of refuge.” (Letter of St. Theodor & Four Abbots to Pope Paschal).
“Teaching us all orthodoxy and destroying all heresy and driving it away from the God-protected halls of our holy Catholic Church. And together with these inspired syllables and characters, I accept all his (the pope’s) letters and teachings as proceeding from the mouth of Peter the Coryphaeus, and I kiss them and salute them and embrace them with all my soul … I recognize the latter as definitions of Peter and the former as those of Mark, and besides, all the heaven-taught teachings of all the chosen mystagogues of our Catholic Church.” (Sophronius, Mansi, xi. 461)
“Transverse quickly all the world from one end to the other until you come to the Apostolic See (Rome), where are the foundations of the orthodox doctrine. Make clearly known to the most holy personages of that throne the questions agitated among us. Cease not to pray and to beg them until their apostolic and Divine wisdom shall have pronounced the victorious judgement and destroyed from the foundation …the new heresy.” (Sophronius,[quoted by Bishop Stephen of Dora to Pope Martin I at the Lateran Council]
, Mansi, x., 893)
“The extremities of the earth, and everyone in every part of it who purely and rightly confess the Lord, look directly towards the Most Holy Roman Church and her confession and faith, as to a sun of unfailing light awaiting from her the brilliant radiance of the sacred dogmas of our Fathers, according to that which the inspired and holy Councils have stainlessly and piously decreed. For, from the descent of the Incarnate Word amongst us, all the churches in every part of the world have held the greatest Church alone to be their base and foundation, seeing that, according to the promise of Christ Our Savior, the gates of hell will never prevail against her, that she has the keys of the orthodox confession and right faith in Him, that she opens the true and exclusive religion to such men as approach with piety, and she shuts up and locks every heretical mouth which speaks against the Most High.” (Maximus, Opuscula theologica et polemica, Migne, Patr. Graec. vol. 90)
C
Chaldean_Rite
Guest
You said it, not me. Be careful, you might get what you wish for.
Lies. Stop painting Catholic teaching in the dim light in which you want to see it. Your comments are a fallacy in nature and your indigent understanding of Catholicism is ever apparent. Remember, you will have to give an account to your words in this side of eternity so choose them wisely brother.
M
Mickey
Guest
Yes. She was Orthodox for about the first 1000 years.
:tiphat:- Status