Does the Roman Church focus on Peter too much

[fated]

Understood.

You have heard us (Catholics) speak of the church as mystical and as physically present. We say all baptized Christians are mystically part of the church. That those who profess the Catholic Faith as their own to be part of both the physical and mystical. This is what I have said and I know it could be put better but here it is.

Now keep this notion of the mystical church in the back of your mind.

Here is something I grabbed from Newadvent (a Catholic's favorite quote site). I only copied a portion of what they said about Unam Sanctum and I know as a protestant you will still find it insulting or upsetting.

Quote:

"Now, therefore, we declare, say, determine and pronounce that for every human creature it is necessary for salvation to be subject to the authority of the Roman pontiff" (Porro subesse Romano Pontifici omni humanae creaturae declaramus, dicimus, definimus, et pronuntiamus omnino esse de necessitate salutis).


The Bull is universal in character. As its content shows, a careful distinction is made between the fundamental principles concerning the Roman primacy and the declarations as to the application of these to the secular power and its representatives. In the registers, on the margin of the text of the record, the last sentence is noted as its real definition: "Declaratio quod subesse Romano Pontifici est omni humanae creaturae de necessitate salutis" (It is here stated that for salvation it is necessary that every human creature be subject to the authority of the Roman pontiff). This definition, the meaning and importance of which are clearly evident from the connection with the first part on the necessity of the one Church for salvation, and on the pope as the one supreme head of the Church, expresses the necessity for everyone who wishes to attain salvation of belonging to the Church, and therefore of being subject to the authority of the pope in all religious matters. This has been the constant teaching of the Church, and it was declared in the same sense by the Fifth Ecumenical Council of the Lateran, in 1516: "De necessitate esse salutis omnes Christi fideles Romano Pontifici subesse" (That it is of the necessity of salvation for all Christ's faithful to be subject to the Roman pontiff).

It is also a teaching of profound temporal moral significance.

 

[fated]

Is that with or without appealing to the ECFs

LLOJ [NEVER appeals to the ECFs]

http://www.predestinarian.net/forum/index.php


Post # 44 The Roman Catholic (Western), Greek Orthodox (Eastern), and the Protestants (schismatics of the Western Church), love to appeal to the early fathers for their identity and foundation. Especially Rome and the Orthodox sects.

That is why you use the literalistic translation.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

That is why you use the literalistic translation.

What do you mean?
I do like to harmonize the OC with the NC if that is what you mean and as accurate translation of the Hebrew/Greek I can get.

http://www.scripture4all.org/

Gene 3:24 And He is expelling the 'adam, and he is dwelling from east to garden of Eden, the cherubim and flame of the sword, the one turning himself, to guard/keep way of tree of the living ones.

Reve 11:2 and the Court/aulhn <833>, the-one with-out/in of-the Sanctuary, be you Casting Out!! [#1537-#906 ek-bale (5628)] out-side/exw <1854>

 

[fated]

What do you mean?
I do like to harmonize the OC with the NC if that is what you mean and as accurate translation of the Hebrew/Greek I can get.

http://www.scripture4all.org/

Gene 3:24 And He is expelling the 'adam, and he is dwelling from east to garden of Eden, the cherubim and flame of the sword, the one turning himself, to guard/keep way of tree of the living ones.

Reve 11:2 and the Court/aulhn <833>, the-one with-out/in of-the Sanctuary, be you Casting Out!! [#1537-#906 ek-bale (5628)] out-side/exw <1854>

Literalistic is when you don't use the authors intent or the intended audience to determine, at least, the surface meaning of a verse.

I am curious, however, how you determine to leave the Pope (Peter's successor) out of the interpretation.when he could just as easily be left in.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Originally Posted by Dominus Fidelis
PeterTheRock-

Even if the Pope did "add" stuff to the Bible, that is his job, as the Bible itself says. He can bind and loose what is sin under the guidance of his charism.

Me thinks you take that a little too Literal ,but what am I but a poor old dumb half-witted "unsaved" Protestant.

 

[PopeBene1]

Peace, be still Little Lamb of Jesus, I know you love Jesus and desire to walk in His ways..

 

[Uphill Battle]

Peace, be still Little Lamb of Jesus, I know you love Jesus and desire to walk in His ways..

anyone else think it odd that someone with the name PopeBene is sporting an EO icon?

 

[mont974x4]

LOL maybe he denies his own authority?

 

[tadoflamb]

anyone else think it odd that someone with the name PopeBene is sporting an EO icon?

Yup!

 

[Rick Otto]

Jesuit Spy!
Probably has a Black Helicopter out behind his mansion.

 

[fated]

What do you mean?
I do like to harmonize the OC with the NC if that is what you mean and as accurate translation of the Hebrew/Greek I can get.

http://www.scripture4all.org/

Gene 3:24 And He is expelling the 'adam, and he is dwelling from east to garden of Eden, the cherubim and flame of the sword, the one turning himself, to guard/keep way of tree of the living ones.

Reve 11:2 and the Court/aulhn <833>, the-one with-out/in of-the Sanctuary, be you Casting Out!! [#1537-#906 ek-bale (5628)] out-side/exw <1854>

You must do also to put the books into historical and literary context. Otherwise, the translation is not properly "literal," but "literalistic."

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Jesuit Spy!
Probably has a Black Helicopter out behind his mansion.

Oh goodie! I get to bring up this drawing again

Reve 9:9 and they had breastplates as iron breastplates, and the noise of the flyers/wings of them/F as a noise of chariots horses, many, racing into battle; 10 and they are having tails like unto scorpions, and stingers, and in the tails of them/F, the authority of them to injure the men five months 11 They are having upon of them, King--the Messenger of the Abyss--a name to him, to Hebrew, Abaddon, and in the Greek name he is having Apollyon.

 

[Uphill Battle]

Yup!

I think someone put on the wrong socks. They thought they had their lycra, and it turned out they were argyle.

 

[mont974x4]

I think someone put on the wrong socks. They thought they had their lycra, and it turned out they were argyle.

perhaps lambs wool?


LOL

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

perhaps lambs wool?


LOL

Did someone mention "lamb"

Wow, this poll is still open LOL

Original OP......

This was mentioned in another thread by a RC concerning the Peter and Paul of the NC in the Bible.
Question does the Roman Church put too much focus on the Peter and not enough on the Paul. Thoughts?

Originally Posted by JacktheCatholic
I can understand why gentiles would hold a special affection towards Paul vs. Peter.

But we all know that Paul did not receive the Keys either in scripture.

Originally Posted by Albion
How in the world does no keys to Peter lead to no New Testament when the record of Christ speaking to Peter in in the New Testament? The one surest thing in all of Christianity is the Bible. It is eternal and never-changing, even if men may change their views of it. That is what everything comes from and why Protestantism, like it or not, is always relevant--that is to say, because it always can point back to the Word of God himself, the God who cannot be wrong in his revelation, and see what it says.

How much different is this from those churches which follow some constantly evolving stream of ideas and are cut loose from that which ultimately is our sure foundation.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Bump....... here is the original OP

http://christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=44194755&postcount=1

This was mentioned in another thread by a RC concerning the Peter and Paul of the NC in the Bible.
Question does the Roman Church put too much focus on the Peter and not enough on the Paul. Thoughts?

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

.


I don't think it's the focus of the RCC on Peter that concerns many non-Catholics but rather the focus of itself on itself. The references to Peter are just attempts to somehow "justify" that.




.

 

[Hentenza]

Mod Hat On
​

Thread moved to Denomination Specific from GT.​

 

[Tu Es Petrus]

Does the Roman Church focus on Peter too much

The name "Peter" appears 184 times in the Bible. Combined with the instances of his given name, Simon, this is more than all the other apostles combined! So mabye you think the Bible foucuses to much on Peter too?

There is ample evidence in the New Testament that Peter was first in authority among the apostles. Whenever they were named, Peter headed the list (Matt. 10:1-4, Mark 3:16-19, Luke 6:14-16, Acts 1:13); sometimes the apostles were referred to as "Peter and those who were with him" (Luke 9:32). Peter was the one who generally spoke for the apostles (Matt. 18:21, Mark 8:29, Luke 12:41, John 6:68-69), and he figured in many of the most dramatic scenes (Matt. 14:28-32, Matt. 17:24-27, Mark 10:23-28). On Pentecost it was Peter who first preached to the crowds (Acts 2:14-40), and he worked the first healing in the Church age (Acts 3:6-7). It is Peter&#8217;s faith that will strengthen his brethren (Luke 22:32) and Peter is given Christ&#8217;s flock to shepherd (John 21:17). An angel was sent to announce the resurrection to Peter (Mark 16:7), and the risen Christ first appeared to Peter (Luke 24:34). He headed the meeting that elected Matthias to replace Judas (Acts 1:13-26), and he received the first converts (Acts 2:41). He inflicted the first punishment (Acts 5:1-11), and excommunicated the first heretic (Acts 8:18-23). He led the first council in Jerusalem (Acts 15), and announced the first dogmatic decision (Acts 15:7-11). It was to Peter that the revelation came that Gentiles were to be baptized and accepted as Christians (Acts 10:46-48).

 

[bbbbbbb]

Lemme see here. Paul is known to have authored eight epistles. John authored one gospel, three epistles, and the book of Revelation. Peter authored two relatively short epistles. If one does a word count in the New Testament of things written by these three apostles, Paul comes out in first place closely followed by John, with Peter a very distant third. Perhaps that might be a better perspective on the matter.