• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.
  3. Please note there is a new rule regarding the posting of videos. It reads, "Post a summary of the videos you post . An exception can be made for music videos.". Unless you are simply sharing music, please post a summary, or the gist, of the video you wish to share.
  4. There have been some changes in the Life Stages section involving the following forums: Roaring 20s, Terrific Thirties, Fabulous Forties, and Golden Eagles. They are changed to Gen Z, Millennials, Gen X, and Golden Eagles will have a slight change.
  5. CF Staff, Angels and Ambassadors; ask that you join us in praying for the world in this difficult time, asking our Holy Father to stop the spread of the virus, and for healing of all affected.

Comments on the pope

Discussion in 'One Bread, One Body - Catholic' started by Hoonbaba, Feb 13, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Hoonbaba

    Hoonbaba Catholic Preterist

    +54
    Catholic
    Hi guys,

    Someone gave some interesting (negative) comments on the pope which I'd like some of you to address:

     


    Can anyone respond to any of this?

    -Jason
     
    We teamed up with Faith Counseling. Can they help you today?
  2. Wolseley

    Wolseley Beaucoup-Diên-Cai-Dāu

    +2,600
    United States
    Catholic
    Married
    US-Others
  3. geocajun

    geocajun Priest of the holy smackrament

    +1,610
    Catholic
    Married
    US-Democrat
    Along with the articles Woseley gave you, I suggest you read the following tracts which address this persons statements:

    the following is a quote from Peter and the Papacy

    Peter and the Papacy

    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’s faith that will strengthen his brethren (Luke 22:32) and Peter is given Christ’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).



    Peter the Rock

    Peter’s preeminent position among the apostles was symbolized at the very beginning of his relationship with Christ. At their first meeting, Christ told Simon that his name would thereafter be Peter, which translates as "Rock" (John 1:42). The startling thing was that—aside from the single time that Abraham is called a "rock" (Hebrew: Tsur; Aramaic: Kepha) in Isaiah 51:1-2—in the Old Testament only God was called a rock. The word rock was not used as a proper name in the ancient world. If you were to turn to a companion and say, "From now on your name is Asparagus," people would wonder: Why Asparagus? What is the meaning of it? What does it signify? Indeed, why call Simon the fisherman "Rock"? Christ was not given to meaningless gestures, and neither were the Jews as a whole when it came to names. Giving a new name meant that the status of the person was changed, as when Abram’s name was changed to Abraham (Gen.17:5), Jacob’s to Israel (Gen. 32:28), Eliakim’s to Joakim (2 Kgs. 23:34), or the names of the four Hebrew youths—Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah to Belteshazzar, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego (Dan. 1:6-7). But no Jew had ever been called "Rock." The Jews would give other names taken from nature, such as Barak "lightning," (Judg. 4:6), Deborah ("bee," Gen. 35:8), and Rachel ("ewe," Gen. 29:16), but never "Rock." In the New Testament James and John were nicknamed Boanerges, meaning "Sons of Thunder," by Christ, but that was never regularly used in place of their original names, and it certainly was not given as a new name. But in the case of Simon-bar-Jonah, his new name Kephas (Greek: Petros) definitely replaced the old.


    also, see the following links:
    Peter's Primacy (quotes from Church fathers)
    Peter's Roman residency
    Was Peter in Rome?
     
  4. isshinwhat

    isshinwhat Pro Deo et Patria

    +605
    Eastern Orthodox
    I find this quote from Cyprian interesting for several reasons. First, it predates the Council of Nicea, second Cyprian was an Eastern Christian, and third it takes into account Matthew 16:18 and 18:18. It points out that the Bishop of Nashville, for instance, is no more or less a bishop than the Bishop of Rome. Their ministry is different, but none is "more a bishop."

    God Bless,

    Neal
     
  5. dignitized

    dignitized Well-Known Member

    +724
    isshinwhat: what is the source of the this quotation? From what collection does it come? The trouble with some of the writings of the church fathers is that many things are said to have been written or said by them which are spurious creations of the Middle ages. During this time in history it was not unheard of to create a document to support the claims of some one to legitimacy when the were making exaggerate claims. One example would be the Donation of Constantine, an other the false Decretals of Pseudo-Isidore. Sadly, the latter was used by Aquinas to support His claims for papal primacy in the Summa.

    I would be greatly interested in knowing if any ultramontanest here has ever read Dollingers work on papal primacy: THE POPE AND THE COUNCIL . . . .
     
  6. Stormy

    Stormy Senior Contributor

    +842
    Christian
    US-Others
    Could someone answer my question calmly, and clearly. I really just want yes or no answers. I am not out to debate, nor win any points for any cause, but rather just to gain knowledge for my own decision.

    Did Peter, or any other disciple, ever refer to Peter as the Pope... or even acknowledge him to be the head of all the early Churches?
     
  7. linda4jesus

    linda4jesus Are you Rapture Ready?

    289
    +0
    Non-Denom
    Stormy,

    None of the Apostles singled Peter out and declared that he was the pope or head of the early Church. When Jesus told Peter that "He is the Rock" Jesus was referring to himself...Jesus Christ is the Rock. Every believer is a stone in Christ’s Church. Peter was not the rock, but just one of many who are a part of this spiritual house of worship.
     
  8. kern

    kern Miserere Nobis

    +7
    Catholic
    Yes. Those words are not quoted in the Bible, but they certainly did acknowledge him as the head.

    -Chris
     
  9. Hoonbaba

    Hoonbaba Catholic Preterist

    +54
    Catholic
    I'm sure any of the Catholics would greatly disagree with you.  I won't spend time giving a long response to your statement that Peter wasn't the rock.  Someone else can get to that. 

    But Peter was singled out many times, it's just that many don't really notice how Peter is often singled out ahead of the other apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 1:36; 3:16; Luke 6:14-16; Act 1:13; 2:37; 5:29)

    Stormy, as for the specific reference to Peter as 'pope', the quick answer is no.  But neither is the trinity mentioned anywhere in the bible, yet almost every Christian denomination agrees it's biblical.  If you'd like, I'll explain the papacy.  But it might take me some time.

    God bless!

    -Jason
     
  10. geocajun

    geocajun Priest of the holy smackrament

    +1,610
    Catholic
    Married
    US-Democrat

    Please carefully read my post and the links here: http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?postid=652161#post652161

    also, did anyone in scripture ever refer to scripture as the 'bible' ?
    did anyone refer to Yahweh as triune?
    there are many more examples I did not provide of extra biblical traditions that Christians accept - such as the canon of the bible....

    Peter is clearly acknowledged as the authority among the Apostles in scripture, and if you read the references in my post I linked above, I believe you will conclude the same.
     
  11. Reformationist

    Reformationist Non nobis domine sed tuo nomine da gloriam

    +412
    United States
    Christian
    Single
    I know this is the OBOB forum and I would certainly never dream of starting a debate as to the interpretation of Scripture, but I do want to offer some advice on dealing with interpretational credibility.  I hope none of you will see this as an attack but rather as constructive criticism.

    I just wanted to point out that it is, IMO, fruitless to explain something that you hold to be true by saying that it's possible because there are other examples in the Bible of things that are commonly believed that aren't directly spelled out.

    The Mormons do this exact same thing in an effort to provide credibility for the legitimacy of their extrabiblical "scripture."  They commonly cite verses which speak of other texts in an effort to show that there are books that the Apostles and Prophets referrenced in a biblical account so their claim of extra revelation can't be completely disputed so there's a possibility of it being divinely authentic.

    Again, I hope only to provide you with some insight in how this weakens your position, instead of strengthening it.

    God bless
     
  12. geocajun

    geocajun Priest of the holy smackrament

    +1,610
    Catholic
    Married
    US-Democrat
    Ref, thanks for the advice, and I agree, I would never lead with such a weak argument, but I do think it is a suitable response to the argument "the word 'Pope' isn't in the bible..."
     
  13. chelcb

    chelcb 'Totus tuus'

    +0
    Hey, reverend is not in there either. And Pope means Papa, just a term of endearment, his official name is the bishop of Rome. I do not see his name being a big deal of it not being in the bible. Also trinity in not in there either and none of us question that.
     
  14. Miss Shelby

    Miss Shelby Legend

    +3,028
    Catholic
    Private
    I don't think it weakens the position. Just because the word 'pope' isn't found in the Bible doesn't mean that the Bible doesn't teach it.

    Michelle
     
  15. kern

    kern Miserere Nobis

    +7
    Catholic
    Yes, it is true. What we are doing here is an example of the logical fallacy "tu quoqum" (or some latin phrase like that) which is basically "well, you do it too."

    The truth is, when someone says the word "Pope" is not in the Bible, all we can say is "You are correct," and then explain why that does not bother us.

    As a separate issue, we can point out that other commonly accepted terms are not in the Bible either. We are not necessarily saying that to prove that the Pope is correct, we are merely saying that the fact that the word "Pope" is not found in the Bible is not relevant to the issue.
     
  16. Reformationist

    Reformationist Non nobis domine sed tuo nomine da gloriam

    +412
    United States
    Christian
    Single
    I didn't say the Bible didn't teach it.  What I said was, using the premise of "the Bible doesn't specifically say the word such and such" is a poor basis for establishing a point of view.  There are a ton of things that the Bible doesn't talk about but that doesn't mean they are to be viewed as biblical.  For that matter, all I was trying to relay was that while you may believe that the office of the Pope is biblically grounded, and you have that right of course, to say, "It's a perfectly okay view because the Bible doesn't say that it's not true" is a bit presumptuous.  Not wrong, presumptuous.

    God bless
     
  17. Reformationist

    Reformationist Non nobis domine sed tuo nomine da gloriam

    +412
    United States
    Christian
    Single
    Now this, I agree with.  Well said.

    God bless
     
  18. chelcb

    chelcb 'Totus tuus'

    +0
    Half the stuff that is not worded in the bible does not keep me up at night worried. It simply is a non issue, at least for me because I know that we base our beliefs on the tradtions of the early first century Christians that were closest to Jesus and his apostles, just as much as we base our beliefs on the bible.
     
  19. isshinwhat

    isshinwhat Pro Deo et Patria

    +605
    Eastern Orthodox
    The quote from Cyprian is authentic, and is referenced at the bottom of my original post. You should have no trouble finding it in most any collection of the Early Fathers. There were two versions put forth.  This is the earliest version which Cyprian, being Eastern, caught some heat for, thus he rewrote this section for an Eastern audience some time later. That section as written in the secondary text is:

    In this text, he still mentions the unity proceeding from one, but no longer mentions Peter by name, thus avoiding any East/West strain while still making his point.

    God Bless,

    Neal
     
  20. Axion

    Axion Senior Veteran

    +295
    Catholic
    The Witness of Some Early Church Fathers

    Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyons, Against Heresies 3:3:1, 3:3:2, and 3:3:3, AD 189,
    "Matthew also issued among the Hebrews a written Gospel in their own language, while Peter and Paul were evangelizing in Rome and laying the foundation of the Church.

    "But since it would be too long to enumerate in such a volume as this the succession of all the churches, we shall confound all those who, in whatever manner, whether through self-satisfaction or vainglory, or through blindness and wicked opinion, assemble other than where it is proper, by pointing out here the successions of the bishops of the greatest and most ancient church known to all, founded and organized at Rome by
    the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul, that church which has the tradition and the faith which comes down to us after having been announced to men by the apostles. With that church, because of its superior origin, all the churches must agree, that is, all the faithful in the whole world, and it is in her that the faithful everywhere have maintained the apostolic tradition.

    "The blessed apostles, having founded and built up the church, they handed over the office of the episcopate to Linus. Paul makes mention of this Linus in the letter to Timothy. To him succeeded Anacletus, and after him, in the third place from the apostles, Clement was chosen for the episcopate. He had seen the blessed apostles and was acquainted with them. It might be said that he still heard the echoes of the preaching of the apostles and had their traditions before his eyes. And not only he, for there were many still remaining who had been instructed by the apostles. In the time of Clement, no small dissension having arisen among the brethren in Corinth, the Church in Rome sent a very strong letter to the Corinthians, exhorting them to peace and renewing their faith . . . To this Clement, Evaristus succeeded . . . and now, in the twelfth place after the apostles, the lot of the episcopate [of Rome] has fallen to Eleutherus. In this order, and by the teaching of the apostles handed down in the Church, the preaching of the truth has come down to us."


    St. Dionysius, Bishop of Corinth, Letter to Pope Soter, AD 170, quoted by Bishop Eusebius in Church History 2:25:8,

    "You have also, by your very admonition, brought together the planting that was made by Peter and
    Paul at Rome and at Corinth; for both of them alike planted in our Corinth and taught us; and both alike, teaching similarly in Italy, suffered martyrdom at the same time."


    ORIGEN:
    "Peter, upon whom is built the Church of Christ, against which the gates of hell shall not prevail, left only one epistle of acknowledged genuinity. Let us concede also a second, which however is doubtful." (Commentaries on John 5,3)
    "Look upon the great foundation of the Church, that most solid of rocks, upon whom Christ built the Church! And what does the Lord say to him? 'O you of little faith,' He says, 'why did you doubt!'"
    (Homilies on Exodus 5,4)
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...