• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

first church?????????

Status
Not open for further replies.

elijahlexis

Godseeker
Mar 22, 2004
125
12
cincinnati, ohio
✟322.00
Faith
Non-Denom
i have been reading through alot of the posts made in several forum
and i just want to state
that i believe that
given what our Lord and Saviour said
that i am part of the oldest church
the Body of Christ
in that He said
I am the Alpha and the Omega
the beginning and the end
guess that sums up what i believe on the whole "my church was the first church" thing
in a nutshell anyways (a very small nutshell i may add)
peace to all
looking forward to seing the responses
not to argue
but to gain clarity
and wisdom
not an attack, i love ya ll
and i think there is a greater revelation of the Truth that is Him
and that is life changing!
peace
lijalex
 
  • Like
Reactions: daveleau

daveleau

In all you do, do it for Christ and w/ Him in mind
Apr 12, 2004
8,984
703
51
Bossier City, LA (removed from his native South C
✟37,974.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
It is my belief that the above is correct based on what Peter says to Jesus and His response. When Peter tells Christ that "You are the Christ", that this is what Christ was taling about being the foundation. He (Christ) is the foundation. This is consistent with other themes in Scripture, which is an all-important key in formulating ideas about specific Scriptures.
 
Upvote 0

thereselittleflower

Well-Known Member
Nov 9, 2003
34,832
1,526
✟65,355.00
Faith
Catholic
daveleau said:
It is my belief that the above is correct based on what Peter says to Jesus and His response. When Peter tells Christ that "You are the Christ", that this is what Christ was taling about being the foundation. He (Christ) is the foundation. This is consistent with other themes in Scripture, which is an all-important key in formulating ideas about specific Scriptures.
Hi daveleau

How is the above consistant with other themes in Scripture? I know that this subject comes up fairly often, but even many Protestant scholars do not believe that the "rock" Jesus said He would build His Church on is anyone else other than Peter.

I mean, we have a rock cliff prominently figuring in the setting where Jesus and Peter have this exchange. The imagery is unmistakeable as Jesus says "You are Peter (petros) and upon this Rock (petra) I will build My Church . .. " in Matthew 16:18

From where I sit, it is clear He is saying Peter is that Rock He will build His Church upon, and here is that big rock cliff that cannot escape notice, and here He is comparing Peter to it . .

What themes are you seeing in scripture that would prevent such an understanding?


Peace to all!
 
Upvote 0

Bulldog

Don't Tread on Me
Jan 19, 2004
7,125
176
22 Acacia Avenue
✟8,212.00
Faith
Protestant
Politics
US-Libertarian
thereselittleflower said:
Hi daveleau

How is the above consistant with other themes in Scripture? I know that this subject comes up fairly often, but even many Protestant scholars do not believe that the "rock" Jesus said He would build His Church on is anyone else other than Peter.

I mean, we have a rock cliff prominently figuring in the setting where Jesus and Peter have this exchange. The imagery is unmistakeable as Jesus says "You are Peter (petros) and upon this Rock (petra) I will build My Church . .. " in Matthew 16:18

From where I sit, it is clear He is saying Peter is that Rock He will build His Church upon, and here is that big rock cliff that cannot escape notice, and here He is comparing Peter to it . .

What themes are you seeing in scripture that would prevent such an understanding?


Peace to all!

Hi therese,

One reason I am skeptical of such a view of Matt. 16 is that it was not a prevelant view amoung the early church.

I have noticed that the Early church fathers are very contradictory, but it seems to be an issue in the Early church (first-fifth century) that the majority of the early church fathers agree on, and that is that when Jesus says "this rock" he is referring back to the third person, and referring to the confession that He was the Christ. Some examples:


"He, then, who before was silent, to teach us that we ought not to repeat the words of the impious, this one, I say, when he heard: 'But who do you say I am,' immediately, not unmindful of his station, exercised his primacy, that is, the primacy of confession, not of honor; the primacy of belief, not of rank...This, then, is Peter who has replied for the rest of the Apostles; rather, before the rest of men. And so he is called the foundation, because he knows how to preserve not only his own but the common foundation. Christ agreed with him; the Father revealed it to him. For he who speaks of the true generation of the Father, received it from the Father, did not receive it from the flesh. Faith, then, is the foundation of the Church, for it was not said of Peter's flesh, but of his faith, that 'the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.' But his confession of faith conquered hell. And this confession did not shut out one heresy, for, since the Church like a good ship is often buffeted by many waves, the foundation of the Church should prevail against all heresies. The day will fail me sooner than the names of heretics and the different sects, yet against all is this general faith-that Christ is the Son of God, and eternal from the Father, and born of the Virgin Mary.52

Jesus said to them: Who do men say that I am? Simon Peter answering said, The Christ of God (Lk. ix.20). If it is enough for Paul 'to know nothing but Christ Jesus and Him crucified,' (1 Cor. ii.2), what more is to be desired by me than to know Christ? For in this one name is the expression of His Divinity and Incarnation, and faith in His Passion. And accordingly though the other apostles knew, yet Peter answers before the rest, 'Thou art the Christ the Son of God.'...Believe, therefore, as Peter believed, that thou also mayest be blessed, and that thou also mayest deserve to hear, 'Because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but My Father who is in heaven.'...Peter therefore did not wait for the opinion of the people, but produced his own, saying, 'Thou art the Christ the Son of the living God': Who ever is, began not to be, nor ceases to be. Great is the grace of Christ, who has imparted almost all His own names to His disciples. 'I am,' said He, 'the light of the world,' and yet with that very name in which He glories, He favoured His disciples, saying, 'Ye are the light of the world.' 'I am the living bread;' and 'we all are one bread' (1 Cor. x.17)...Christ is the rock, for 'they drank of the same spiritual rock that followed them, and the rock was Christ' (1 Cor. x.4); also He denied not to His disciple the grace of this name; that he should be Peter, because he has from the rock (petra) the solidity of constancy, the firmness of faith. Make an effort, therefore, to be a rock! Do not seek the rock outside of yourself, but within yourself! Your rock is your deed, your rock is your mind. Upon this rock your house is built. Your rock is your faith, and faith is the foundation of the Church. If you are a rock, you will be in the Church, because the Church is on a rock. If you are in the Church the gates of hell will not prevail against you...He who has conquered the flesh is a foundation of the Church; and if he cannot equal Peter, he can imitate him.

Which of these three different causes of impossibility, think you, which we have enumerated (setting aside the fourth) can we meetly assign to the case of the Son of God? Is He naturally insensible and immovable, like a stone? He is indeed a stone of stumbling to the wicked, a cornerstone for the faithful; but He is not insensible, upon Whom the faithful affection of sentient people are stayed. He is not an immovable rock, 'for they drank of a Rock that followed them, and that Rock was Christ.'...Moreover, that thou mayest know that it is after His Manhood that He entreats, and in virtue of His Godhead that He commands, it is written for thee in the Gospel that He said to Peter: 'I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not.' To the same Apostle, again, when on a former occasion he said, 'Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God,' He made answer: 'Thou art Peter, and upon this Rock will I build My Church, and I will give thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven.' Could He not then, strengthen the faith of the man to whom, acting on His own authority, He gave the kingdom, whom He called the Rock, thereby declaring him to be the foundation of the Church?54

It was not out of confusion that Peter said: 'Depart from me Lord, for I am a sinner' (Lk. 5.8); for Peter was a wise and judicious man-a man in whom were both the foundation of the Church and the authority to discipline; and he perceived that nothing could be more useful to him than that he should be exalted as a result of Christ's ensuing act (of raising him).55

It is that same Peter to whom He said, 'Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build My Church.' Therefore, where Peter is, there the Church is, there death is not, but life eternal. And therefore did He add, 'and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it,' (or him). Blessed Peter, against whom 'the gates of hell prevailed not,' the gate of heaven closed not; but who, on the contrary, destroyed the porches of hell, and opened the heavenly vestibules; wherefore, though placed on earth, he opened heaven and closed hell.56

'They sucked honey out of the firm rock,' (Deut. xxxii.13): for the flesh of Christ is a rock, which redeemed heaven and the whole world (1 Cor. x.4).

The Lord said to Peter: on this rock I will build My Church…On this catholic confession of faith he establishes the faithful in life.

Nor Paul inferior to Peter, though the latter is the foundation of the Church, and the former, a wise architect, knew how to lay a foundation for the steps of believing people; nor was Paul, I say, unworthy of the college of apostles; and is easily to be compared even with the first, and second to none. For who knows not himself unequal, makes himself equal." -Ambrose


"Aptly indeed Isaiah says prophetically that the Father was laying the Son as a cornerstone, doubtless signifying that the whole structure of the world was borne upon that foundation and base. No doubt at another time, as has been written in the holy books of the Gospel, the only Begotten calls Peter the foundation of the Church, saying: 'You are Peter and upon this rock I shall build my Church.' Now this chief, as it were, great and hard stone, Christ, was set into the excavated hollow of this world, into this vale of tears, as David says, in order that he might bear all Christians founded upon him aloft into the domicile of our hope. 'For no other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid, which is Christ Jesus.' But our Saviour did give Peter a like appellation, thereby teaching that his chief disciple ought to be honored, calling him a rock of faith. Through Peter, therefore who was made a true and faithful teacher of piety, a stable and inflexible foundation for the Church exists. Moreover, having struck root in this foundation we stand complete, who are Christians all over the world. To be sure from the time of the announcement of the Gospel, many temptations have sprung up, and innumerable tyrants with their chief, the devil, have tried to destroy the foundations and to turn us from our moorings. Rivers have run like torrents, say the saving and holy Scriptures; the violent winds of diabolical spirits have rushed; the plentiful and harsh showers of persecution have poured down forcefully upon Christians. Yet nothing has proved more powerful than the divine ramparts, because doubtless the foundation of faith was raised by the holy hands of that chief apostles. These things, I think, needed to be said in response to that word of blessing from him who called the evangelist and holy preacher a rock. Moreover we may see, if we please, the method by which Peter built-not with stones and walls, or other earthly materials, but with words and deeds which he performed at the instigation of the Holy Spirit.

Thus Peter calls Christ the Son of the living God. Peter and no other spoke carefully; and he confessed the right rule of faith which had no error in it. And having given to us all in this inviolable law a work of piety, he by no means departed without reward, since-blessed by him who is in the highest degree blessed-he was named a rock of faith, and the foundation and basis of God's Church. Moreover by promise he received the keys of the kingdom and was made master of its gates, so that he might open to whomever he willed and might close the gates to whomever they must rightly be closed. By these last we understand those who are defiled and profane, and those who deny that confession on account of which Peter, like a sedulous and energetic guardian of the Church's goods, was put in charge of the gates of the kingdom." -Asterius


"And if we too have said like Peter, 'Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God,' not as if flesh and blood had revealed it unto us, but by light from the Father in heaven having shone in our heart, we become a Peter, and to us there might be said by the Word, 'Thou art Peter,' etc. For a rock is every disciple of Christ of whom those drank who drank of the spiritual rock which followed them, and upon every such rock is built every word of the church, and the polity in accordance with it; for in each of the perfect, who have the combination of words and deeds and thoughts which fill up the blessedness, is the church built by God.
But if you suppose that upon the one Peter only the whole church is built by God, what would you say about John the son of thunder or each one of the Apostles? Shall we otherwise dare to say, that against Peter in particular the gates of Hades shall not prevail, but that they shall prevail against the other Apostles and the perfect? Does not the saying previously made, 'The gates of Hades shall not prevail against it,' hold in regard to all and in the case of each of them? And also the saying, 'Upon this rock I will build My church'? Are the keys of the kingdom of heaven given by the Lord to Peter only, and will no other of the blessed receive them? But if this promise, 'I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven,' be common to others, how shall not all things previously spoken of, and the things which are subjoined as having been addressed to Peter, be common to them?
'Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.' If any one says this to Him...he will obtain the things that were spoken according to the letter of the Gospel to that Peter, but, as the spirit of the Gospel teaches, to every one who becomes such as that Peter was. For all bear the surname of 'rock' who are the imitators of Christ, that is, of the spiritual rock which followed those who are being saved, that they may drink from it the spiritual draught. But these bear the surname of the rock just as Christ does. But also as members of Christ deriving their surname from Him they are called Christians, and from the rock, Peters...And to all such the saying of the Saviour might be spoken, 'Thou art Peter' etc., down to the words, 'prevail against it.' But what is the 'it'? Is it the rock upon which Christ builds the church, or is it the church? For the phrase is ambiguous. Or is it as if the rock and the church were one and the same? This I think to be true; for neither against the rock on which Christ builds the church, nor against the church will the gates of Hades prevail. Now, if the gates of Hades prevail against any one, such an one cannot be a rock upon which Christ builds the church, nor the church built by Jesus upon the rock.

Look at the great foundation of that Church and at the very solid rock upon which Christ has founded the Church. Wherefore the Lord says: 'Ye of little faith, why have you doubted?'

Moreover in the law this (love) is said to be the first commandment, and in the Gospels one is taught above all other things about love. Although the highest calling of feeding the sheep was communicated to Peter, and though the Church was established upon him as upon a solid ground, the confession of no other virtue is required of him, save that of love...

But if she (the soul) does contrive to get through these unscathed, then the winter is past, and spring has come to her. For spring for her is when repose is given to her soul and calmness to her mind. Then the Word of God comes to her, then He calls her to Himself, and bids her come forth, not only from the house, but from the city itself-in other words, she must forsake not only fleshly vices, but also everything bodily and visible that the world contains. For we have already demonstrated plainly that the city is a figure for the world. The soul, therefore, is summoned forth outside the wall, and is brought to the outwork, when, forsaking and leaving things seen and temporal, she hastens towards those that are unseen and eternal. She is shown, however, that the way thereto must be followed beneath the cover of the rock, and not out in the open. And that she may not suffer the sun's heat and perhaps become tanned again and say once more: 'The sun hath looked askance at me,' therefore she takes the way beneath the cover of the rock.
But He will not have this covering made for her of branches, or canvas, or skins; He will have her covering made of rock-that is, the firm and solid teachings of Christ. For Him St. Paul declares to be a rock when he says: And the rock was Christ.
If, then, the soul be shielded and covered with the doctrine and the faith of Christ, she can come safely to that secret place wherein she may behold the glory of the Lord with open face. We may well believe that covering of the rock is safe, since Solomon also says of it in Proverbs that the tracks of the serpent cannot be detected on the rock...For no tracks of the serpent-that is, no marks of sin-can be found in this rock which is Christ, for it is He alone who did no sin. Having therefore availed herself of the covering of this rock, the soul comes safely to the place on the outwork-that is, to the contemplation of things incorporeal and eternal. David speaks of this same rock under another metaphor in Psalm Seventeen: And He set my feet upon a rock and ordered my paths. Do not be surprised if with David this rock is as it were the ground and basis upon which a soul goes to God, while with Solomon it is the covering of the soul that is set upon reaching the mystical secrets of wisdom; seeing that Christ Himself is at one time called the Way by which believers go, and again the Forerunner, as when Paul says: Into which the forerunner Jesus entered for us.
Like to these is the saying of God to Moses: Lo, I have set thee in a cleft of the rock, and thou shalt see my back parts. That Rock which is Christ is, therefore, not completely closed, but has clefts. But the cleft of the rock is He who reveals God to men, and makes Him known to them; for no one knoweth the Father, save the Son. So no one sees the back parts of God-that is to say, the things that are come to pass in the latter times, unless he be placed in the cleft of the rock, that is to say, when he is taught them by Christ's own revealing.

But who is thus blessed, who so throws off the burden of temptations that no thought of ambiguity creeps up on his mind? See what was said by the Lord to the great foundation of the church and very solid rock, upon which Christ founded the church: 'O you of little faith he says, why have you doubted?" -Origen


I challenge you to find a church father (1-5 centuries) Who took the modern Roman Catholic (is "Roman" Catholic offensive?) interpretation of the verse, that the rock is Peter, and that the Pope and the Pope alone is his succesor.
 
Upvote 0

thereselittleflower

Well-Known Member
Nov 9, 2003
34,832
1,526
✟65,355.00
Faith
Catholic
Bulldog said:
Hi therese,

I challenge you to find a church father (1-5 centuries) Who took the modern Roman Catholic (is "Roman" Catholic offensive?) interpretation of the verse, that the rock is Peter, and that the Pope and the Pope alone is his succesor.
Hi Bulldog

Just one?




Peter the Rock:
Tertullian


Was anything withheld from the knowledge of Peter, who is called the ‘rock on which the church should be built’ who also obtained ‘the keys of the kingdom of heaven,’ with the power of ‘loosing and binding in heaven and earth? [size=-1](Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, Ante-Nicene Fathers (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1951), Volume III, Tertullian, Prescription Against Heretics 22).[/size]

"[T]he Lord said to Peter, ‘On this rock I will build my Church, I have given you the keys of the kingdom of heaven [and] whatever you shall have bound or loosed on earth will be bound or loosed in heaven’ [Matt. 16:18–19]. . . . What kind of man are you, subverting and changing what was the manifest intent of the Lord when he conferred this personally upon Peter? Upon you, he says, I will build my Church; and I will give to you the keys" (Modesty 21:9–10 [A.D. 220]).


The Letter of Clement to James

"Be it known to you, my lord, that Simon [Peter], who, for the sake of the true faith, and the most sure foundation of his doctrine, was set apart to be the foundation of the Church, and for this end was by Jesus himself, with his truthful mouth, named Peter" (Letter of Clement to James 2 [A.D. 221]).

The Clementine Homilies

"[Simon Peter said to Simon Magus in Rome:] ‘For you now stand in direct opposition to me, who am a firm rock, the foundation of the Church’ [Matt. 16:18]" (Clementine Homilies 17:19 [A.D. 221]).



Origen


"Look at [Peter], the great foundation of the Church, that most solid of rocks, upon whom Christ built the Church [Matt. 16:18]. And what does our Lord say to him? ‘Oh you of little faith,’ he says, ‘why do you doubt?’ [Matt. 14:31]" (Homilies on Exodus 5:4 [A.D. 248]).

Now in regards to your asking about succession . . here is Cyprian who establishes that not only was the Church built on Peter, but on his CHAIR . . and speaks about deserting not just Peter, but THE CHAIR THE CHURCH IS BUILT ON




This bring in clearly the idea of succession, and Cyprian was speaking of THE CHAIR 200 years AFTER Peter . Clearly, someone occupied that CHAIR in succession to Peter:
Cyprian of Carthage


"The Lord says to Peter: ‘I say to you,’ he says, ‘that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell will not overcome it. And to you I will give the keys of the kingdom of heaven . . . ’ [Matt. 16:18–19]. On him [Peter] he builds the Church, and to him he gives the command to feed the sheep [John 21:17], and although he assigns a like power to all the apostles, yet he founded a single chair [cathedra], and he established by his own authority a source and an intrinsic reason for that unity. Indeed, the others were that also which Peter was [i.e., apostles], but a primacy is given to Peter, whereby it is made clear that there is but one Church and one chair. . . . If someone does not hold fast to this unity of Peter, can he imagine that he still holds the faith? If he [should] desert the chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built, can he still be confident that he is in the Church?" (The Unity of the Catholic Church 4; 1st edition [A.D. 251]).

"There is one God and one Christ, and one Church, and one chair founded on Peter by the word of the Lord. It is not possible to set up another altar or for there to be another priesthood besides that one altar and that one priesthood. Whoever has gathered elsewhere is scattering" (Letters 43[40]:5 [A.D. 253]).

"There [John 6:68–69] speaks Peter, upon whom the Church would be built, teaching in the name of the Church and showing that even if a stubborn and proud multitude withdraws because it does not wish to obey, yet the Church does not withdraw from Christ. The people joined to the priest and the flock clinging to their shepherd are the Church. You ought to know, then, that the bishop is in the Church and the Church in the bishop, and if someone is not with the bishop, he is not in the Church. They vainly flatter themselves who creep up, not having peace with the priests of God, believing that they are
secretly [i.e., invisibly] in communion with certain individuals. For the Church, which is one and Catholic, is not split nor divided, but it is indeed united and joined by the cement of priests who adhere one to another" (ibid., 66[69]:8).



The next, though a dispute as to Stephen's right to hold the succession of Peter, shows such a chair, such an office, such a succession was indeed recognized - Firmillian just did not agree that Stephen should be the one to occupy that office:
Firmilian


"But what is his error . . . who does not remain on the foundation of the one Church which was founded upon the rock by Christ [Matt. 16:18], can be learned from this, which Christ said to Peter alone: ‘Whatever things you shall bind on earth shall be bound also in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth, they shall be loosed in heaven’ [Matt. 16:19]" (collected in Cyprian’s Letters 74[75]:16 [A.D. 253]).

"[Pope] Stephen . . . boasts of the place of his episcopate, and contends that he holds the succession from Peter, on whom the foundations of the Church were laid [Matt. 16:18]. . . . [Pope] Stephen . . . announces that he holds by succession the throne of Peter" (ibid., 74[75]:17).


Ephraim the Syrian

"[Jesus said:] ‘Simon, my follower, I have made you the foundation of the holy Church. I betimes called you Peter, because you will support all its buildings. You are the inspector of those who will build on earth a Church for me. If they should wish to build what is false, you, the foundation, will condemn them. You are the head of the fountain from which my teaching flows; you are the chief of my disciples’" (Homilies 4:1 [A.D. 351]).


Optatus

"You cannot deny that you are aware that in the city of Rome the episcopal chair was given first to Peter; the chair in which Peter sat, the same who was head—that is why he is also called Cephas [‘Rock’]—of all the apostles; the one chair in which unity is maintained by all" (The Schism of the Donatists 2:2 [A.D. 367]).


Ambrose of Milan

"[Christ] made answer: ‘You are Peter, and upon this rock will I build my Church. . . . ’ Could he not, then, strengthen the faith of the man to whom, acting on his own authority, he gave the kingdom, whom he called the rock, thereby declaring him to be the foundation of the Church [Matt. 16:18]?" (The Faith 4:5 [A.D. 379]).

"It is to Peter that he says: ‘You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church’ [Matt. 16:18]. Where Peter is, there is the Church. And where the Church is, no death is there, but life eternal" (Commentary on Twelve Psalms of David 40:30 [A.D. 389]).



Here we see the "see" of Peter discussed, which carries with it succession and by a Pope.
Pope Damasus I


"Likewise it is decreed . . . that it ought to be announced that . . . the holy Roman Church has not been placed at the forefront [of the churches] by the conciliar decisions of other churches, but has received the primacy by the evangelic voice of our Lord and Savior, who says: ‘You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it; and I will give to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven. . . . ’ [Matt. 16:18–19]. The first see, therefore, is that of Peter the apostle, that of the Roman Church, which has neither stain nor blemish nor anything like it" (Decree of Damasus 3 [A.D. 382]).


Jerome

"‘But,’ you [Jovinian] will say, ‘it was on Peter that the Church was founded’ [Matt. 16:18]. Well . . . one among the twelve is chosen to be their head in order to remove any occasion for division" (Against Jovinian 1:26 [A.D. 393]).

"I follow no leader but Christ and join in communion with none but your blessedness [Pope Damasus I], that is, with the chair of Peter. I know that this is the rock on which the Church has been built. Whoever eats the Lamb outside this house is profane. Anyone who is not in the ark of Noah will perish when the flood prevails" (Letters 15:2 [A.D. 396]).



Here we see that there is a particular succession to Peter . . individuals suceeding him one by one . . in so doing, as we have seen above, they occupy his Chair, his See . .
Augustine


"If the very order of episcopal succession is to be considered, how much more surely, truly, and safely do we number them [the bishops of Rome] from Peter himself, to whom, as to one representing the whole Church, the Lord said, ‘Upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not conquer it.’ Peter was succeeded by Linus, Linus by Clement. ... In this order of succession a Donatist bishop is not to be found" (Letters 53:1:2 [A.D. 412]).


Council of Ephesus

"Philip, the presbyter and legate of the Apostolic See [Rome], said: ‘There is no doubt, and in fact it has been known in all ages, that the holy and most blessed Peter, prince and head of the apostles, pillar of the faith, and foundation of the Catholic Church, received the keys of the kingdom from our Lord Jesus Christ, the Savior and Redeemer of the human race, and that to him was given the power of loosing and binding sins: who down even to today and forever both lives and judges in his successors’" (Acts of the Council, session 3 [A.D. 431]).



Pope Leo I

"Our Lord Jesus Christ . . . has placed the principal charge on the blessed Peter, chief of all the apostles. . . . He wished him who had been received into partnership in his undivided unity to be named what he himself was, when he said: ‘You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church’ [Matt. 16:18], that the building of the eternal temple might rest on Peter’s solid rock, strengthening his Church so surely that neither could human rashness assail it nor the gates of hell prevail against it" (Letters 10:1 [A.D. 445]).


Council of Chalcedon

"Wherefore the most holy and blessed Leo, archbishop of the great and elder Rome, through us, and through this present most holy synod, together with the thrice blessed and all-glorious Peter the apostle, who is the rock and foundation of the Catholic Church, and the foundation of the orthodox faith, has stripped him [Dioscorus] of the episcopate" (Acts of the Council, session 3 [A.D. 451]).


quotes from http://www.catholic.com/library/Origins_of_Peter_as_Pope.asp


Well, this was not just one . . .



Peace to all!
 
Upvote 0

PaladinValer

Traditional Orthodox Anglican
Apr 7, 2004
23,587
1,245
44
Myrtle Beach, SC
✟30,305.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
The First Church was the Early Church. The first fracture was the Oriental Church after the Third Ecumenical Council but before the Fourth. The second fracture was between the Church in the West, based in the Vatican (the Catholic Church) and the Church in the East, based in Constantinople (the Orthodox Church). The third fracture was the Anglican/Lutheran/Presbyterian/Anabaptist break. Even then, the Anglicans, Lutherans, and the Presbyterians believed in the actual Institution of the Church (something many of today's Calvinists forget). The Anabaptists were the first to actually say that the Institution of the Church doesn't exist (as far as I know).

The First Church will come about again when all the splinters come back together.
 
Upvote 0
May 11, 2004
4,273
123
Fortress Kedar
✟36,153.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
PaladinValer said:
The First Church was the Early Church. The first fracture was the Oriental Church after the Third Ecumenical Council but before the Fourth. The second fracture was between the Church in the West, based in the Vatican (the Catholic Church) and the Church in the East, based in Constantinople (the Orthodox Church). The third fracture was the Anglican/Lutheran/Presbyterian/Anabaptist break. Even then, the Anglicans, Lutherans, and the Presbyterians believed in the actual Institution of the Church (something many of today's Calvinists forget). The Anabaptists were the first to actually say that the Institution of the Church doesn't exist (as far as I know).

The First Church will come about again when all the splinters come back together.
Thanks! So when were the third and fourth councils?
 
Upvote 0

thereselittleflower

Well-Known Member
Nov 9, 2003
34,832
1,526
✟65,355.00
Faith
Catholic
PaladinValer said:
The First Church was the Early Church. The first fracture was the Oriental Church after the Third Ecumenical Council but before the Fourth. The second fracture was between the Church in the West, based in the Vatican (the Catholic Church) and the Church in the East, based in Constantinople (the Orthodox Church). The third fracture was the Anglican/Lutheran/Presbyterian/Anabaptist break. Even then, the Anglicans, Lutherans, and the Presbyterians believed in the actual Institution of the Church (something many of today's Calvinists forget). The Anabaptists were the first to actually say that the Institution of the Church doesn't exist (as far as I know).

The First Church will come about again when all the splinters come back together.
Hi Paladin Valer

That would suggest that the First Church no longer exists so neither do its teaching, doctrines and dogmas . .

It is not that the First Church no longer exists, but it will not be whole untill all the splinters come back together in it.

I think you are speaking about the "wholeness" of the First Church . . and if so, I agree with you. :(


Peace to all!
 
Upvote 0
May 11, 2004
4,273
123
Fortress Kedar
✟36,153.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
thereselittleflower said:
Hi Paladin Valer

That would suggest that the First Church no longer exists so neither do its teaching, doctrines and dogmas . .

It is not that the First Church no longer exists, but it will not be whole untill all the splinters come back together in it.

I think you are speaking about the "wholeness" of the First Church . . and if so, I agree with you. :(


Peace to all!
Do you want to get together a group and try to change that? I'm ready for unity again.
 
Upvote 0

Bulldog

Don't Tread on Me
Jan 19, 2004
7,125
176
22 Acacia Avenue
✟8,212.00
Faith
Protestant
Politics
US-Libertarian
Good day, therese,

I will try to deal with many of these, some a little later, but for now....

thereselittleflower said:
Hi Bulldog




Peter the Rock:
Tertullian


Was anything withheld from the knowledge of Peter, who is called the ‘rock on which the church should be built’ who also obtained ‘the keys of the kingdom of heaven,’ with the power of ‘loosing and binding in heaven and earth? [size=-1](Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, Ante-Nicene Fathers (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1951), Volume III, Tertullian, Prescription Against Heretics 22).[/size]


Tertullian did believe Peter to be the rock, but not in the sense that the church was built on Peter but rather through him in the sense that is preaches the gospel. He tells us furthur what he means here:


If, because the Lord has said to Peter, ‘Upon this rock I will build My Church,’ ‘to thee have I given the keys of the heavenly kingdom;’ or, ‘Whatsoever thou shalt have bound or loosed in earth, shall be bound or loosed in the heavens,’ you therefore presume that the power of binding and loosing has derived to you, that is, to every Church akin to Peter, what sort of man are you, subverting and wholly changing the manifest intention of the Lord, conferring (as that intention did) this (gift) personally upon Peter? ‘On thee,’ He says, ‘will I build My church;’ and, ‘I will give thee the keys’...and, ‘Whatsoever thou shalt have loosed or bound’...In (Peter) himself the Church was reared; that is, through (Peter) himself; (Peter) himself essayed the key; you see what key: ‘Men of Israel, let what I say sink into your ears: Jesus the Nazarene, a man destined by God for you,’ and so forth. (Peter) himself, therefore, was the first to unbar, in Christ’s baptism, the entrance to the heavenly kingdom, in which kingdom are ‘loosed’ the sins that were beforetime ‘bound;’ and those which have not been ‘loosed’ are ‘bound,’ in accordance with true salvation...(Volume VI)




Origen


"Look at [Peter], the great foundation of the Church, that most solid of rocks, upon whom Christ built the Church [Matt. 16:18]. And what does our Lord say to him? ‘Oh you of little faith,’ he says, ‘why do you doubt?’ [Matt. 14:31]" (Homilies on Exodus 5:4 [A.D. 248]).

Now in regards to your asking about succession . . here is Cyprian who establishes that not only was the Church built on Peter, but on his CHAIR . . and speaks about deserting not just Peter, but THE CHAIR THE CHURCH IS BUILT ON

Origen did believe Peter to be the rock, but he also believed anyone with Peter's faith to receive the keys and become the rock.


And if we too have said like Peter, ‘Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God,’ not as if flesh and blood had revealed it unto us, but by the light from the Father in heaven having shone in our heart, we become a Peter, and to us there might be said by the Word, ‘Thou art Peter,’ etc. For a rock is every disciple of Christ of whom those drank who drank of the spiritual rock which followed them, and upon every such rock is built every word of the Church, and the polity in accordance with it; for in each of the perfect, who have the combination of words and deeds and thoughts which fill up the blessedness, is the church built by God.
But if you suppose that upon the one Peter only the whole church is built by God, what would you say about John the son of thunder or each one of the Apostles? Shall we otherwise dare to say, that against Peter in particular the gates of Hades shall not prevail, but that they shall prevail against the other Apostles and the perfect? Does not the saying previously made, ‘The gates of Hades shall not prevail against it,’ hold in regard to all and in the case of each of them? And also the saying, ‘Upon this rock I will build My Church?’ Are the keys of the kingdom of heaven given by the Lord to Peter only, and will no other of the blessed receive them? But if this promise, ‘I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven,’ be common to others, how shall not all things previously spoken of, and the things which are subjoined as having been addressed to Peter, be common to them?
‘Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.’ If any one says this to Him...he will obtain the things that were spoken according to the letter of the Gospel to that Peter, but, as the spirit of the Gospel teaches to every one who becomes such as that Peter was. For all bear the surname ‘rock’ who are the imitators of Christ, that is, of the spiritual rock which followed those who are being saved, that they may drink from it the spiritual draught. But these bear the surname of rock just as Christ does. But also as members of Christ deriving their surname from Him they are called Christians, and from the rock, Peters...And to all such the saying of the Savior might be spoken, ‘Thou art Peter’ etc., down to the words, ‘prevail against it.’ But what is the it? Is it the rock upon which Christ builds the Church, or is it the Church? For the phrase is ambiguous. Or is it as if the rock and the Church were one and the same? This I think to be true; for neither against the rock on which Christ builds His Church, nor against the Church will the gates of Hades prevail. Now, if the gates of Hades prevail against any one, such an one cannot be a rock upon which the Christ builds the Church, nor the Church built by Jesus upon the rock (Origen, Commentary on Matthew, Chapters 10-11).




This bring in clearly the idea of succession, and Cyprian was speaking of THE CHAIR 200 years AFTER Peter . Clearly, someone occupied that CHAIR in succession to Peter:
Cyprian of Carthage


"The Lord says to Peter: ‘I say to you,’ he says, ‘that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell will not overcome it. And to you I will give the keys of the kingdom of heaven . . . ’ [Matt. 16:18–19]. On him [Peter] he builds the Church, and to him he gives the command to feed the sheep [John 21:17], and although he assigns a like power to all the apostles, yet he founded a single chair [cathedra], and he established by his own authority a source and an intrinsic reason for that unity. Indeed, the others were that also which Peter was [i.e., apostles], but a primacy is given to Peter, whereby it is made clear that there is but one Church and one chair. . . . If someone does not hold fast to this unity of Peter, can he imagine that he still holds the faith? If he [should] desert the chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built, can he still be confident that he is in the Church?" (The Unity of the Catholic Church 4; 1st edition [A.D. 251]).

"There is one God and one Christ, and one Church, and one chair founded on Peter by the word of the Lord. It is not possible to set up another altar or for there to be another priesthood besides that one altar and that one priesthood. Whoever has gathered elsewhere is scattering" (Letters 43[40]:5 [A.D. 253]).

"There [John 6:68–69] speaks Peter, upon whom the Church would be built, teaching in the name of the Church and showing that even if a stubborn and proud multitude withdraws because it does not wish to obey, yet the Church does not withdraw from Christ. The people joined to the priest and the flock clinging to their shepherd are the Church. You ought to know, then, that the bishop is in the Church and the Church in the bishop, and if someone is not with the bishop, he is not in the Church. They vainly flatter themselves who creep up, not having peace with the priests of God, believing that they are
secretly [i.e., invisibly] in communion with certain individuals. For the Church, which is one and Catholic, is not split nor divided, but it is indeed united and joined by the cement of priests who adhere one to another" (ibid., 66[69]:8).​




Cyprian also believed all Bishops to be the succesor of Peter, not just the Bishop of Rome.

Our Lord whose precepts and warnings we ought to observe, determining the honour of a Bishop and the ordering of His own Church, speaks in the Gospel and says to Peter, I say unto thee, that thou art Peter, and on this rock I will build My Church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven. Thence the ordination of Bishops, and the ordering of the Church, runs down along the course of time and line of succession, so that the Church is settled upon her Bishops; and every act of the Church is regulated by these same Prelates (A Library of the Fathers of the Holy Catholic Church (The Epistles of S. Cyprian, Ep. 33.1).





Ambrose of Milan

"[Christ] made answer: ‘You are Peter, and upon this rock will I build my Church. . . . ’ Could he not, then, strengthen the faith of the man to whom, acting on his own authority, he gave the kingdom, whom he called the rock, thereby declaring him to be the foundation of the Church [Matt. 16:18]?" (The Faith 4:5 [A.D. 379]).

"It is to Peter that he says: ‘You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church’ [Matt. 16:18]. Where Peter is, there is the Church. And where the Church is, no death is there, but life eternal" (Commentary on Twelve Psalms of David 40:30 [A.D. 389]).
Here we see the "see" of Peter discussed, which carries with it succession and by a Pope.
Pope Damasus I



Ambrose later explains what he means in other statements.

He, then, who before was silent, to teach us that we ought not to repeat the words of the impious, this one, I say, when he heard, ‘But who do you say I am,’ immediately, not unmindful of his station, exercised his primacy, that is, the primacy of confession, not of honor; the primacy of belief, not of rank. This, then, is Peter, who has replied for the rest of the Apostles; rather, before the rest of men. And so he is called the foundation, because he knows how to preserve not only his own but the common foundation...Faith, then, is the foundation of the Church, for it was not said of Peter’s flesh, but of his faith, that ‘the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.’ But his confession of faith conquered hell. And this confession did not shut out one heresy, for, since the Church like a good ship is often buffeted by many waves, the foundation of the Church should prevail against all heresies ( Ambrose, Theological and Dogmatic Works, The Sacrament of the Incarnation of Our Lord IV.32-V.34, pp. 230-231).


from http://www.christiantruth.com/mt16.html

Also therese, keep in mind that the Council of Trent claimed that the modern Roman Catholic doctrine of the papacy was unanimous amoung the church fathers, anything short of that falls short of Rome's claim.​
 
Upvote 0

Hands&Feet

Active Member
Sep 27, 2003
360
62
70
USA
✟861.00
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
Thoughout history, b iblical and post biblical, God has always used the weak things of the world to shame the strong, the foolish to expose the folly of the wise (ie ancient Hebrews, Noah, Abraham, Gideon, David, Mary&Joseph and Jesus, to name a few), so He did with using Peter and the other disciples.

Peter was a fisherman. One can only imagine that he probably had a pretty strong mouth on him. He also would more than likely have had a penchant for drinking--something which is alluded to in the Gospels. He obviously had no clue what he was getting himself into when he began following Jesus. When Jesus was taken to prison, Peter denied even knowing Him. When He was crucified, he thought his dreams had come crashing down. Even after pentecost, he was quick to fall into false teachings, believing for a time that Christ's sacrifice was not sufficient for salvation, but that one must also be circumcized--an act which by its very sanction would deny the atonement of Christ. Peter was thickheaded. One might say he was almost a bully.

But Peter loved the Lord. His faith was based on that fact alone. Peter was wrong about many things regarding the Kingdom of God. He wasn't all that bright. God chose him--not because of his wisdom or his righteous attributes--but in spite of his lack of them, in spite of his propensity for never seeming to "get it right."

That is the scandal of Peter being the 'Rock" upon which Christ would build His church. Like so many Peters, we still don't "get it." We still have Peter's "let's-crush-the-oppressors-and-start-our-own-kingdom" mentality.

I have no problem with believing that the Pope follows the succession of Peter, as long as we are not trying to attribute those who hold that office as greater than the "Rock" himself, who was really nothing more than a "good old boy," a roughneck who was big on faith and short on religion and understanding. Because that is precisely WHY Jesus made him the Rock. If Jesus could accept Peter, He would accept all who stumbled into His Kingdom. There in lies the scandal of the Christ--the reason why Jesus was such an affront to those who upheld knowledge and position--and the reason why men continue to mask His radical message with the veils of religiosity.
 
Upvote 0

PaladinValer

Traditional Orthodox Anglican
Apr 7, 2004
23,587
1,245
44
Myrtle Beach, SC
✟30,305.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Bizzlebin Imperatoris said:
Thanks! So when were the third and fourth councils?

The Third Ecumenical Council was held in Ephesus, in 431 ce.
The Fourth Ecumenical Council was held in Chalcedon, in 451 ce.

thereselittleflower said:
That would suggest that the First Church no longer exists so neither do its teaching, doctrines and dogmas . .

On the contrary, it does still exist! And even though the Church is no longer One, the doctrines it held as orthodox are still quite binding. And it is those Churches who still hold them are of that First Church; the Early Church.

 
Upvote 0

thereselittleflower

Well-Known Member
Nov 9, 2003
34,832
1,526
✟65,355.00
Faith
Catholic
Bulldog said:
Good day, therese,

I will try to deal with many of these, some a little later, but for now....



Tertullian did believe Peter to be the rock, but not in the sense that the church was built on Peter but rather through him in the sense that is preaches the gospel.
Well, we have agreement that Tertullian calls Peter "the Rock" Jesus referred to when Jesus said " on this rock I will build my Church .. "

You asked for ONE Early Church Father that said " that the rock is Peter"

I gave you not just one, but many . . . so, are we agreed that there is at least one who says "that the rock is Peter" ??, in fact, many?

I am going to to more indepth into these as I can . .so I am taking the first for now to examine if it really supports your contention . .if Tertullian has really said here what you say he has . . .

He tells us furthur what he means here:


If, because the Lord has said to Peter, ‘Upon this rock I will build My Church,’ ‘to thee have I given the keys of the heavenly kingdom;’ or, ‘Whatsoever thou shalt have bound or loosed in earth, shall be bound or loosed in the heavens,’ you therefore presume that the power of binding and loosing has derived to you, that is, to every Church akin to Peter, what sort of man are you, subverting and wholly changing the manifest intention of the Lord, conferring (as that intention did) this (gift) personally upon Peter? ‘On thee,’ He says, ‘will I build My church;’ and, ‘I will give thee the keys’...and, ‘Whatsoever thou shalt have loosed or bound’... In (Peter) himself the Church was reared; that is, through (Peter) himself; (Peter) himself essayed the key; you see what key: ‘Men of Israel, let what I say sink into your ears: Jesus the Nazarene, a man destined by God for you,’ and so forth. (Peter) himself, therefore, was the first to unbar, in Christ’s baptism, the entrance to the heavenly kingdom, in which kingdom are ‘loosed’ the sins that were beforetime ‘bound;’ and those which have not been ‘loosed’ are ‘bound,’ in accordance with true salvation...(Volume VI)
Who was he speaking to here? And in what context? And what about the parts that are missing from your quote above?

It is an argument of semmantics and taking things out of context to try to make Tertullian say something different simply because in one spot he says "on" and in another place says "through", and even ignore that he said "IN".





Let's look again:
If, because the Lord has said to Peter, "Upon this rock will I build My Church", "to thee have I given the keys of the heavenly kingdom; " or, "Whatsoever thou shall have bound or loosed in earth, shall be bound or loosed in the heavens," you therefore presume that the power of binding and loosing has derived to you, that is, to every Church akin to Peter, what sort of man are you, subverting and wholly changing the manifest intention of the Lord, conferring (as that intention did) this (gift) personally upon Peter? "On thee," He says, "will I build My Church;" and, "I will give to thee the keys," not to the Church; and, "Whatsoever thou shall have loosed or bound," not what they shall have loosed or bound. For so withal the result teaches.




The parts your quote left out above are in red . . . he is clearly making the distinction that not only on Peter is the Church built, but what was given was given to Peter was given ONLY to Peter, ie the Keys, and NOT to the Church as a whole, and the power and authority to bind and loose to him alone there, not to a plural "they" . .


Then we get into what you contend is an explanation of what Tertullian meant . . but when we look at it in the full context of what he wrote, nothin omitted, we see that is not what he is doing.

Above, Tertullian clearly speaks of Peter being the Rock Christ builds His Church ON . .

But now, he is moving from speaking of Peter as the rock on which the Church is to be built, and of Peter to whom the Keys of the Kingdom were given, to continue in regards to Peter's authority and power to bind and loose




Look again at what was left out of your quote . . I believe it greatly affects the understanding of what Tertullian was sayin here . . again, I will highlight what was left out in red - the last part that starts with "and Ananias he "bound" was entirely left out of your quote to the end of mine, so I highlithed the beginning of that section in red :



For so withal the result teaches. In (Peter) himself the Church was reared; that is, through (Peter) himself; (Peter) himself essayed the key; you see what (key): "Men of Israel, let what I say sink into your ears: Jesus the Nazarene, a man destined by God for you," and so forth.sc10 (Peter) himself, therefore, was the first to unbar, in Christ's baptism, the entrance to the heavenly kingdom, in which (kingdom) are "loosed" the sins that were beforetime "bound;" and those which have not been "loosed" are "bound," in accordance with true salvation; and Ananias he "bound" with the bond of death, and the weak in his feet he "absolved" from his defect of health. Moreover, in that dispute about the observance or non-observance of the Law, Peter was the first of all to be endued with the Spirit, and, after making preface touching the calling of the nations, to say, "And now why are ye tempting the Lord, concerning the imposition upon the brethren of a yoke which neither we nor our fathers were able to support? But however, through the grace of Jesus we believe that we shall be saved in the same way as they."sc11 This sentence both "loosed" those parts of the law which were abandoned, and "bound" those which were reserved. Hence the power of loosing and of binding committed to Peter had nothing to do with the capital sins of believers


We can say that the Church is built ON Christ, IN Christ, and THROUGH Christ, yet one phrase does not limit the other . . Tertullian also says all three about Peter . .. and one phrase does not limit the others.



When he speaks of the Church being reared IN Peter, THROUGH Peter, he is no longer spekaing of Peter being the Rock the Church is built ON.

Instead he is now speaking specifically in the context of binding and loosing, and explains himself above. He makes this clear when he connects it all with the word "Hence" when he goes on to say that the binding and loosing spoken here of by Jesus does not have to do with the capital sins of believers . . (we see that given later).

By leaving out some key words in the quote, you can change the meaning to make it appear to prove your claim . . you probably got that quote just like you put it in your post from someone else who had done that . . but it is important to read it in its full context.

It's full context does not support your claim that he did not mean Peter was the Rock in the same sense that the Church was built on Peter.


It fully supports the Catholic understanding that Peter is the Rock that Jesus would build His Church on.


Peace to all!
 
Upvote 0

thereselittleflower

Well-Known Member
Nov 9, 2003
34,832
1,526
✟65,355.00
Faith
Catholic
Bulldog said:
Good day, therese,

I will try to deal with many of these, some a little later, but for now....



Origen did believe Peter to be the rock, but he also believed anyone with Peter's faith to receive the keys and become the rock.


And if we too have said like Peter, ‘Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God,’ not as if flesh and blood had revealed it unto us, but by the light from the Father in heaven having shone in our heart, we become a Peter, and to us there might be said by the Word, ‘Thou art Peter,’ etc. For a rock is every disciple of Christ of whom those drank who drank of the spiritual rock which followed them, and upon every such rock is built every word of the Church, and the polity in accordance with it; for in each of the perfect, who have the combination of words and deeds and thoughts which fill up the blessedness, is the church built by God.
But if you suppose that upon the one Peter only the whole church is built by God, what would you say about John the son of thunder or each one of the Apostles? Shall we otherwise dare to say, that against Peter in particular the gates of Hades shall not prevail, but that they shall prevail against the other Apostles and the perfect? Does not the saying previously made, ‘The gates of Hades shall not prevail against it,’ hold in regard to all and in the case of each of them? And also the saying, ‘Upon this rock I will build My Church?’ Are the keys of the kingdom of heaven given by the Lord to Peter only, and will no other of the blessed receive them? But if this promise, ‘I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven,’ be common to others, how shall not all things previously spoken of, and the things which are subjoined as having been addressed to Peter, be common to them?
‘Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.’ If any one says this to Him...he will obtain the things that were spoken according to the letter of the Gospel to that Peter, but, as the spirit of the Gospel teaches to every one who becomes such as that Peter was. For all bear the surname ‘rock’ who are the imitators of Christ, that is, of the spiritual rock which followed those who are being saved, that they may drink from it the spiritual draught. But these bear the surname of rock just as Christ does. But also as members of Christ deriving their surname from Him they are called Christians, and from the rock, Peters...And to all such the saying of the Savior might be spoken, ‘Thou art Peter’ etc., down to the words, ‘prevail against it.’ But what is the it? Is it the rock upon which Christ builds the Church, or is it the Church? For the phrase is ambiguous. Or is it as if the rock and the Church were one and the same? This I think to be true; for neither against the rock on which Christ builds His Church, nor against the Church will the gates of Hades prevail. Now, if the gates of Hades prevail against any one, such an one cannot be a rock upon which the Christ builds the Church, nor the Church built by Jesus upon the rock (Origen, Commentary on Matthew, Chapters 10-11).
Hi Bulldog

I have actually read quite a bit of Origen in the past. One thing that needs to be kept in mind when quoting Origen is that he the most prolific writer of his time, perhaps ever, and much did not survive down to our day . . he wrote about everything, what was doctrine, teaching, and what was conjecture . .

In the quote above he is presenting a personal opinion he held at that time, no so much about what the Rock is, but about whether or not Jesus was saying, the Gates of hell would not prevail against the Church or the Rock .. or whether or not they are one and the same . . and he says, "This I think to be true; " . . notice, "I THINK" not I teach, I know, we know, etc . .

Individual Church Fathers are like you and me and are free to speculate on things . .and this is what he was doing here . .

Later, his name got dragged through the mud because some unlearned men took his writing, in which there is much speculation written in the same manner as presented above, which went on and on as though it was what he truly believed, yet only to come to the point of denying the validity of what he had written for pages beforehand . . such as his speculations on repeating eons, which is part of what this group took as his teaching, rather than his speculations, and made doctrine from it . and became heretical . .He has ever more been associated with form of universalism and many branded him a heretic, not understanding what he really wrote on the matter . .

One has to be careful using Orgen, espcially if they are not aware how freely he wrote about his speculations and how much they sound like he believed them.

What I do not see in that quote above is anything that takes away from Peter any primacy . .. and I would have to disagree with what he wrote, which makes me think it is more in the line of speculation, since if the Rock and the Church are one and the same, then Jesus would have been saying, "upon this Church I will build my Church" or "upon this Rock I will build my Rock" . . it just doesn't make sense.

What is important to know is that Origen's Commentary on Mattew which you quoted from above was written, from what I can gather, towards the end of the 2nd Century, fairly early in his career . Since there is an element of speculation in his words, it is good to see what he wrote later.



Here is what Origen says in other works later in the 3rd Century:
A.D. 226 – 232 "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, qtd in Jurgens 479a]

Above it appears that he has resolved his earlier speculation as to whether or not it was the Church, the Rock or both Jesus was saying the Gates of Hell would not prevail against in favor of it being the Church.

A.D. 244 – (Speaking about Peter) "Look at 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!’ (Matt. 14:31)" [Homilies on Exodus, qtd in Jurgens 489]
Again, if he still held to the idea that all disciples are "rocks" (and I can see some room for him to do so), here he clearly sets Peter above them all calling him the "great foundation" of the Church, the "most solid of rocks" giving him clearly pre-eminence.


The quote you gave above does not help your position or substantiate your claim if simply for no other reason than how much he wrote about everything, even that which he was uncertain of or speculated freely on.


Peace to all!



 
Upvote 0

Bulldog

Don't Tread on Me
Jan 19, 2004
7,125
176
22 Acacia Avenue
✟8,212.00
Faith
Protestant
Politics
US-Libertarian
thereselittleflower said:
Well, we have agreement that Tertullian calls Peter "the Rock" Jesus referred to when Jesus said " on this rock I will build my Church .. "

You asked for ONE Early Church Father that said " that the rock is Peter"

I gave you not just one, but many . . . so, are we agreed that there is at least one who says "that the rock is Peter" ??, in fact, many?

I am going to to more indepth into these as I can . .so I am taking the first for now to examine if it really supports your contention . .if Tertullian has really said here what you say he has . . .


Who was he speaking to here? And in what context? And what about the parts that are missing from your quote above?

It is an argument of semmantics and taking things out of context to try to make Tertullian say something different simply because in one spot he says "on" and in another place says "through", and even ignore that he said "IN".





Let's look again:
If, because the Lord has said to Peter, "Upon this rock will I build My Church", "to thee have I given the keys of the heavenly kingdom; " or, "Whatsoever thou shall have bound or loosed in earth, shall be bound or loosed in the heavens," you therefore presume that the power of binding and loosing has derived to you, that is, to every Church akin to Peter, what sort of man are you, subverting and wholly changing the manifest intention of the Lord, conferring (as that intention did) this (gift) personally upon Peter? "On thee," He says, "will I build My Church;" and, "I will give to thee the keys," not to the Church; and, "Whatsoever thou shall have loosed or bound," not what they shall have loosed or bound. For so withal the result teaches.




The parts your quote left out above are in red . . . he is clearly making the distinction that not only on Peter is the Church built, but what was given was given to Peter was given ONLY to Peter, ie the Keys, and NOT to the Church as a whole, and the power and authority to bind and loose to him alone there, not to a plural "they" . .


Then we get into what you contend is an explanation of what Tertullian meant . . but when we look at it in the full context of what he wrote, nothin omitted, we see that is not what he is doing.

Above, Tertullian clearly speaks of Peter being the Rock Christ builds His Church ON . .

But now, he is moving from speaking of Peter as the rock on which the Church is to be built, and of Peter to whom the Keys of the Kingdom were given, to continue in regards to Peter's authority and power to bind and loose




Look again at what was left out of your quote . . I believe it greatly affects the understanding of what Tertullian was sayin here . . again, I will highlight what was left out in red - the last part that starts with "and Ananias he "bound" was entirely left out of your quote to the end of mine, so I highlithed the beginning of that section in red :



For so withal the result teaches. In (Peter) himself the Church was reared; that is, through (Peter) himself; (Peter) himself essayed the key; you see what (key): "Men of Israel, let what I say sink into your ears: Jesus the Nazarene, a man destined by God for you," and so forth.sc10 (Peter) himself, therefore, was the first to unbar, in Christ's baptism, the entrance to the heavenly kingdom, in which (kingdom) are "loosed" the sins that were beforetime "bound;" and those which have not been "loosed" are "bound," in accordance with true salvation; and Ananias he "bound" with the bond of death, and the weak in his feet he "absolved" from his defect of health. Moreover, in that dispute about the observance or non-observance of the Law, Peter was the first of all to be endued with the Spirit, and, after making preface touching the calling of the nations, to say, "And now why are ye tempting the Lord, concerning the imposition upon the brethren of a yoke which neither we nor our fathers were able to support? But however, through the grace of Jesus we believe that we shall be saved in the same way as they."sc11 This sentence both "loosed" those parts of the law which were abandoned, and "bound" those which were reserved. Hence the power of loosing and of binding committed to Peter had nothing to do with the capital sins of believers


We can say that the Church is built ON Christ, IN Christ, and THROUGH Christ, yet one phrase does not limit the other . . Tertullian also says all three about Peter . .. and one phrase does not limit the others.



When he speaks of the Church being reared IN Peter, THROUGH Peter, he is no longer spekaing of Peter being the Rock the Church is built ON.

Instead he is now speaking specifically in the context of binding and loosing, and explains himself above. He makes this clear when he connects it all with the word "Hence" when he goes on to say that the binding and loosing spoken here of by Jesus does not have to do with the capital sins of believers . . (we see that given later).

By leaving out some key words in the quote, you can change the meaning to make it appear to prove your claim . . you probably got that quote just like you put it in your post from someone else who had done that . . but it is important to read it in its full context.

It's full context does not support your claim that he did not mean Peter was the Rock in the same sense that the Church was built on Peter.


It fully supports the Catholic understanding that Peter is the Rock that Jesus would build His Church on.


Peace to all!

Thank you for pointing this out to me, and I agree.

But Tertullian did not believe the Bishop of Rome to be the succesor to Peter. In fact, Tertullian insulted the Bishop of Rome, even calling him Pontifous Maximus, which at the time, was the cheif pagan preist.
 
Upvote 0

Bulldog

Don't Tread on Me
Jan 19, 2004
7,125
176
22 Acacia Avenue
✟8,212.00
Faith
Protestant
Politics
US-Libertarian
Again, if he still held to the idea that all disciples are "rocks" (and I can see some room for him to do so), here he clearly sets Peter above them all calling him the "great foundation" of the Church, the "most solid of rocks" giving him clearly pre-eminence.

And I absolutly agree, whoever I do not believe Origen believed the kesy alone were given to Peter alone. He also identifies Paul as the founder of the church:

"I do not know how Celsus should have forgotten or not have thought of saying something about Paul, the founder, after Jesus, of the Churches that are in Christ." (Against Celsus, 1:63)

EDIT: I thought that Origen's commentarias on Matthew were written in 247, no?
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.