From Where do the RCC and the EOC get the Authority they claim for themselves?

[LittleLambofJesus]

Not in the sense that you are suggesting though. Christ is the one shepherd.

1Peter 5:4 And of being made manifest the Chief-Shepherd/arci-poimenoV <750>, ye shall be being requitted the unfading crown of the glory

Reve 19:15 And out of the mouth of Him is going forth a sword keen, that in her He should be smiting/pataxh <3960> (5661) the nations
and He shall be shepherding/poimanei <4165> (5692) them in rod iron. And He is treading the winepress of the wine of the fury of the wrath of the God the Almighty

 

[chestertonrules]

True, the seat is located in every region where the bishop sits.
which all the apostles, and subsequently all bishops have.
Proclaimed by the Apostles and defended by the Ecumenical Councils. Thus all Christians are to abide by the faith which was handed down by the Apostles through their successors the bishops.
Not in the sense that you are suggesting though. Christ is the one shepherd.
I am not a humble man, still I would not presume to append such a claim to one of my posts.

John

I'll cite some passages and you tell me if they support my position as to what Jesus understood and instructed.

1) I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven;

2) that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you.

3) They too will listen to my voice, and there shall be one flock and one shepherd.

4) To Peter, holder of the Keys:

Jesus said, "Feed my lambs."
Jesus said, "Take care of my sheep."
Jesus said, "Feed my sheep.

 

[Rick Otto]

1. keys = spiritual knowlege (the gospel)
2. spiritual unity, not beaurocratic conformity
3. Any adjective which modifies "Christian" to "officialy" describe Christians should be studiously avoided. One shepard, no "official" stand-ins, representatives, etc.
4. You leave out important parts that provide insight:


14: This is now the third time that Jesus shewed himself to his disciples, after that he was risen from the dead.
15: So when they had dined, Jesus saith to Simon Peter, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me more than these? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my lambs.
16: He saith to him again the second time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my sheep.
17: He saith unto him the third time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved because he said unto him the third time, Lovest thou me? And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love thee. Jesus saith unto him, Feed my sheep.
18: Verily, verily, I say unto thee, When thou wast young, thou girdedst thyself, and walkedst whither thou wouldest: but when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall gird thee, and carry thee whither thou wouldest not.
19: This spake he, signifying by what death he should glorify God. And when he had spoken this, he saith unto him, Follow me.
20: Then Peter, turning about, seeth the disciple whom Jesus loved following; which also leaned on his breast at supper, and said, Lord, which is he that betrayeth thee?
21: Peter seeing him saith to Jesus, Lord, and what shall this man do?
22: Jesus saith unto him, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? follow thou me.

Jesus told him NOT to worry about what the others do - exactly the opposite of a pope.
"Feed", not fleece, not "lord over", not "interpret".

The importance of three times references Peters 3x denial of Jesus as well as the 3 directions his ministry was to take - Jews, Isrealites (10 tribes), & Gentiles.

 

[prodromos]

I'll cite some passages and you tell me if they support my position as to what Jesus understood and instructed.

I'll get back to you after the weekend, as I will not have Internet access until then.

John

 

[prodromos]

Just quickly now, before I head off.

4) To Peter, holder of the Keys:

Jesus said, "Feed my lambs."
Jesus said, "Take care of my sheep."
Jesus said, "Feed my sheep.

Jesus said this, not to Peter, but to Simon. Perhaps you should consider the implications of why Christ did not address him as Peter at this time.

Before Christ was arrested Peter had stated that even if all the other disciples abandoned Him, he would never do so. In effect he was claiming to love Jesus more than the others. So what was the question Christ asked him?

Simon, son of Jonah, do you love me more than these [the other disciples]​

Simon has had his pride broken by now, after all it was John who did not abandon Christ and not he. It was John who was standing at the foot of the cross and not he. Not only had he abandoned Christ, but worse than the disciples abandoning Him, he has also denied Christ not once, but three times. Remember what Christ had told them earlier? "He who denies me, I will deny before my Father."

Why do you think he was grieved when Christ asked him a third time, "Do you love me?"

See you in a few days.
In Christ,
John

 

[chestertonrules]

1. keys = spiritual knowlege (the gospel)
2. spiritual unity, not beaurocratic conformity
3. Any adjective which modifies "Christian" to "officialy" describe Christians should be studiously avoided. One shepard, no "official" stand-ins, representatives, etc.
4. You leave out important parts that provide insight:


14: This is now the third time that Jesus shewed himself to his disciples, after that he was risen from the dead.
15: So when they had dined, Jesus saith to Simon Peter, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me more than these? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my lambs.
16: He saith to him again the second time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my sheep.
17: He saith unto him the third time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved because he said unto him the third time, Lovest thou me? And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love thee. Jesus saith unto him, Feed my sheep.
18: Verily, verily, I say unto thee, When thou wast young, thou girdedst thyself, and walkedst whither thou wouldest: but when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall gird thee, and carry thee whither thou wouldest not.
19: This spake he, signifying by what death he should glorify God. And when he had spoken this, he saith unto him, Follow me.
20: Then Peter, turning about, seeth the disciple whom Jesus loved following; which also leaned on his breast at supper, and said, Lord, which is he that betrayeth thee?
21: Peter seeing him saith to Jesus, Lord, and what shall this man do?
22: Jesus saith unto him, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? follow thou me.

Jesus told him NOT to worry about what the others do - exactly the opposite of a pope.
"Feed", not fleece, not "lord over", not "interpret".

The importance of three times references Peters 3x denial of Jesus as well as the 3 directions his ministry was to take - Jews, Isrealites (10 tribes), & Gentiles.

Nice try.

I don't think you even convinced yourself.

 

[chestertonrules]

Just quickly now, before I head off.
Jesus said this, not to Peter, but to Simon. Perhaps you should consider the implications of why Christ did not address him as Peter at this time.

Before Christ was arrested Peter had stated that even if all the other disciples abandoned Him, he would never do so. In effect he was claiming to love Jesus more than the others. So what was the question Christ asked him?

Simon, son of Jonah, do you love me more than these [the other disciples]
​

Simon has had his pride broken by now, after all it was John who did not abandon Christ and not he. It was John who was standing at the foot of the cross and not he. Not only had he abandoned Christ, but worse than the disciples abandoning Him, he has also denied Christ not once, but three times. Remember what Christ had told them earlier? "He who denies me, I will deny before my Father."

Why do you think he was grieved when Christ asked him a third time, "Do you love me?"

See you in a few days.
In Christ,
John

I believe Peter felt shame and unworthiness before the grace of God.

I'm more concerned about what Jesus said than Peter, however.

 

[MamaZ]

Nice try.

I don't think you even convinced yourself.

One must understand the Spiritual things. But for a natural man it is foolishness.

 

[Uphill Battle]

divisions DO exist. you call them "rites." (even if you DON'T count the Sedevacanists.)




what I find really amusing about what I've been reading over the last few pages, is the "singular authority" is being preached by an adherent to an organization that claims validation of it's dogma according to councicular means.

unadressed. How shocking!

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

keys = The Sacraments.

Forgive me...

 

[racer]

It doesn't matter where the seat is located, it matters that it represents the authority given to Peter and that all Christians abide by the truth proclaimed.

One flock with one shepherd. That is the only way to unity.

Jesus understood this.

How do you know what Jesus understood?

 

[racer]

How can there be unity without foundational rock?

Well, I believe the assertion here that there must be a foundational "rock" for unity is debatable, we do know that the Church has one--Jesus.

What if two bishops disagree? What if three disagree?

Well, whoever ends up out numbered is usually anathematized and deemed heretical by the RCC.

Cyprian understands. This is why he never left the Church even though he disagreed with a ruling of Pope Stephen.

How do you know what Cyprian understands? I'm amazed at how you continually speak for men who are a long time dead!

And, if he believed Pope Stephen to be wrong, then he couldn't possibly have held to the notion of Papal Infallibility.

 

[racer]

That is not unity.

Why not? Are you actually asserting that the EOC is not united in their teachings and beliefs?

It could make for a bigger and more inclusive Church, but divisions would persist.

Divisions persist even now. Do you remember the later "schism" in the Catholic church when the "Old Catholics" strongly objected to the declaration of the dogma of Papal Infallibility?

 

[racer]

I'll cite some passages and you tell me if they support my position as to what Jesus understood and instructed.

1) I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven;

2) that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you.

3) They too will listen to my voice, and there shall be one flock and one shepherd.

4) To Peter, holder of the Keys:

Jesus said, "Feed my lambs."
Jesus said, "Take care of my sheep."
Jesus said, "Feed my sheep.

Which still implies nothing about any type of Papal authority or infallibility.

 

[racer]

http://www.ntrmin.org/catholic_but_not_roman_catholic_01.htm

"Come now, you who would indulge a better curiosity, if you would apply it to the business of your salvation, run over the apostolic churches, in which the very thrones of the apostles are still pre-eminent in their places, in which their own authentic writings are read, uttering the voice and representing the face of each of them severally. Achaia is very near you, in which you find Corinth. Since you are not far from Macedonia, you have Philippi; and there too you have the Thessalonians. Since you are able to cross to Asia, you get Ephesus. Since, moreover, you are close upon Italy, you have Rome, from which there comes even into our own hands the very authority of apostles themselves. How happy is its church, on which apostles poured forth all their doctrine along with their blood! where Peter endures a passion like his Lord's! where Paul wins his crown in a death like John's where the Apostle John was first plunged, unhurt, into boiling oil, and thence remitted to his island-exile! See what she has learned, what taught, what fellowship has had with even our churches in Africa! One Lord God does she acknowledge, the Creator of the universe, and Christ Jesus born of the Virgin Mary, the Son of God the Creator; and the Resurrection of the flesh; the law and the prophets she unites in one volume with the writings of evangelists and apostles, from which she drinks in her faith. This she seals with the water of baptism, arrays with the Holy Ghost, feeds with the Eucharist, cheers with martyrdom, and against such a discipline thus maintained she admits no gainsayer. This is the discipline which I no longer say foretold that heresies should come, but from which they proceeded. However, they were not of her, because they were opposed to her. Even the rough wild-olive arises from the germ of the fruitful, rich, and genuine olive; also from the seed of the mellowest and sweetest fig there springs the empty and useless wild-fig. In the same way heresies, too, come from our plant, although not of our kind; they come from the grain of truth, but, owing to their falsehood, they have only wild leaves to show." (Tertullian, The Prescription Against Heretics, 36)

"Remember in your prayers the Church in Syria, which now has God for its shepherd, instead of me. Jesus Christ alone will oversee it, and your love will also regard it." (Ignatius, Epistle to the Romans, shorter version, 9)

"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, add 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 that 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 the others, how shall not all the things previously spoken of, and the things which are subjoined as having been addressed to Peter, be common to them? For in this place these words seem to be addressed as to Peter only, 'Whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven,' etc; but in the Gospel of John the Saviour having given the Holy Spirit unto the disciples by breathing upon them said, 'Receive ye the Holy Spirit,' etc....And if any one says this to Him, not by flesh and blood revealing it unto Him but through the Father in heaven, 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." (Origen, Commentary on Matthew, 12:10-11)

"James was invested with the chief rule [in Acts 15], and think it no hardship. So clean was their soul from love of glory. 'And after that they had held their peace, James answered,' etc. (v. 13.) Peter indeed spoke more strongly, but James here more mildly: for thus it behooves one in high authority, to leave what is unpleasant for others to say, while he himself appears in the milder part." (Chrysostom, Homilies on the Acts of the Apostles, 33)

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Which still implies nothing about any type of Papal authority or infallibility.

http://www.catholicradiodramas.com/HomepgImages/Articles/protestant_vs__catholic.htm

In his book The Great Heresies, Hilaire Belloc includes Protestantism as one of five great heresies appearing in the history of the Christian religion. Heresy can be described as the denial of one or more essential doctrines which weakens and dislocates the integrity of the whole.

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

QFT ~

"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, add 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 that 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 the others, how shall not all the things previously spoken of, and the things which are subjoined as having been addressed to Peter, be common to them? For in this place these words seem to be addressed as to Peter only, 'Whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven,' etc; but in the Gospel of John the Saviour having given the Holy Spirit unto the disciples by breathing upon them said, 'Receive ye the Holy Spirit,' etc....And if any one says this to Him, not by flesh and blood revealing it unto Him but through the Father in heaven, 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." (Origen, Commentary on Matthew, 12:10-11)

Forgive me...

 

[chestertonrules]

QFT ~



Forgive me...

I'm not sure of the chronology of Origen's opinions, but we know that his views were not fixed.

"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)

He was very influential in the life of Chrysostom, who had this to say:

"Peter was to be entrusted with the keys of the church, or, rather, he was entrusted with the keys of heaven, and he was to be entrusted with the multitude of the people....That Peter the head of the apostles, the unshaken foundation, the unbroken rock, the first in the Church, the unconquerable port, the unshaken tower...he who was to be entrusted with the Church, the pillar of the Church, the port of the faith, Peter, the teacher of the whole world...Peter, that column, that bulwark."

As if St. Chrysostom was prescient of some future critic who would wish to explain that any of the apostles might be said to preside over the brethren, and that what is said to Peter as head of the choir is meant for all, he adds further on:

"If anyone should say 'Why then was it James who received the See of Jerusalem?' I should reply that He made Peter the teacher not of that See but of the world."


http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/num52.htm
​

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

"If anyone should say 'Why then was it James who received the See of Jerusalem?' I should reply that He made Peter the teacher not of that See but of the world."

Not in Texas

 

[racer]

I'm not sure of the chronology of Origen's opinions, but we know that his views were not fixed.

"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)

He was very influential in the life of Chrysostom, who had this to say:

"Peter was to be entrusted with the keys of the church, or, rather, he was entrusted with the keys of heaven, and he was to be entrusted with the multitude of the people....That Peter the head of the apostles, the unshaken foundation, the unbroken rock, the first in the Church, the unconquerable port, the unshaken tower...he who was to be entrusted with the Church, the pillar of the Church, the port of the faith, Peter, the teacher of the whole world...Peter, that column, that bulwark."

As if St. Chrysostom was prescient of some future critic who would wish to explain that any of the apostles might be said to preside over the brethren, and that what is said to Peter as head of the choir is meant for all, he adds further on:

"If anyone should say 'Why then was it James who received the See of Jerusalem?' I should reply that He made Peter the teacher not of that See but of the world."


http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/num52.htm
​

Chrysostom who said this:

"James was invested with the chief rule [in Acts 15], and think it no hardship. So clean was their soul from love of glory. 'And after that they had held their peace, James answered,' etc. (v. 13.) Peter indeed spoke more strongly, but James here more mildly: for thus it behooves one in high authority, to leave what is unpleasant for others to say, while he himself appears in the milder part." (Chrysostom, Homilies on the Acts of the Apostles, 33)