Papal apologetics

[Amandine]

This topic is of quite some interest to me, and I was wondering if you knew of any good resources (preferably online, I know some books already) that I could look at. I'm fairly "convinced" of the Roman patriach's authority (and since my anscestors would have been in his region by default, I think I'm obligated to submit to it ). I still have one question that I haven't been able to address.... although Peter has primacy, he established a few other lines of bishops and stuff (sorry, I'm not really up on how that whole thing worked), not just in Rome. So, what means the Roman pope has the power instead of the Antiochan patriach (or whomever it would be *apologies*)?
-Catherine

 

[BAChristian]

Hi cbrickell....i just bought pope fiction by patrick madrid...

 

[Amandine]

Yeah, thereselittleflower has reccommended it to me several times. I haven't found it at my local bookstores though. So.. I'm waiting for my amazon.com gift certificate to come so I can get it of the web
In the meantime...I'd like to know what I can!
-Catherine

 

[thereselittleflower]

Yeah, thereselittleflower has reccommended it to me several times. I haven't found it at my local bookstores though. So.. I'm waiting for my amazon.com gift certificate to come so I can get it of the web
In the meantime...I'd like to know what I can!
-Catherine

Hi cbrickell

LOL and I was going to suggest it again! . . .

Here is a link to an article in Envoy Magazine (also by Patrick Madrid in which 5 of the 'myths" regarding the Pope that are dealt with in Pope Fiction are dealt with here (in the book, there are 30 "myths" he deals with) . . you might find it interesting .. I think #2 in this article touches some upon what you want to know . .

http://www.envoymagazine.com/backissues/2.2/mar_apr98_coverstory.html



Peace in Him!

 

[thereselittleflower]

Yeah, thereselittleflower has reccommended it to me several times. I haven't found it at my local bookstores though. So.. I'm waiting for my amazon.com gift certificate to come so I can get it of the web
In the meantime...I'd like to know what I can!
-Catherine

You might also find this interesting . . Quotes from the Early Eastern Church Fathers:

http://www.kensmen.com/catholic/easternfathers.html


Peace in Him!

 

[Amandine]

Thanks! That Madrid article was already helpful...even #1 I think is insightful for my question.
-Catherine

 

[Dominus Fidelis]

This topic is of quite some interest to me, and I was wondering if you knew of any good resources (preferably online, I know some books already) that I could look at. I'm fairly "convinced" of the Roman patriach's authority (and since my anscestors would have been in his region by default, I think I'm obligated to submit to it ). I still have one question that I haven't been able to address.... although Peter has primacy, he established a few other lines of bishops and stuff (sorry, I'm not really up on how that whole thing worked), not just in Rome. So, what means the Roman pope has the power instead of the Antiochan patriach (or whomever it would be *apologies*)?
-Catherine

Go here and look under the "Defense" section, and then click on the Papacy link.

http://www.true-faith.info/index.asp

 

[Preachers12]

God give you Peace.

You may also like to look at Stephen Ray's, "Upon This Rock." It is not an easy read, but very thorough.

God Bless,
P12

 

[KennySe]

Here's some more readin' material.

http://www.catholic.com/library/church_papacy.asp

 

[RhetorTheo]

I'd be carefuly about posting anything from Pope Fiction as anything other than, ahem, fiction. Here is a google link with "response to pope fiction" - the first link it brings up has a devastating rebuttal against Mr. Madrid's credibility and honesty. (I won't post the link directly, get it yourself.)

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=response+to+pope+fiction

 

[MorphRC]

This topic is of quite some interest to me, and I was wondering if you knew of any good resources (preferably online, I know some books already) that I could look at. I'm fairly "convinced" of the Roman patriach's authority (and since my anscestors would have been in his region by default, I think I'm obligated to submit to it ). I still have one question that I haven't been able to address.... although Peter has primacy, he established a few other lines of bishops and stuff (sorry, I'm not really up on how that whole thing worked), not just in Rome. So, what means the Roman pope has the power instead of the Antiochan patriach (or whomever it would be *apologies*)?
-Catherine

Pax Christi Sister Catherine.

Check and this link - It has all the scriptural support the Papacy and Saint Peter:

The Church:
http://www.scripturecatholic.com/the_church.html

Primacy of Saint Peter:
http://www.scripturecatholic.com/primacy_of_peter.html

The Part about Saint Peter making other lines, I believe was parishes or "particular churches" that are in Communion with the Bishop of Rome. This was a way to spread and evangelize the World. I am not to uptodate on that, Im reading through the Catechism now, so If I come across anything Ill make a note for ya.

 

[RhetorTheo]

Using Google, I found an atheist/agnostic/skeptic site that claims that Peter as the pope is not historical. I am unable to find any non-Catholic site or source that agrees with the Church that, as a historical matter, the papacy begin with Peter and went succeeded to the current Pope. Can anyone direct me to a non-Catholic site or source that agrees with the Church on this historical question?

 

[Amandine]

Um..okay Roll Troll, I'm quite aware that Madrid is just your average apologist (I too wasn't really looking forward to relying on just that book a lot). However, there are other resources. I'm really not concerned about the Papal Tiara issue... any conclusions about the Pope as a symbol of the anti-christ seem far-fetched to me when they want nothing but more to come to Christ.
As I stated before, my main question is on the supremacy of the Roman line established by Peter...as compared to the other lines he established.
-Catherine

 

[Amandine]

Hehe..good point RoleTroll but you gotta think.. if they agreed with the papacy, wouldn't they feel bound to follow it? I think that is what continues to happen and those on the "outside" who start out defending the church end up becoming a part of it.
(edit: to add, I see lists in non-catholic reference books of the popes...beyond that where else could I find it?)
-Catherine

 

[MorphRC]

Using Google, I found an atheist/agnostic/skeptic site that claims that Peter as the pope is not historical. I am unable to find any non-Catholic site or source that agrees with the Church that, as a historical matter, the papacy begin with Peter and went succeeded to the current Pope. Can anyone direct me to a non-Catholic site or source that agrees with the Church on this historical question?

No Problem RoleTroll. Heres some quotes from Non-Catholic Sources.

ROMAN CATHOLICISM. The largest of the Christian denominations is the Roman Catholic church. As an institution it has existed since the 1st century AD...The name of the church is derived from its base in Rome and from a Greek term meaning "universal." The word Catholic refers to the wholeness of the church, and for many centuries the Roman church claimed to be the only true Christian denomination.
(Compton's Interactive Encyclopedia © 1996)

ROMAN CATHOLICISM: Christian church characterized by its uniform, highly developed doctoral and organizational structure that traces its history to the apostles of Jesus Christ in the 1st century C.E.
(Marriam-Webster's Encyclopedia of World Religions © 1999, page 938 )

The history of the Roman Church, therefore, in relation to the ancient oriental churches, is in fact, the history of this claim to supremacy. The claim of supremacy on the part of the bishop of Rome rests on the belief that Christ conferred on the apostle Peter a 'primacy of jurisdiction;' that Peter fixed his see and died at Rome and thus, that the bishops of Rome, as successors of the apostle Peter, have succeeded to his preorgatives of supremacy. In this light, historians read the facts of the early history of the church---and they trace to this acknoledgment of the superiority of that see, the numerous references to Rome on matters of doctrine or discipline; the appeals from other churhces, even those of Alexandria, Antioch, and Constantinople; the depositions or nominations of bishops, examination and condemnation of heresies---of which the first five centuries, especially the 4th and 5th, present examples. . . In all the controversies on the Incarnation---the Arian, the Nestorian, the Eutychian, the Monothelite---not only was the orthodoxy of Rome never impeached, but she even supplied at every crisis a rallying point for the orthodox of every church.
( Imperial Encyclopedia and Dictionary, Volume 32 © 1903)

The Church of Rome is the earliest of Christian organization; after three centuries of persecution, it was given freedom by the edict of Constantine and Licinius and acquired increased influence. Bishoprics were established in various parts of the empire, but the one at Rome remained supreme, and in time the title of Pope, or father originally borne by all the bishops indiscriminately, began to be restricted to the bishop of Rome.
(The World Book Encyclopedia © 1940, Page 6166, Volume 14,)

The office of Pope was founded on the words of Christ: "And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter [which means a rock], and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it" ( Matthew xvi, 18). The attention of every historian has been attracted by the endurance of the Papacy through centuries that have seen the downfall of every other European institution that existed when the Papacy arose, and of a number of others that have originated and fallen, while it continued t flourish. The Roman Catholic offers these facts as evidence that the Church is not merely a human institution, but that it is built "upon a rock,"
(The World Book Encyclopedia © 1940, Page 5730 Volume13)

Historical Notes. The Holy Catholic Apostolic Roman Church recognizes the Bishop of Rome, the Pope, as the Vicar of Christ on this earth, and as the Head of the Church. It traces its origin from the naming of the Apostles Peter by Jesus as the chief of the Apostles . The authority of Peter as head of the Church is exercised by his successors as the Bishops of Rome. The doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church come from the faith given by Christ to his Apostles.
( World Religions, By Benson Y. Landis, © 1957 Page 110)

At first the Christians were terribly persecuted, but gradually they spread the Christ’s radian spirit and teachings until they united many races, classes, and religious beliefs into a brotherhood which extended from Persia to the Atlantic Ocean. Later, this brotherhood spread to American, and Christianity became the prevailing religion of the Western Hemisphere. It has now ben taught in all countries.For nearly a thousand years the Christians remained practically one great community. Then the Greek Catholics broke away from the Roman Catholics.
(The World Book Encyclopedia ©1940, Page 1413 Volume 3)
(The Catholic) Church... traces an unbroken line of popes from St. Peter in the 1st century AD to the present occupant of the papal throne. During this nearly 2,000-year period there were more than 30 false popes, most notably during the late 14th and early 15th centuries. These men were merely claimants to the position. There have rarely been periods when a genuine pope was not ruling the church. In 1978 John Paul II became the 264th true pope.(Compton's Interactive Encyclopedia © 1996)

By A. D. 100,...Christianity had become an institution headed by a three-rank hierarchy of bishops, priests, and deacons, who understood themselves to be the guardians of the only "true faith." The majority of churches, among which the church of Rome took a leading role, rejected all other viewpoints as heresy. Deploring the diversity of the earlier movement, Bishop Irenaeus and his followers insisted that there could be only one church, and outside of that church, he declared, "there is no salvation." Members of this church alone are orthodox (literally, "straight-thinking") Christians. And, he claimed, this church must be catholic-- that is, universal.
(The Gnostic Gospels by Elaine Pagels. Published by Vintage Books. 1994)

There ya go.

 

[RhetorTheo]

I agree that the Pope as anti-christ is very far-fetched. As to the line of Peter and the papacy, I would like to see a credible source that agrees with the Church on this. A source that doesn't have a dog in the fight. The atheist's site I found is the first link in this Google search: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=myth+petrine+papacy

I would expect to hear the truth from those without bias for or against Catholicism, but this is just "some guy on the internet" and not a credible source like a university or such. I would love to know what the opinion of secular history is on this question.

 

[MorphRC]

RollTroll, you also got to think. Are non-catholics really if they had a chance to and had historical proof, that the Church was founded on Saint peter, would they admit it? Let alone put it in writing?

 

[Maximus]

You might want to read the book, The Divine Primacy of the Bishop of Rome and Modern Eastern Orthodoxy: Letters to a Greek Orthodox on the Unity of the Church, by James Likoudis.

It is a very powerful pro-Papacy argument and is available here.

 

[MorphRC]

I agree that the Pope as anti-christ is very far-fetched. As to the line of Peter and the papacy, I would like to see a credible source that agrees with the Church on this. A source that doesn't have a dog in the fight. The atheist's site I found is the first link in this Google search: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=myth+petrine+papacy

I would expect to hear the truth from those without bias for or against Catholicism, but this is just "some guy on the internet" and not a credible source like a university or such. I would love to know what the opinion of secular history is on this question.

The Church doesnt lie about its history. RoleTroll it sounds like you want proof, but youre asking for specifics that may not exist, therefore I conclude you dont want to really know, your just trying to put doubt in our minds. Thats my feelings, I use to do exactly the same thing you are doing to Muslims.

 

[Amandine]

Thank you Maximus!! That is a fascinating website. Too many misconceptions persist between the Catholic and Orthodox laity. Although I am considering joining the Catholic church under the Latin Rite, I was previously starting my Orthodox catechisis. I love my brothers and sisters of that faith (I will still attend youth group at OCF ) but I do see enough evidence that Peter had a primacy that most Orthodox ignore (another one of those throwing the baby out with the bathwater things hehe..) Of course, I'm still worried because I'm not sure if all the doctrines in the Catholic church are the most correct but I do feel at more at home here.
May God have mercy on me,
-Catherine