Peter Is Not The Rock!

[Trento]

Interesting.
I guess if were going to use guys'
interpretations might as well look at
all of them..
But it still makes more sense to me
to just look at the Scripture.
It's common sense that God wouldn't
build HIS church on any mere mortal,
no?


Cyril’s views are very similar to those of Chrysostom. He identifies the rock of the Church to be Peter’s confession of faith and not the person of Peter himself. He separates Peter’s faith from Peter’s person, just as Augustine, Chrysostom and Ambrose did. All of the apostles according to Cyril are Shepherds and foundations. It is their teaching on Christ which is foundational and points to Christ as the true rock and only foundation upon which the Church is built. He interprets the rock of Matthew 16 to be Christ as well as Peter’s confession of faith. This amounts to the same thing as Peter’s confession points to the person of Christ. Cyril’s views are completely antithetical to those of the Roman Catholic Church. He is no proponent of the teaching of papal primacy. Michael Winter summarizes Cyril’s views in the following statements:

In the first place, let us note St. Chrysostom's habit of showing his extraordinary reverence for St. Peter, by habitually adding to his name a whole list of titles, for instance:

"Peter, that head of the Apostles, the first in the Church, the friend of Christ, who received the revelation not from man but from the Father....this Peter, and when I say Peter, I mean the unbroken Rock, the unshaken foundation, the great apostle, the first of the disciples, the first called, the first to obey." (De Eleemos III, 4, vol II, 298[300])
"Peter the coryphaeus of the choir of apostles, the mouth of the disciples, the foundation of the faith, the base of the confession, the fisherman of the world, who brought back our race form the depth of error to heaven, he who is everywhere fervent and full of boldness, or rather of love than of boldness." (Hom de decem mille talentis, 3, vol III, 20[4])
"The first of the apostles, the foundation of the Church, the coryphaeus of the choir of the disciples." (Ad eos qui scandalizati sunt, 17, vol III, 517[504])
"The foundation of the Church, the vehement lover of Christ, at once unlearned in speech, and the vanquisher of orators, the man without education who closed the mouth of philosophers, who destroyed the philosophy of the Greeks as though it were a spider's web, he who ran throughout the world, he who cast his net into the sea, and fished the whole world." (In illud, Vidi dominum, 3, vol VI, 123[124])
"Peter, the base, the pillar...." (Hom Quod frequenta conueniendum sit, 5, vol XII, 466[328])
"This holy coryphaeus of the blessed choir, the lover of Christ, the ardent disciple, who was entrusted with the keys of heaven, he who received the spiritual revelation." (In Acta Apost VI, I [chap 2, verse 22] vol IX, 56[48])

"He said not to Peter, 'If thou lovest Me, do miracles,' but, 'Feed My sheep'; and everywhere giving him more honor than the rest, with James and John, wherefore, tell me, did he prefer him?" (Hom 46[47] in Matt 3, vol VII, 480[485])

"See the unanimity of the apostles," he says, on Acts 2:4: "they give up to Peter the office of preaching, for it would not do for all to preach." "Hear how this same John, who now comes forward (to ask for a seat at Christ's right hand) in the Acts of the Apostles, always gives up the first place to Peter both in preaching and in working miracles. Afterwards James and John were not thus. Everywhere they gave up the first place to Peter, and in preaching they set him first, though he seemed of rougher manners than the others."
He received his name for the unchangeableness and immobility of his faith; and when all were asked in common, he says, leaping forth before the others: 'Thou art the Christ,' etc, when he was entrusted with the keys of the kingdom of heaven." (chap 2 of Galat 4, vol X, 640[686]; also Hom 2 in Inscr Act 6, vol II, 86[70], and Hom 19[18] in Joann, vol VIII, 121[111-112]; also Palladius " Dial de vita Chrys, vol 1, 68).

God allowed him to fall, because He meant to make him ruler of the whole world [Greek], that, remembering his own fall, he might forgive those who should slip in the future. And what I have said is no guess, listen to Christ Himself saying, 'Simon, Simon, how often hath Satan desired to sift thee as wheat, but I have prayed for thee that thy strength fail not, and when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren'." (Hom quod frequenter conveniendum sit, 5, vol XII, 466
​

 

[Fireinfolding]

[SIZE=+1]AUGUSTINE[/SIZE]


Augustine is considered by many the most important theologian in the history of the Church for the first twelve hundred years. No other Church father has had such far reaching influence upon the theology of the Church. His authority throughout the patristic and middle ages is unsurpassed. He was the bishop of Hippo in North Africa from the end of the fourth century and on into the first quarter of the fifth, until his death in 430. William Jurgens makes these comments about his importance:

If we were faced with the unlikely proposition of having to destroy completely either the works of Augustine or the works of all the other Fathers and Writers, I have little doubt that all the others would have to be sacrificed. Augustine must remain. Of all the Fathers it is Augustine who is the most erudite, who has the most remarkable theological insights, and who is effectively most prolific [SIZE=-1](William Jurgens, The Faith of the Early Fathers (Collegeville: Liturgical, 1979), Vol. 3, p. 1).[/SIZE]​

He was a prolific writer and he has made numerous comments which relate directly to the issue of the interpretation of the rock of Matthew 16:18. In fact, Augustine made more comments upon this passage than any other Church father. At the end of his life, Augustine wrote his Retractations where he corrects statements in his earlier writings which he says were erroneous. One of these had to do with the interpretation of the rock in Matthew 16. At the beginning of his ministry Augustine had written that the rock was Peter. However, very early on he later changed his position and throughout the remainder of his ministry he adopted the view that the rock was not Peter but Christ or Peter’s confession which pointed to the person of Christ.

The following are statements from his Retractations which refer to his interpretation of the rock of Matthew 16:

In a passage in this book, I said about the Apostle Peter: ‘On him as on a rock the Church was built’...But I know that very frequently at a later time, I so explained what the Lord said: ‘Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church,’ that it be understood as built upon Him whom Peter confessed saying: ‘Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God,’ and so Peter, called after this rock, represented the person of the Church which is built upon this rock, and has received ‘the keys of the kingdom of heaven.’ For, ‘Thou art Peter’ and not ‘Thou art the rock’ was said to him. But ‘the rock was Christ,’ in confessing whom, as also the whole Church confesses, Simon was called Peter. But let the reader decide which of these two opinions is the more probable [SIZE=-1](The Fathers of the Church (Washington D.C., Catholic University, 1968), Saint Augustine, The Retractations Chapter 20.1).[/SIZE]​

Clearly Augustine is repudiating a previously held position, adopting the view that the rock was Christ and not Peter. This became his consistent position. He does leave the interpretation open for individual readers to decide which was the more probable interpretation but it is clear what he has concluded the interpretation should be and that he believes the view that the rock is Christ is the correct one. The fact that he would even suggest that individual readers could take a different position is evidence of the fact that after four hundred years of church history there was no official authoritative Church interpretation of this passage as Vatican One has stated. Can the reader imagine a bishop of the Roman Catholic Church today suggesting that it would be appropriate for individuals to use private interpretation and come to their own conclusion as to the proper meaning of the rock of Matthew 16? But that is precisely what Augustine does, although he leaves us in no doubt as to what he, as a leading bishop and theologian of the Church, personally believes. And his view was not a novel interpretation, come to at the end of his life, but his consistent teaching throughout his ministry. Nor was it an interpretation that ran counter to the prevailing opinion of his day. The following quotation is representative of the overall view espoused by this great teacher and theologian:

And I tell you...‘You are Peter, Rocky, and on this rock I shall build my Church, and the gates of the underworld will not conquer her. To you shall I give the keys of the kingdom. Whatever you bind on earth shall also be bound in heaven; whatever you loose on earth shall also be loosed in heaven’ (Mt 16:15-19). In Peter, Rocky, we see our attention drawn to the rock. Now the apostle Paul says about the former people, ‘They drank from the spiritual rock that was following them; but the rock was Christ’ (1 Cor 10:4). So this disciple is called Rocky from the rock, like Christian from Christ...Why have I wanted to make this little introduction? In order to suggest to you that in Peter the Church is to be recognized. Christ, you see, built his Church not on a man but on Peter’s confession. What is Peter’s confession? ‘You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.’ There’s the rock for you, there’s the foundation, there’s where the Church has been built, which the gates of the underworld cannot conquer [SIZE=-1](John Rotelle, Ed., The Works of Saint Augustine (New Rochelle: New City Press, 1993), Sermons, Vol. 6, Sermon 229P.1, p. 327).[/SIZE]​

Augustine could not be clearer in his interpretation of the rock of Matthew 16. In his view, Peter is representative of the whole Church. The rock is not the person of Peter but Christ himself. In fact, in the above statements, in exegeting Matthew 16, he explicitly says that Christ did not build his Church on a man, referring specifically to Peter. If Christ did not build his Church on a man then he did not establish a papal office with successors to Peter in the bishops of Rome. Again, if one examines the documentation from the writings of Augustine that are provided in Jesus, Peter and the Keys, this particular reference will not be found. Clearly, the authors neglected to provide such documentation because it completely undermines their position. The following extensive documentation reveals that Augustine taught that Peter was simply a figurative representative of the Church, not its ruler—a view reminiscent of Cyprian:

But whom say ye that I am? Peter answered, ‘Thou art the Christ, The Son of the living God.’ One for many gave the answer, Unity in many. Then said the Lord to him, ‘Blessed art thou, Simon Barjonas: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but My Father which is in heaven.’ Then He added, ‘and I say unto thee.’ As if He had said, ‘Because thou hast said unto Me, “Thou art the Christ the Son of the living God;” I also say unto thee, “Thou art Peter.” ’ For before he was called Simon. Now this name of Peter was given him by the Lord, and in a figure, that he should signify the Church. For seeing that Christ is the rock (Petra), Peter is the Christian people. For the rock (Petra) is the original name. Therefore Peter is so called from the rock; not the rock from Peter; as Christ is not called Christ from the Christian, but the Christian from Christ. ‘Therefore,’ he saith, ‘Thou art Peter; and upon this Rock’ which Thou hast confessed, upon this rock which Thou hast acknowledged, saying, ‘Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God, will I build My Church;’ that is upon Myself, the Son of the living God, ‘will I build My Church.’ I will build thee upon Myself, not Myself upon Thee.​

For men who wished to be built upon men, said, ‘I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas,’ who is Peter. But others who did not wish to built upon Peter, but upon the Rock, said, ‘But I am of Christ.’ And when the Apostle Paul ascertained that he was chosen, and Christ despised, he said, ‘Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?’ And, as not in the name of Paul, so neither in the name of Peter; but in the name of Christ: that Peter might be built upon the Rock, not the Rock upon Peter. This same Peter therefore who had been by the Rock pronounced ‘blessed,’ bearing the figure of the Church [SIZE=-1](Philip Schaff, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1956), Volume VI, St. Augustin, Sermon XXVI.1-4, pp. 340-341).[/SIZE]​

And this Church, symbolized in its generality, was personified in the Apostle Peter, on account of the primacy of his apostleship. For, as regards his proper personality, he was by nature one man, by grace one Christian, by still more abounding grace one, and yet also, the first apostle; but when it was said to him, ‘I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth, shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, shall be loosed in heaven,’ he represented the universal Church, which in this world is shaken by divers temptations, that come upon it like torrents of rain, floods and tempests, and falleth not, because it is founded upon a rock (petra), from which Peter received his name. For petra (rock) is not derived from Peter, but Peter from petra; just as Christ is not called so from the Christian, but the Christian from Christ. For on this very account the Lord said, ‘On this rock will I build my Church,’ because Peter had said, ‘Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.’ On this rock, therefore, He said, which thou hast confessed, I will build my Church. For the Rock (Petra) was Christ; and on this foundation was Peter himself built. For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Christ Jesus. The Church, therefore, which is founded in Christ received from Him the keys of the kingdom of heaven in the person of Peter, that is to say, the power of binding and loosing sins. For what the Church is essentially in Christ, such representatively is Peter in the rock (petra); and in this representation Christ is to be understood as the Rock, Peter as the Church [SIZE=-1](Philip Schaff, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1956), Volume VII, St. Augustin, On the Gospel of John, Tractate 124.5).[/SIZE]​

Before his passion the Lord Jesus, as you know, chose those disciples of his, whom he called apostles. Among these it was only Peter who almost everywhere was given the privilege of representing the whole Church. It was in the person of the whole Church, which he alone represented, that he was privileged to hear, ‘To you will I give the keys of the kingdom of heaven’ (Mt 16:19). After all, it isn’t just one man that received these keys, but the Church in its unity. So this is the reason for Peter’s acknowledged pre–eminence, that he stood for the Church’s universality and unity, when he was told, ‘To you I am entrusting,’ what has in fact been entrusted to all.​

I mean, to show you that it is the Church which has received the keys of the kingdom of heaven, listen to what the Lord says in another place to all his apostles: ‘Receive the Holy Spirit;’ and straightway, ‘Whose sins you forgive, they will be forgiven them; whose sins you retain, they will be retained’ (Jn 20:22-23). This refers to the keys, about which it is said, ‘whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven’ (Mt 16:19). But that was said to Peter. To show you that Peter at that time stood for the universal Church, listen to what is said to him, what is said to all the faithful, the saints: ‘If your brother sins against you, correct him between you and himself alone’ [SIZE=-1](John Rotelle, Ed., The Works of Saint Augustine (Hyde Park: New City, 1994), Sermons, III/8 (273-305A), On the Saints, Sermon 295.1-3, pp. 197-198).[/SIZE]​

According to Augustine the Apostles are equal in all respects. Each receives the authority of the keys, not Peter alone. But some object, doesn’t Augustine accord a primacy to the apostle Peter? Does he not call Peter the first of the apostles, holding the chief place in the Apostleship? Don’t such statements prove papal primacy? While it is true that Augustine has some very exalted things to say about Peter, as do many of the fathers, it does not follow that either he or they held to the Roman Catholic view of papal primacy. This is because their comments apply to Peter alone. They have absolutely nothing to do with the bishops of Rome. How do we know this? Because Augustine and the fathers do not make that application in their comments. They do not state that their descriptions of Peter apply to the bishops of Rome. The common mistake made by Roman Catholic apologists is the assumption that because some of the fathers make certain comments about Peter—for example, that he is chief of the apostles or head of the apostolic choir—that they also have in mind the bishop of Rome in an exclusive sense. But they do not state this in their writings. This is a preconceived theology that is read into their writings. Did they view the bishops of Rome as being successors of Peter? Yes. Did they view the bishops of Rome as being the exclusive successors of Peter? No. In the view of Augustine and the early fathers all the bishops of the Church in the East and West were the successors of Peter. They all possess the chair of Peter. So when they speak in exalted terms about Peter they do not apply those terms to the bishops of Rome. Therefore, when a father refers to Peter as the rock, the coryphaeus, the first of the disciples, or something similar, this does not mean that he is expressing agreement with the current Roman Catholic interpretation. This view is clearly validated from the following statements of Augustine:

This same Peter therefore who had been by the Rock pronounced ‘blessed,’ bearing the figure of the Church, holding the chief place in the Apostleship (Sermon 26).​

The blessed Peter, the first of the apostles (Sermon 295)​

Before his passion the Lord Jesus, as you know, chose those disciples of his, whom he called apostles. Among these it was only Peter who almost everywhere was given the privilege of representing the whole Church. It was in the person of the whole Church, which he alone represented, that he was privileged to hear, ‘To you will I give the keys of the kingdom of heaven’ (Mt 16:19). After all, it isn’t just one man that received these keys, but the Church in its unity. So this is the reason for Peter’s acknowledged preeminence, that he stood for the Church’s universality and unity, when he was told, ‘To you I am entrusting,’ what has in fact been entrusted to all (Sermon 295).​

Previously, of course, he was called Simon; this name of Peter was bestowed on him by the Lord, and that with the symbolic intention of his representing the Church. Because Christ, you see, is the petra or rock; Peter, or Rocky, is the Christian people (Sermon 76).​

So then, this self–same Peter, blessed by being surnamed Rocky from the rock, representing the person of the Church, holding chief place in the apostolic ranks (Sermon 76).​

For as some things are said which seem peculiarly to apply to the Apostle Peter, and yet are not clear in their meaning, unless when referred to the Church, whom he is acknowledged to have figuratively represented, on account of the primacy which he bore among the Disciples; as it is written, ‘I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven,’ and other passages of like purport: so Judas doth represent those Jews who were enemies of Christ (Exposition on the Book of Psalms, Psalm 119).​

You will remember that the apostle Peter, the first of all the apostles, was thrown completely of balance during the Lord’s passion (Sermon 147).​

Christ, you see, built his Church not on a man but on Peter’s confession. What is Peter’s confession? ‘You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.’ There’s the rock for you, there’s the foundation, there’s where the Church has been built, which the gates of the underworld cannot conquer. (Sermon 229).​

And this Church, symbolized in its generality, was personified in the Apostle Peter, on account of the primacy of his apostleship. For, as regards his proper personality, he was by nature one man, by grace one Christian, by still more abounding grace one, and yet also, the first apostle; but when it was said to him, I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth, shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, shall be loosed in heaven,’ he represented the universal Church, which in this world is shaken by divers temptations, that come upon it like torrents of rain, floods and tempests, and falleth not, because it is founded upon a rock (petra), from which Peter received his name. For petra (rock) is not derived from Peter, but Peter from petra; just as Christ is not called so from the Christian, but the Christian from Christ. For on this very account the Lord said, ‘On this rock will I build my Church,’ because Peter had said, ‘Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.’ On this rock, therefore, He said, which thou hast confessed, I will build my Church. For the Rock (Petra) was Christ; and on this foundation was Peter himself built. For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Christ Jesus. The Church, therefore, which is founded in Christ received from Him the keys of the kingdom of heaven in the person of Peter, that is to say, the power of binding and loosing sins. For what the Church is essentially in Christ, such representatively is Peter in the rock (petra); and in this representation Christ is to be understood as the Rock, Peter as the Church (Commentary on the Gospel of John, Tractate 124.5).​

Augustine states that Peter is the first and head of the apostles and that he holds a primacy. However he does not interpret that primacy in a Roman Catholic sense. He believes that Peter’s primacy is figurative in that he represents the universal Church. Again, he explicitly states that Christ did not build his Church upon a man but on Peter’s confession of faith. Peter is built on Christ the rock and as a figurative representative of the Church he shows how each believer is built on Christ. In Augustine’s view, Peter holds a primacy or preeminence, but none of this applies to him in a jurisdictional sense, because he says that ‘Christ did not build his Church upon a man.’ We can not get a clearer illustration that the fathers did indeed separate Peter’s confession of faith from Peter’s person. In commenting on one of Augustine’s references to Peter and the rock, John Rotelle, the editor of the Roman Catholic series on the Sermons of Augustine, makes these observations:

‘There was Peter, and he hadn’t yet been confirmed in the rock’: That is, in Christ, as participating in his ‘rockiness’ by faith. It does not mean confirmed as the rock, because Augustine never thinks of Peter as the rock. Jesus, after all, did not in fact call him the rock...but ‘Rocky.’ The rock on which he would build his Church was, for Augustine, both Christ himself and Peter’s faith, representing the faith of the Church (emphasis mine) [SIZE=-1](John Rotelle, Ed., The Works of Saint Augustine (New Rochelle: New City, 1993), Sermons, Sermon 265D.6, p. 258-259, n. 9)[/SIZE]​

Augustine does not endorse the Roman Catholic interpretation. Again and again he states that the rock is Christ, not Peter. Augustine claims no exclusive Petrine succession in the Roman bishops and no papal office. Karlfried Froehlich sums up Augustine’s views on Peter and the rock of Matthew 16 in these comments:

Augustine’s formulation (of Matthew 16:18-19), informed by a traditional North African concern for the unity of the church, that in Peter unus pro omnibus (one for all) had answered and received the reward, did not suggest more than a figurative reading of Peter as an image of the true church. In light of Peter’s subsequent fall and denial, the name itself was regularly declared to be derived from Christ, the true rock. Augustine, who followed Origen in this assumption, was fascinated by the dialectic of the ‘blessed’ Peter (Matt. 16:17) being addressed as ‘Satan’ a few verses later (v. 23). In Peter, weak in himself and strong only in his connection with Christ, the church could see the image of its own total dependence on God’s grace.​

Augustine rigorously separated the name-giving from its explanation: Christ did not say to Peter: ‘you are the rock,’ but ‘you are Peter.’ The church is not built upon Peter but upon the only true rock, Christ. Augustine and the medieval exegetes after him found the warrant for this interpretation in 1 Cor. 10:4. The allegorical key of this verse had already been applied to numerous biblical rock passages in the earlier African testimonia tradition. Matt. 16:18 was no exception. If the metaphor of the rock did not refer to a negative category of ‘hard’ rocks, it had to be read christologically [SIZE=-1](Karlfried Froehlich, Saint Peter, Papal Primacy, and Exegetical Tradition, 1150-1300, pp. 3, 8-14. Taken from The Religious Roles of the Papacy: Ideals and Realities, 1150-1300, ed. Christopher Ryan, Papers in Medieval Studies 8 (Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Medieval Studies, 1989).[/SIZE]​

Karl Morrison sums up Augustine’s views of ecclesiology in these words:

Peter was said to have received the power of the keys, not in his own right, but as the representative of the entire Church. Without contesting Rome’s primacy of honor, St. Augustine held that all the Apostles, and all their successors, the bishops, shared equally in the powers which Christ granted St. Peter [SIZE=-1](Karl Morrison, Tradition and Authority in the Western Church 300-1140 (Princeton: Princeton University, 1969), p. 162).[/SIZE]​

Reinhold Seeberg, the Protestant Church historian, makes these comments on Augustine’s interpretation of Peter pointing out that it reflects the view of Cyprian:

The idea of the Roman Primacy likewise receives no special elucidation at the hands of Augustine. We find a general acknowledgment of the ‘primacy of the apostolic chair,’ but Augustine knows nothing of any special authority vested in Peter or his successors. Peter is a ‘figure of the church’ or of ‘good pastors,’ and represents the unity of the church (serm. 295.2; 147.2). In this consists the significance of his position and that of his successors...As all bishops (in contradistinction from the Scriptures) may err (unit. eccl. II.28), so also the Roman bishop. This view is plainly manifest from the bearing of Augustine and his colleagues in the Pelagian controversy...Dogmatically, there had been no advance from the position of Cyprian. The Africans, in their relations with Rome, played somewhat the role of the Gallicanism of a later period [SIZE=-1](Reinhold Seeberg, Text-Book of the History of Doctrines (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1952), Volume I, p. 318-319).[/SIZE]​

W.H.C. Frend affirms the above consensus of Augustine’s ecclesiology and his interpretation of Peter’s commission:

Augustine...rejected the idea that ‘the power of the keys’ had been entrusted to Peter alone. His primacy was simply a matter of personal privilege and not an office. Similarly, he never reproached the Donatists for not being in communion with Rome, but with lack of communion with the apostolic Sees as a whole. His view of Church government was that less important questions should be settled by provincial councils, greater matters at general councils [SIZE=-1](W.H.C. Frend, The Early Church (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1965), p. 222).[/SIZE]​

Augustine is the greatest Church father and theologian of the patristic age writing after 400 years of Church history. The constitution of the Church should have been a firmly settled issue, especially since Vatican I claims that its papal teachings and interpretation of Matthew 16 upon which they rest have been the belief and teaching of the Church from the very beginning. Yet Augustine interprets Matthew 16 in a Protestant and Orthodox way, explicitly repudiating the Roman Catholic interpretation of Vatican I. How are we to explain this? Vatican I states the rock of Matthew 16 is the person of Peter and has been the unanimous opinion of the Church fathers. Then why did Augustine hold a contrary view to that which was supposedly the universal opinion of the Church of his day and in all preceding Church history? According to Rome, this passage holds the key to the constitution of the Church given by Christ himself which was fully recognized from the very beginning. If this was so, why would Augustine purposefully contradict the universal interpretation of so fundamental and important a passage? The answer, quite simply, is that the fathers did not interpret the rock of Matthew 16 the way Vatican I does. Augustine is merely a prominent representative of the opinion of the Church as a whole.
The authors of Jesus, Peter and the Keys suggest that Augustine invented a novel interpretation of the rock of Matthew 16 in stating that the rock is Christ. Specifically they state: ‘St. Augustine invented a new exegesis (of Matthew 16:18-19)—that the rock is Christ' [SIZE=-1](Scott Butler, Norman Dahlgren, David Hess, Jesus, Peter and the Keys (Santa Barbara: Queenship, 1996), p. 252). [/SIZE]This is a completely misinformed statement. As we have seen this interpretation was utilized by Eusebius in the fourth century, many years before Augustine.

Too much too underline in that one

Fireinfolding

 

[Fireinfolding]

Yall ought take a look at that link posted

Im not even half way through separating them and underlining the Church Fathers.

Fireinfolding

 

[Fireinfolding]

Its so much easier to quote the scripture then rummage through others stuff though lol

Fireinfolding

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

The authors of Jesus, Peter and the Keys suggest that Augustine invented a novel interpretation of the rock of Matthew 16 in stating that the rock is Christ. Specifically they state: ‘St. Augustine invented a new exegesis (of Matthew 16:18-19)—that the rock is Christ' [SIZE=-1](Scott Butler, Norman Dahlgren, David Hess, Jesus, Peter and the Keys (Santa Barbara: Queenship, 1996), p. 252). [/SIZE]This is a completely misinformed statement. As we have seen this interpretation was utilized by Eusebius in the fourth century, many years before Augustine.

Kind of like going from a candlelight to stadium lights

 

[Leah]

No, Peter is not, nor has he ever been, the rock. The rock is the confession and belief of who Jesus Christ is.

So in what sense does it make to belive that the rock is a person??

 

[Fireinfolding]

Kind of like going from a candlelight to stadium lights

The point is, we can quote the church Fathers as they are not beyond being taken out of context and twisted as the scriptures are.

Not only so but they have retractions as well and often the words of God and others get corrupted because of the GAIN they can GET pulling it away from (or turning from) Christ (as HE still remains the ONE we can reject, disallow or turn away from).

I measure the things I hear along those lines.

It either has you seeing HIM or has you looking to men (not in truth).

Peace

Fireinfolding

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

The point is, we can quote the church Fathers as they are not beyond being taken out of context and twisted as the scriptures are.

Not only so but they have retractions as well and often the words of God and others get corrupted because of the GAIN they can GET pulling it away from (or turning from) Christ (as HE still remains the ONE we can reject, disallow or turn away from).

I measure the things I hear along those lines.

It either has you seeing HIM or has you looking to men (not in truth).

Peace

Fireinfolding

Isn't our Lord simply wonderfull.

Matthew 28:20 teaching them to be keeping all, as-much I command to ye and Behold, I, with ye, am all the days--till of-the full-end/ sun-teleiaV <4930> of the age/aiwnoV <165> .'

Hebrews 9:26 since it behoved Him many times to be suffering from down-casting of world. Now yet once upon a full-end /sunteleia <4930> of-the ages/aiwnwn <165> into repudiation of-the sin through the sacrifice of Him, he hath been manifested/pefanerwtai <5319> ;

 

[PassthePeace1]

Yall ought take a look at that link posted

Im not even half way through separating them and underlining the Church Fathers.

Fireinfolding

Don't get to excited, Webster is using selective quotes taken out of context, and projecting his own meaning on to them.....so they do not convey the authors complete understand of what he beleive about Peter.

Also don't get too excited if you see an Early Church Father or an Early Church Writer use the terminology that Jesus is the Rock, because this might come as a shock to you....because Catholics also believe that as well. There is a difference between an eternal and temporal state, or jurisdiction (probably a better word, but I'll go with that now).

I will try to get to this later, but right now I am almost up to my eyeballs in alligators. If you are watching the national news.....I live right in that area in Texas with all the heavy flooding, some of those people that are being rescued in boats because of flooding are my neighbors. Last night was a freaky ride, a tornado touchdown so close to my house I could hear it. My house was spared flooding, but there is a river flowing in my front yard.. . I finally made contact with my youngest son, well sort of....our cell connections are breaking up, so I really couldn't understand what he was saying, but at least I know he is alive. I could really, really use some prayers right now....we are all safe, just still somewhat rattled...lol.


Peace be with you...Pam

 

[Hentenza]

Don't get to excited, Webster is using selective quotes taken out of context, and projecting his own meaning on to them.....so they do not convey the authors complete understand of what he beleive about Peter.

Also don't get too excited if you see an Early Church Father or an Early Church Writer use the terminology that Jesus is the Rock, because this might come as a shock to you....because Catholics also believe that as well. There is a difference between an eternal and temporal state, or jurisdiction (probably a better word, but I'll go with that now).

I will try to get to this later, but right now I am almost up to my eyeballs in alligators. If you are watching the national news.....I live right in that area in Texas with all the heavy flooding, some of those people that are being rescued in boats because of flooding are my neighbors. Last night was a freaky ride, a tornado touchdown so close to my house I could hear it. My house was spared flooding, but there is a river flowing in my front yard.. . I finally made contact with my youngest son, well sort of....our cell connections are breaking up, so I really couldn't understand what he was saying, but at least I know he is alive. I could really, really use some prayers right now....we are all safe, just still somewhat rattled...lol.


Peace be with you...Pam

Hi Pam,

Sorry to hear that. I have been watching the reports in the news. You and your neighbors are in my prayers.

 

[PassthePeace1]

Hi Pam,

Sorry to hear that. I have been watching the reports in the news. You and your neighbors are in my prayers.

Thank you so much....

 

[Trento]

I can see it in scripture beatifully, but I guess Ill dig into some of the church Fathers stuff

Not that I care to, I just figured to see what they say given everyone quotes them verses scripture.

Heres one from the same link




Though Tertullian states that Peter is the rock he does not mean it in a pro–papal sense. We know this because of other comments he has made. But if we isolate this one passage it would be easy to read a pro–Roman interpretation into it. However, in other comments on Matthew 16:18–19, Tertullian explains what he means when he says that Peter is the rock on which the Church would be built:

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...[SIZE=-1](Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, The Ante-Nicene Fathers (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1951), Volume IV, Tertullian, On Modesty 21, p. 99).[/SIZE]​

When Tertullian says that Peter is the rock and the Church is built upon him he means that the Church is built through him as he preaches the gospel. This preaching is how Tertullian explains the meaning of the keys. They are the declarative authority for the offer of forgiveness of sins through the preaching of the gospel. If men respond to the message they are loosed from their sins. If they reject it they remain bound in their sins. In the words just preceding this quote Tertullian explicitly denies that this promise can apply to anyone but Peter and therefore he does not in any way see a Petrine primacy in this verse with successors in the bishops of Rome. The patristic scholar, Karlfried Froehlich, states that even though Tertullian teaches that Peter is the rock he does not mean this in the same sense as the Roman Catholic Church:

‘Tertullian regarded the Peter of Matthew 16:18–19 as the representative of the entire church or at least its ‘spiritual’ members.’ [SIZE=-1](Karlfried Froehlich, Saint Peter, Papal Primacy, and Exegetical Tradition, 1150-1300, pp. 13. Taken from The Religious Roles of the Papacy: Ideals and Realities, 1150-1300, ed. Christopher Ryan, Papers in Medieval Studies 8 (Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Medieval Studies, 1989)[/SIZE]​

It is a common practice of Roman Catholic apologists to omit part of the quotation given above by Tertullian in order to make it appear that he is a proponent of papal primacy. A prime example off this is found in a recently released Roman Catholic defense of the papacy entitled Jesus, Peter and the Keys. The authors give the following partial citation from Tertullian:

I now inquire into your opinion, to see whence you usurp this right for the Church. Do you presume, because the Lord said to Peter, ‘On this rock I will build my Church, I have given you the keys of the kingdom of heaven’ [Matt. 16:1819a] or ‘whatever you shall have bound or loosed on earth will be bound or loosed in heaven’ [Matt. 16:19b] that the power of binding and loosing has thereby been handed on to you, that is, to every church akin to Peter? What kind of man are you, subverting and changing what was the manifest intent of the Lord when he conferred this personally upon Peter? On you, he says, I will build my Church; and I will give to you the keys, not to the Church; and whatever you shall have bound or you shall have loosed, not what they shall have bound or they shall have loosed [SIZE=-1](Scott Butler, Norman Dahlgren, David Hess, Jesus, Peter and the Keys (Santa Barbara: Queenship, 1996), pp. 216-217).[/SIZE]​

When comparing this citation with the one given above it is clear that these authors have left out the last half of the quotation. The part of the quotation that is omitted defines what Tertullian means by the statement that Christ built his Church on Peter and invested him with authroity. Again, what he means by these words is that Christ built his church on Peter by building it through him as he preached the gospel. This is a meaning that is clearly contrary to the Roman Catholic perspective. To omit this is to distort the teaching of Tertullian and to give the impression that he taught something he did not teach. So, though Tertullian states that Peter is the rock, he does not mean this in the same way the Roman Catholic Church does. Peter is the rock because he is the one given the privilege of being the first to open the kingdom of God to men. This is similar to the view expressed by Maximus of Tours when he says: ‘For he is called a rock because he was the first to lay the foundations of the faith among the nations' [SIZE=-1](Ancient Christian Writers (New York: Newman, 1989), The Sermons of St. Maximus of Turin, Sermon 77.1, p. 187).[/SIZE]

Not only do we see a clear denial of any belief in a papal primacy in Tertullian’s exegesis of Matthew 16, but such a denial is also seen from his practice. In his later years Tertullian separated himself from the Catholic Church to become a Montanist. He clearly did not hold to the view espoused by Vatican I that communion with the Bishop of Rome was the ultimate criterion of orthodoxy and of inclusiveness in the Church of God.

Theres a bunch of them there.

Fireinfolding

"...who conferred this on Peter personally! He says, 'on thee I will build my church and I will give the keys to thee', not the Church"
Tertullian, De Pudcitiia AD 220

...Was anything hidden from Peter who was called the rock on which the Church would be built, who received the keys of the kingdom of heaven...'
De Praescriptione AD 200



Origen

"Jesus..sends Peter..this was a very great honour which had been bestowed on Peter by Jesus(judging him greater than the rest of his friends)...Peter received the keys not of heaven but of more...as in the case of Peter, but in one only; for they do not reach so high a stage, with power as Peter to bind and loose all heavens"
Origen, Comm on Matthew, AD 247

...if we were to attend carefully to the Gospels, we should also find, in relation to those things which seem to be common to Peter and those three time admonished his brethren, a great difference and pre-eminence in the things said to Peter, compared with the second class. For it is no small difference that Peter received the keys not of one heaven but of more, and in order that whatsoever things he binds on the earth may be bound not in one heaven but in them all, as compared with the many who bind on earth and loose on earth, so that these things are bound and loosed not in the heavens, as in the case of Peter, but in ONE only; for they do NOT reach so high a stage, with power AS PETER to bind and loose in ALL the heavens. The better therefore, is the binder, so much more blessed is he who has been so loosed that in every part of the heavens his loosing has been accomplished'
ibid BK 13:31

Similarly Origen affirms Peter's primacy by affirming that Christ built the Church upon Peter.

'Just as Christians are called after Christ, so Peter derived his name from the spiritual rock[petra], from which as it followed them the whole people drank. Or else he calls him Peter from the firm and unshaken quality of his faith, on which Christ said that he would be his Church, seeing that he was the first to lay the foundation of the dogmas of the Church among the Jews and Greeks and UPON HIM was BUILT the Church'
Commentary on Rom 5:10


Eusebius
“That powerful and great one of the Apostles, who, on account of his excellence, was the leader of all the rest.” Eusebius, A.D. 325, Com. in Ps. lxviii 9, tom. v. p. 737, in Charles F. B. Allnatt, ed., Cathedra Petri – The Titles and Prerogatives of St. Peter, (London: Burns & Oates, 1879), 49.

“And Peter,on whom the Church of Christ is built, 'against which the gates of hell shall not prevail'” Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, 6:25 (A.D. 325).

​

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

&#8220;And Peter,on whom the Church of Christ is built, 'against which the gates of hell shall not prevail'&#8221; Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, 6:25 (A.D. 325).

What happens to the office of the pope and catholic heirarchy if it is proven the churhc wasn't built on "Peter". Just curious.

Reve 14:12 Here is endurance of the Saints is. Here are those keeping the commands/entolaV <1785> of the God and the Faith/pistin <4102> of Jesus".

Reve 12:17 And is wroght, the dragon over the woman, and came away to do battle with the rest of the seed of her, of the ones keeping the commands/entolaV <1785> of the God/qeou <2316> , and having the witness/testimony/marturian <3141> of the Jesus * Christ.

Byz./Maj.) Revelation 12:17 kai wrgisqh o drakwn epi th gunaiki kai aphlqen poihsai polemon meta twn loipwn tou spermatoV authV twn thrountwn taV entolaV tou qeou kai econtwn thn marturian ihsou

Textus Rec.) Revelation 12:17 kai wrgisqh o drakwn epi th gunaiki kai aphlqen poihsai polemon meta twn loipwn tou spermatoV authV twn thrountwn taV entolaV tou qeou kai econtwn thn marturian tou ihsou cristou

 

[Trento]

[SIZE=+1]AUGUSTINE[/SIZE]









Augustine states that Peter is the first and head of the apostles and that he holds a primacy. However he does not interpret that primacy in a Roman Catholic sense. He believes that Peter’s primacy is figurative in that he represents the universal Church. Again, he explicitly states that Christ did not build his Church upon a man but on Peter’s confession of faith. Peter is built on Christ the rock and as a figurative representative of the Church he shows how each believer is built on Christ. In Augustine’s view, Peter holds a primacy or preeminence, but none of this applies to him in a jurisdictional sense, because he says that ‘Christ did not build his Church upon a man.’ We can not get a clearer illustration that the fathers did indeed separate Peter’s confession of faith from Peter’s person. In commenting on one of Augustine’s references to Peter and the rock, John Rotelle, the editor of the Roman Catholic series on the Sermons of Augustine, makes these observations:

‘There was Peter, and he hadn’t yet been confirmed in the rock’: That is, in Christ, as participating in his ‘rockiness’ by faith. It does not mean confirmed as the rock, because Augustine never thinks of Peter as the rock. Jesus, after all, did not in fact call him the rock...but ‘Rocky.’ The rock on which he would build his Church was, for Augustine, both Christ himself and Peter’s faith, representing the faith of the Church (emphasis mine) [SIZE=-1](John Rotelle, Ed., The Works of Saint Augustine (New Rochelle: New City, 1993), Sermons, Sermon 265D.6, p. 258-259, n. 9)[/SIZE]​

Augustine does not endorse the Roman Catholic interpretation. Again and again he states that the rock is Christ, not Peter. Augustine claims no exclusive Petrine succession in the Roman bishops and no papal office. Karlfried Froehlich sums up Augustine’s views on Peter and the rock of Matthew 16 in these comments:

Augustine’s formulation (of Matthew 16:18-19), informed by a traditional North African concern for the unity of the church, that in Peter unus pro omnibus (one for all) had answered and received the reward, did not suggest more than a figurative reading of Peter as an image of the true church. In light of Peter’s subsequent fall and denial, the name itself was regularly declared to be derived from Christ, the true rock. Augustine, who followed Origen in this assumption, was fascinated by the dialectic of the ‘blessed’ Peter (Matt. 16:17) being addressed as ‘Satan’ a few verses later (v. 23). In Peter, weak in himself and strong only in his connection with Christ, the church could see the image of its own total dependence on God’s grace.​

Augustine rigorously separated the name-giving from its explanation: Christ did not say to Peter: ‘you are the rock,’ but ‘you are Peter.’ The church is not built upon Peter but upon the only true rock, Christ. Augustine and the medieval exegetes after him found the warrant for this interpretation in 1 Cor. 10:4. The allegorical key of this verse had already been applied to numerous biblical rock passages in the earlier African testimonia tradition. Matt. 16:18 was no exception. If the metaphor of the rock did not refer to a negative category of ‘hard’ rocks, it had to be read christologically [SIZE=-1](Karlfried Froehlich, Saint Peter, Papal Primacy, and Exegetical Tradition, 1150-1300, pp. 3, 8-14. Taken from The Religious Roles of the Papacy: Ideals and Realities, 1150-1300, ed. Christopher Ryan, Papers in Medieval Studies 8 (Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Medieval Studies, 1989).[/SIZE]​

Karl Morrison sums up Augustine’s views of ecclesiology in these words:

Peter was said to have received the power of the keys, not in his own right, but as the representative of the entire Church. Without contesting Rome’s primacy of honor, St. Augustine held that all the Apostles, and all their successors, the bishops, shared equally in the powers which Christ granted St. Peter [SIZE=-1](Karl Morrison, Tradition and Authority in the Western Church 300-1140 (Princeton: Princeton University, 1969), p. 162).[/SIZE]​

Reinhold Seeberg, the Protestant Church historian, makes these comments on Augustine’s interpretation of Peter pointing out that it reflects the view of Cyprian:

The idea of the Roman Primacy likewise receives no special elucidation at the hands of Augustine. We find a general acknowledgment of the ‘primacy of the apostolic chair,’ but Augustine knows nothing of any special authority vested in Peter or his successors. Peter is a ‘figure of the church’ or of ‘good pastors,’ and represents the unity of the church (serm. 295.2; 147.2). In this consists the significance of his position and that of his successors...As all bishops (in contradistinction from the Scriptures) may err (unit. eccl. II.28), so also the Roman bishop. This view is plainly manifest from the bearing of Augustine and his colleagues in the Pelagian controversy...Dogmatically, there had been no advance from the position of Cyprian. The Africans, in their relations with Rome, played somewhat the role of the Gallicanism of a later period [SIZE=-1](Reinhold Seeberg, Text-Book of the History of Doctrines (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1952), Volume I, p. 318-319).[/SIZE]​

W.H.C. Frend affirms the above consensus of Augustine’s ecclesiology and his interpretation of Peter’s commission:

Augustine...rejected the idea that ‘the power of the keys’ had been entrusted to Peter alone. His primacy was simply a matter of personal privilege and not an office. Similarly, he never reproached the Donatists for not being in communion with Rome, but with lack of communion with the apostolic Sees as a whole. His view of Church government was that less important questions should be settled by provincial councils, greater matters at general councils [SIZE=-1](W.H.C. Frend, The Early Church (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1965), p. 222).[/SIZE]​

Augustine is the greatest Church father and theologian of the patristic age writing after 400 years of Church history. The constitution of the Church should have been a firmly settled issue, especially since Vatican I claims that its papal teachings and interpretation of Matthew 16 upon which they rest have been the belief and teaching of the Church from the very beginning. Yet Augustine interprets Matthew 16 in a Protestant and Orthodox way, explicitly repudiating the Roman Catholic interpretation of Vatican I. How are we to explain this? Vatican I states the rock of Matthew 16 is the person of Peter and has been the unanimous opinion of the Church fathers. Then why did Augustine hold a contrary view to that which was supposedly the universal opinion of the Church of his day and in all preceding Church history? According to Rome, this passage holds the key to the constitution of the Church given by Christ himself which was fully recognized from the very beginning. If this was so, why would Augustine purposefully contradict the universal interpretation of so fundamental and important a passage? The answer, quite simply, is that the fathers did not interpret the rock of Matthew 16 the way Vatican I does. Augustine is merely a prominent representative of the opinion of the Church as a whole.
The authors of Jesus, Peter and the Keys suggest that Augustine invented a novel interpretation of the rock of Matthew 16 in stating that the rock is Christ. Specifically they state: ‘St. Augustine invented a new exegesis (of Matthew 16:18-19)—that the rock is Christ' [SIZE=-1](Scott Butler, Norman Dahlgren, David Hess, Jesus, Peter and the Keys (Santa Barbara: Queenship, 1996), p. 252). [/SIZE]This is a completely misinformed statement. As we have seen this interpretation was utilized by Eusebius in the fourth century, many years before Augustine.

Too much too underline in that one

Fireinfolding

Among these apostles PETER ALONE almost everywhere deserved to represent the whole Church. Because of that representation of the Church, which only he bore, he deserved to hear 'I will give to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven" (Sermons 295:2)

"Some things are said which seem to relate especially to the apostle Peter, and yet are not clear in their meaning unless referred to the Church, which he is acknowledged to have represented in a figure on account of the primacy which he bore among the disciples. Such is 'I will give unto you the keys of the kingdom of heaven,' and other similar passages. In the same way, Judas represents those Jews who were Christ's enemies" (Commentary on Psalm 108 ).

"WHO IS IGNORANT that the first of the apostles is the most blessed Peter?" (Commentary on John 56:1) **
“For if the lineal succession of bishops is to be taken into account, with how much more certainty and benefit to the Church do we reckon back till we reach Peter himself, to whom, as bearing in a figure the whole Church, the Lord said: ‘Upon this rock will I build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it!’ The successor of Peter was Linus, and his successors in unbroken continuity were these: &#8209;Clement, Anacletus, Evaristus, Alexander, Sixtus, Telesphorus, Iginus, Anicetus, Pius, Soter, Eleutherius, Victor, Zephirinus, Calixtus, Urbanus, Pontianus, Antherus, Fabianus, Cornelius, Lucius, Stephanus, Xystus, Dionysius, Felix, Eutychianus, Gaius, Marcellinus, Marcellus, Eusebius, Miltiades, Sylvester, Marcus, Julius, Liberius, Damasus, and Siricius, whose successor is the present Bishop Anastasius. In this order of succession no Donatist bishop is found” (Letters of Augustine 53, 2 in The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers 1st series, 1:298).

What a fascinating quote! Here, not only does Augustine again support Peter's primacy, but he also gives the line of succession of Popes! Since you think you can use Church Father's writings, then I'll assume you accept that this proves apostolic succession for the Catholic Church.





.N.D. Kelly, one of the greatest patristic scholars of the 20th century, and an Anglican, writes to the contrary in his classic work Early Christian Doctrines (HarperSanFrancisco, 1978) :

"According to him [St. Augustine], the Church is the realm of Christ, His mystical body and His bride, the mother of Christians [Ep 34:3; Serm 22:9].​

There is no salvation apart from it; schismatics can have the faith and sacraments....but cannot put them to a profitable use since the Holy Spirit is only bestowed in the Church [De bapt 4:24; 7:87; Serm ad Caes 6].​

...It goes without saying that Augustine identifies the Church with the universal Catholic Church of his day, with its hierarchy and sacraments, and with its centre at Rome....By the middle of the fifth century the Roman church had established, de jure as well as de facto, a position of primacy in the West, and the papal claims to supremacy over all bishops of Christendom had been formulated in precise terms....The student tracing the history of the times, particularly of the Arian, Donatist, Pelagian and Christological controversies, cannot fail to be impressed by the skill and persistence with which the Holy See [of Rome] was continually advancing and consolidating its claims. Since its occupant was accepted as the successor of St. Peter, and prince of the apostles, it was easy to draw the inference that the unique authority which Rome in fact enjoyed, and which the popes saw concentrated in their persons and their office, was no more than the fulfilment of the divine plan." (Kelly, page 412, 413, 417)​

In further support of the above statement from J.N.D. Kelly, the following shall be sufficient proof that St. Augustine, and the Catholic Church of his day (late 4th/early 5th century), believed that​

(1) the Bishop of Rome, as successor of St. Peter, held the primacy of jurisdiction in the Church;
(2) the Pope in this position had the final say on matters of doctrine (we shall discuss the history of the Pelagian heresy) and was indeed the final arbiter of truth and thus infallible;
(3) St. Augustine's "Rome has spoken; the case is closed" is indeed an accurate summary of his belief on the matter (from his Sermons 131:10);​

 

[Fireinfolding]

"...who conferred this on Peter personally! He says, 'on thee I will build my church and I will give the keys to thee', not the Church"
Tertullian, De Pudcitiia AD 220

...Was anything hidden from Peter who was called the rock on which the Church would be built, who received the keys of the kingdom of heaven...'
De Praescriptione AD 200



Origen

"Jesus..sends Peter..this was a very great honour which had been bestowed on Peter by Jesus(judging him greater than the rest of his friends)...Peter received the keys not of heaven but of more...as in the case of Peter, but in one only; for they do not reach so high a stage, with power as Peter to bind and loose all heavens"​

Origen, Comm on Matthew, AD 247​

...if we were to attend carefully to the Gospels, we should also find, in relation to those things which seem to be common to Peter and those three time admonished his brethren, a great difference and pre-eminence in the things said to Peter, compared with the second class. For it is no small difference that Peter received the keys not of one heaven but of more, and in order that whatsoever things he binds on the earth may be bound not in one heaven but in them all, as compared with the many who bind on earth and loose on earth, so that these things are bound and loosed not in the heavens, as in the case of Peter, but in ONE only; for they do NOT reach so high a stage, with power AS PETER to bind and loose in ALL the heavens. The better therefore, is the binder, so much more blessed is he who has been so loosed that in every part of the heavens his loosing has been accomplished'​

ibid BK 13:31​

Similarly Origen affirms Peter's primacy by affirming that Christ built the Church upon Peter.

'Just as Christians are called after Christ, so Peter derived his name from the spiritual rock[petra], from which as it followed them the whole people drank. Or else he calls him Peter from the firm and unshaken quality of his faith, on which Christ said that he would be his Church, seeing that he was the first to lay the foundation of the dogmas of the Church among the Jews and Greeks and UPON HIM was BUILT the Church'​

Commentary on Rom 5:10​

Eusebius​

“That powerful and great one of the Apostles, who, on account of his excellence, was the leader of all the rest.” Eusebius, A.D. 325, Com. in Ps. lxviii 9, tom. v. p. 737, in Charles F. B. Allnatt, ed., Cathedra Petri – The Titles and Prerogatives of St. Peter, (London: Burns & Oates, 1879), 49. ​

“And Peter,on whom the Church of Christ is built, 'against which the gates of hell shall not prevail'” Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, 6:25 (A.D. 325).​

​

Appreciate as always the little SNIPPETS you paste of them Trento

One of these days Id love to read them all in their context because I MIGHT just find them to make sense within it (not as others snip them). Just dawned on me what they say is just as much at the mercy of those who quote them wrongly as the scriptures are.

I will stick plainly to the one I see (moreso and moreso). That which relies heavily on after the manner of the ability to reccognize and confess this foundational truth. The plurality of appostles (as is elsewhere confirmed). Using more then a single verse that has an entire doctrine made out of it.

I prefer my manner of study thanks.


Fireinfolding

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Yikes!!! My eyes are starting to strain looking at all these hugh fonts so you will pardon me if I refrain from reading them anymore. Peace to all.

 

[IamAdopted]

Don't get to excited, Webster is using selective quotes taken out of context, and projecting his own meaning on to them.....so they do not convey the authors complete understand of what he beleive about Peter.

Also don't get too excited if you see an Early Church Father or an Early Church Writer use the terminology that Jesus is the Rock, because this might come as a shock to you....because Catholics also believe that as well. There is a difference between an eternal and temporal state, or jurisdiction (probably a better word, but I'll go with that now).

I will try to get to this later, but right now I am almost up to my eyeballs in alligators. If you are watching the national news.....I live right in that area in Texas with all the heavy flooding, some of those people that are being rescued in boats because of flooding are my neighbors. Last night was a freaky ride, a tornado touchdown so close to my house I could hear it. My house was spared flooding, but there is a river flowing in my front yard.. . I finally made contact with my youngest son, well sort of....our cell connections are breaking up, so I really couldn't understand what he was saying, but at least I know he is alive. I could really, really use some prayers right now....we are all safe, just still somewhat rattled...lol.


Peace be with you...Pam

Awe I am praying right away. Praying that the Lord keep you safe and all those around you. Praying for the floods to subside..

 

[Fireinfolding]

Awe I am praying right away. Praying that the Lord keep you safe and all those around you. Praying for the floods to subside..

Praying God keep Pam and her family safe through the storm too.

Peace

Fireinfolding

 

[FreeinChrist]

Deu 32:3 "For I proclaim the name of the LORD; Ascribe greatness to our God!
Deu 32:4 "The Rock! His work is perfect, For all His ways are just; A God of faithfulness and without injustice, Righteous and upright is He.
2Sa 22:2 He said, "The LORD is my rock and my fortress and my deliverer;
2Sa 22:3 My God, my rock, in whom I take refuge, My shield and the horn of my salvation, my stronghold and my refuge; My savior, You save me from violence. 2Sa 22:32 "For who is God, besides the LORD? And who is a rock, besides our God? 2Sa 22:47 "The LORD lives, and blessed be my rock; And exalted be God, the rock of my salvation,

2Sa 23:3 "The God of Israel said, The Rock of Israel spoke to me, 'He who rules over men righteously, Who rules in the fear of God,

Psa 18:2 The LORD is my rock and my fortress and my deliverer, My God, my rock, in whom I take refuge; My shield and the horn of my salvation, my stronghold.

1Cr 10:4 and all drank the same spiritual drink, for they were drinking from a spiritual rock which followed them; and the rock was Christ.

 

[sunlover1]

I will try to get to this later, but right now I am almost up to my eyeballs in alligators. If you are watching the national news.....I live right in that area in Texas with all the heavy flooding, some of those people that are being rescued in boats because of flooding are my neighbors. Last night was a freaky ride, a tornado touchdown so close to my house I could hear it. My house was spared flooding, but there is a river flowing in my front yard.. . I finally made contact with my youngest son, well sort of....our cell connections are breaking up, so I really couldn't understand what he was saying, but at least I know he is alive. I could really, really use some prayers right now....we are all safe, just still somewhat rattled...lol.


Peace be with you...Pam

Hi Pam,

Sorry to hear that. I have been watching the reports in the news. You and your neighbors are in my prayers.

Awe I am praying right away. Praying that the Lord keep you safe and all those around you. Praying for the floods to subside..

Praying God keep Pam and her family safe through the storm too.

Peace

Fireinfolding

Me too pam.
And God help that mom who lost her
4 yo right out of her arms.

Hear our cries oh God


.