Question: Catholics

[TruthTraveler]

What is the point in having a Pope?
Why does the Pope need a Pope mobile?

 

[ZiSunka]

The pope needs the special car to protect him against attacks. You might not remember when he was attacked many years ago, but his life is in jeopardy and the car is an extra protection when we goes out in public.

The world is a crazy place anymore, and everything is more dangerous for everyone, especially famous people.

 

[Oblio]

Pope simply means Father, he is the spiritual Father of the Western Church. He is (in Orthodox eyes) the Patriarch (a Bishop of a See of the Early Fathers) of Rome and holds the office mentioned in the Bible as Episkopos (forgive Gk grammar errors )

 

[martinluther2003]

Is the next pope going to use the same car if his health is better than the currnet pope is doing?

 

[Metanoia02]

Is the next pope going to use the same car if his health is better than the currnet pope is doing?

The car is not so much for his health, it is mainly for his saftey. The new Pope will decide if he needs to use the Popemobile or not. Due to the assaination attempt on JPII, I assume they will continue to use it.

 

[water_ripple]

What is the point in having a Pope?

Probably for the same purpose that prodestants need preachers or elders

 

[Fiat]

Jesus, the Good Shepherd, called Peter to be the chief shepherd of his Church (John 21:15-17). He gave Peter the task of strengthening the other apostles in their faith, ensuring that the faith of the Church would never go astray (Luke 22:31-32). Peter led the Church in proclaiming the gospel and making decisions (Acts 2:1-41 15:7-12). Peter's successors, the bishops of Rome (who are called "POPE", which means "papa") continue to exercise Peter's ministry in the Church.

The Pope is the successor to Peter as bishop of Rome. The world's other bishops are successors to the apostles in general.

I hope this helps.

 

[Rising_Suns]

What is the point in having a Pope?
Why does the Pope need a Pope mobile?

The pope is the successor of Peter, when Jesus said that Peter is the rock and upon him He will build His church. Peter was the first pope, and after Jesus died, Peter moved to Rome where the succession of popes began. We can trace the lineage of the popes straight back to Peter.

In a sense, the pope is mainly a positional role. The Catholic church needs a certain structure to it, because we trace our existance back to Jesus's time and have been here ever since. So some system is needed to preserve the oiginal teachings of Christ, the apostolic tradition. The pope is in no power to change scripture, nor can he change dogma or any of the core of Christian beliefs. He can however, change/modfiy the lesser important things, like doctrine and discipline, to change with the moving times. Also note that even though the Pope is the earthly head of the church, we of course acknowledge Jesus to be the true spiritual head. Without His death and ressurection, none of this would be possible. Also note that the pope is not in his own world, calling all the shots. He meets with his team of clergy, and if something needs to be added on or changed to accomodate our liquid society, then they decide as a group. So the pope's official actions directly reflect what the church in general says.

Here is some scripture to support the primacy of peter

Matt. to Rev. - Peter is mentioned 155 times and the rest of apostles combined are only mentioned 130 times. Peter is also always listed first except in 1 Cor 3:22 and Gal. 2:9 (which are exceptions to the rule).

Matt 10:2; Mark 1:36; 3:16; Luke 6:14-16; Act 1:3; 2:37; 5:29 - these are some of many examples where Peter is mentioned first among the apostles.

Matt. 14:28-29 - only Peter has the faith to walk on water. What other man has walked on water? This faith ultimately did not fail.

Matt. 16:16, Mark 8:29; John 6:69 - Peter is first among the apostles to confess the divinity of Christ.

Matt. 16:17 - Peter alone is told he has received divine knowledge by a special revelation from God the Father.

Matt. 16:18 - Jesus builds the Church only on Peter, the rock, with the other apostles as the foundation and Jesus as the Head.

Matt. 16:19 - only Peter receives the keys, which represent authority over the Church and facilitate dynastic succession to his authority.

Matt. 17:24-25 - the tax collector approaches Peter for Jesus' tax. Peter is the spokesman for Jesus. He is the Vicar of Christ.

Matt. 17:26-27 - Jesus pays the half-shekel tax with one shekel, for both Jesus and Peter. Peter is Christ's representative on earth.

Matt. 18:21 - in the presence of the disciples, Peter asks Jesus about the rule of forgiveness. One of many examples where Peter takes a leadership role among the apostles in understanding Jesus' teachings.

Matt. 19:27 - Peter speaks on behalf of the apostles by telling Jesus that they have left everything to follow Him.

Mark 10:28 - here also, Peter speaks on behalf of the disciples by declaring that they have left everything to follow Him.

Mark 11:21 - Peter speaks on behalf of the disciples in remembering Jesus' curse on the fig tree.

Mark 14:37 - at Gethsemane, Jesus asks Peter, and no one else, why he was asleep. Peter is accountable to Jesus for his actions on behalf of the apostles because he has been appointed by Jesus as their leader.

Mark 16:7 - Peter is specified by an angel as the leader of the apostles as the angel confirms the resurrection of Christ.

Luke 5:4,10 - Jesus instructs Peter to let down the nets for a catch, and the miraculous catch follows. Peter, the Pope, is the "fisher of men."

Luke 7:40-50- Jesus addresses Peter regarding the rule of forgiveness and Peter answers on behalf of the disciples.

Luke 8:45 - when Jesus asked who touched His garment, it is Peter who answers on behalf of the disciples.

Luke 8:51; 9:28; 22:8; Acts 1:13; 3:1,3,11; 4:13,19; 8:14 - Peter is always mentioned before John, the disciple whom Jesus loved.

Luke 9:28;33 - Peter is mentioned first as going to mountain of transfiguration and the only one to speak at the transfiguration.

Luke 12:41 - Peter seeks clarification of a parable on behalf on the disciples. This is part of Peter's formation as the chief shepherd of the flock after Jesus ascended into heaven.

Luke 22:31-32 - Jesus prays for Peter alone, that his faith may not fail, and charges him to strengthen the rest of the apostles.

Luke 24:12, John 20:4-6 - John arrived at the tomb first but stopped and waited for Peter. Peter then arrived and entered the tomb first.

Luke 24:34 - the two disciples distinguish Peter even though they both had seen the risen Jesus the previous hour. See Luke 24:33.

John 6:68 - after the disciples leave, Peter is the first to speak and confess his belief in Christ after the Eucharistic discourse.

John 13:6-9 - Peter speaks out to the Lord in front of the apostles concerning the washing of feet.

John 13:36; 21:18 - Jesus predicts Peter's death. Peter was martyred at Rome in 67 A.D. Several hundred years of papal successors were also martyred.

John 21:2-3,11 - Peter leads the fishing and his net does not break. The boat (the "barque of Peter") is a metaphor for the Church.

John 21:7 - only Peter got out of the boat and ran to the shore to meet Jesus. Peter is the earthly shepherd leading us to God.

John 21:15 - in front of the apostles, Jesus asks Peter if he loves Jesus "more than these," which refers to the other apostles. Peter is the head of the apostolic see.

John 21:15-17 - Jesus charges Peter to "feed my lambs," "tend my sheep," "feed my sheep." Sheep means all people, even the apostles.

Acts 1:13 - Peter is first when entering upper room after our Lord's ascension. The first Eucharist and Pentecost were given in this room.

Acts 1:15 - Peter initiates selection of a successor to Judas right after Jesus ascended into heaven, and no one questions him. Further, if the Church needed a successor to Judas, wouldn't it need one to Peter? Of course.

Acts 2:14 - Peter is first to speak for the apostles after the Holy Spirit descended upon them at Pentecost. Peter is the first to preach the Gospel.

Acts 2:38 - Peter gives first preaching in the early Church on repentance and baptism in the name of Jesus Christ.

Acts 3:1,3,4 - Peter is mentioned first as going to the Temple to pray.

Acts 3:6-7 - Peter works the first healing of the apostles.

Acts 3:12-26, 4:8-12 - Peter teaches the early Church the healing through Jesus and that there is no salvation other than Christ.

Acts 5:3 - Peter declares first anathema of Ananias and Sapphira which is ratified by God, and brings about their death. Peter exercises his binding authority.

Acts 5:15 - Peter's shadow has healing power. No other apostle is said to have this power.

Acts 8:14 - Peter is mentioned first in conferring the sacrament of confirmation.

Acts 8:20-23 - Peter casts judgment on Simon's quest for gaining authority through the laying on of hands. Peter exercises his binding and loosing authority.

Acts 9:32-34 - Peter is mentioned first among apostles and works healing of Aeneas.

Acts 9:38-40 - Peter is mentioned first among the apostles and raises Tabitha from the dead.

Acts 10:5 - Cornelius is told by an angel to call upon Peter. Angels are messengers of God. Peter was granted this divine vision.

Acts 10:34-48, 11:1-18 - Peter is first to teach about salvation for all (Jews and Gentiles).

Acts 12:5 - this verse implies that the "whole Church" offered "earnest prayers" for Peter, their leader, during his imprisonment.

Acts 12:6-11 - Peter is freed from jail by an angel. He is the first object of divine intervention in the early Church.

Acts 15:7-12 - Peter resolves the first doctrinal issue on circumcision at the Church's first council at Jerusalem, and no one questions him. After Peter the Papa spoke, all were kept silent.

Acts 15:12 - only after Peter (the Pope) speaks do Paul and Barnabas (bishops) speak in support of Peter's definitive teaching.

Acts 15:13-14 - then James speaks to further acknowledge Peter's definitive teaching. "Simeon (Peter) has related how God first visited..."

Rom. 15:20 - Paul says he doesn't want to build on "another man's foundation" referring to Peter, who built the Church in Rome.

1 Cor. 15:4-8 - Paul distinguishes Jesus' post-resurrection appearances to Peter from those of the other apostles.

Gal.1:18 - Paul spends fifteen days with Peter privately before beginning his ministry, even after Christ's Revelation to Paul.

1 Peter 5:1 - Peter acts as the chief bishop by "exhorting" all the other bishops and elders of the Church.

1 Peter 5:13 - Some Protestants argue against the Papacy by trying to prove Peter was never in Rome. First, this argument is irrelevant to whether Jesus instituted the Papacy. Secondly, this verse demonstrates that Peter was in fact in Rome. Peter writes from "Babylon" which was a code name for Rome during these days of persecution. See, for example, Rev. 14:8, 16:19, 17:5, 18:2,10,21, which show that "Babylon" meant Rome. Rome was the only "great city" of the New Testament period. Because Rome during this age was considered the center of the world, the Lord wanted His Church to be established in Rome.

2 Peter 1:14 - Peter writes about Jesus' prediction of Peter's death, embracing the eventual martyrdom that he would suffer.

2 Peter 3:16 - Peter is making a judgment on the proper interpretation of Paul's letters. Peter is the chief shepherd of the flock.

Matt. 23:11; Mark 9:35; 10:44 - yet Peter, as the first, humbled himself to be the last and servant of all servants.

 

[pax]

I think the popemobile existed prior to the assasination attempt, but there wasn't the bullet-proof glass shield until after the assasination attempt.

We love you John Paul II!

 

[ps139]

Rising Suns - awesome reply!!!

My 2 cents follow:

I believe that the Bible is the inerrant Word of God. However, the Bible is a book, and if you talk to it, excepting a miracle, it won't grow a mouth and talk back to you. It cannot be added to or taken away from.

So if there is confusion about modern day issues, or of the meaning of a tricky Bible passage, we need a source of authority who can respond when spoken to.

We believe the teaching of the Church and ex cathedra papal statements to be infallible. So if there is a teaching, I can be sure that it is the correct one if I accept the belief that the Holy Spirit guides the Church's teaching.

If I do not accept that, how can I know whether what I believe (if not explicitly mentioned in the Bible) is true? Take the Rapture. Evangelical Protestants have three conflicting views, all of which can be backed up by Scriptural evidence. But who is correct? How can anyone know?

This is why the pope is necessary, because humans bicker and are confused, and a representative of Christ on earth, one who is guided by the Spirit in teaching, actually has the power to say "yes" or "no."

We need a living authority. I think that if there was never a pope, there would be 30 Million Christian denominations today, much more than the current number of 30,000 - 99% of which do not have a pope.

 

[Lynn73]

And how do you know the Pope or the Catholic church is infallible? Sorry, I don't accept their infallibility since I believe many teachings of the RCC are contrary to scripture. We don't need a Pope to tell us what to believe or what the Bible says. He's no more infallible than anyone else and the RCC declaring it so doesn't make it so. Church tradition, Magesterium, Holy See, Pope; these things are NOT on a par with scripture in my opinion. They can make all the declarations they want to, but if it doesn't line up with what I see in the word of God, I will reject it.

 

[Miss Shelby]

And how do you know the Pope or the Catholic church is infallible?.

The Pope himself as a human is not infallibe. He speaks infallibly only when making an official proclamation regarding faith and morals. He has to go to confession, just like the rest of us.

How do we know that the Church is infallible? The same way you deem the Bible infallible. Because she has the promise of the Holy Spirit to guide her to the end of the age.

Michelle

 

[Metanoia02]

They can make all the declarations they want to, but if it doesn't line up with what I see in the word of God, I will reject it.

So you are the determining factor in what is true and what is not true? Who gave you the authority to determine what the Word of God means as thought you are infallible?

 

[Lynn73]

I understand the English language. I believe God was able to see that we have a correct English translation. I don't need a Pope or priest to tell me what "thou shalt not" means. I don't accept any man, including the Pope, as speaking infallibly at any time, including making official proclamations. Sure, the Holy Spirit will guide God's true church made up of all born again believers in Christ. And that guidance won't contradict the scriptures in any way. If it does, it's not from the Holy Spirit. If I don't consider a church to be the true church because of teachings and doctrines that disagree with scripture, why should I consider them to have the authority to dictate to me what the word of God means when I can read it for myself? The Holy Spirit living in me will guide me just the same as anyone else who belongs to Christ. Why should I let the Roman Catholic Church be an authority to tell me what the word of God says? I don't consider them to be the one true church as many Catholics do so I don't accept their authority. Neither did Martin Luther, after close study of the sciptures, and those who decided to leave it. Scripture alone is the authority. You add all this other stuff and you're asking for error to creep in. The guidance of the Holy Spirit will always confirm the written word, not contradict or add to imho. Of course, you're not going to agree with me.

The noble Bereans searched the scriptures to see if the things they were being told was true. We should do the same instead of just automatically accepting the pronouncements of a Pope, priest, magisterium, minister, or whatever. The Bible is for all of us to read for ourselves, not just for a few church officials to tell the rest of us what it says.

 

[Miss Shelby]

So you are the determining factor in what is true and what is not true? Who gave you the authority to determine what the Word of God means as thought you are infallible?

This is what it always comes back to, isn't it? If the Pope doesn't speak infallibly on faith and morals, then it's up to Joe Schmo down the street to do it. In any case, when people say they interpret the Bible for themselves, they are in effect, making themselves infallible. Personally, I'd rather leave the job in more capable hands then my own.

Michelle

 

[Miss Shelby]

The noble Bereans searched the scriptures to see if the things they were being told was true. We should do the same instead of just automatically accepting the pronouncements of a Pope, priest, magisterium, minister, or whatever. The Bible is for all of us to read for ourselves, not just for a few church officials to tell the rest of us what it says.

This might come as a surprise to you, but I am Catholic and I read my Bible all by myself, everyday, without a priest looking over my shoulder. I am edified by His word, God speaks to me through His word, and it is a very essential part of my Christian walk. However, I do not feel that I have the authority to interpret and declare doctrine all by my lonesome. I trust the teaching authority of the Church because Jesus gave that authority to Peter and said that the Holy Spirit would always guide the Church, hence I don't have to worry about it. And I suspect that the noble Bereans probably had to answer to someone.

Michelle

 

[Lynn73]

How do you know the RCC is the one true church? What if the Pope and Magesterium and all that are wrong? Christ's church is made up of all born again believers everywhere, not just the RCC. If the RCC is the true church only, why does some of it's teaching have no basis in scripture such as purgatory, paying to have dead relatives prayed out of purgatory, men naming other people to be saints, etc. etc. Why should the RCC have all the authority to interpret doctrine? God gave us a mind, heart, and brain and every believer has the Holy Spirit.

Plus I think they've misinterpeted this whole "Peter was the first Pope and the church is built on him" thing. The Church is built on what Peter said, not Peter Himself. And what did he say? "Thou art the Christ the Son of the living God." The church is built upon the foundation of Jesus Christ, NOT Peter. Peter was only a man. Why would I give absolute authority of the RCC over my life when it teaches these things. A simple misinterpetation of scripture and we have this "the church was founded on Peter" doctrine. Course, you believe otherwise and that's your privilege.

I don't mean to sound snooty or anything, I just have a real problem with RCC doctrine. Nothing personal against you. Just giving my .02 worth.

 

[ps139]

Lynn73, from where do you get your information on Catholic teachings/practices? I think if you read some Catholic authors like Karl Keating or Scott Hahn you might see some things differently. They are both Protestant converts, so they are well acquainted with both sides. Hahn was a Presbyterian minister at one point, Keating may have been as well, not sure. Anyway, I grew up thinking a lot of incorrect things about Protestants. This all changed when I joined an Evangelical Bible Study for 3 years in college, and I'm currently taking a Bible classes at an Evangelical church. This is so I know both sides of the debate and learn from the sources, so I can be sure that my decisions of faith can be based on the real evidence.

 

[Rising_Suns]

Christ's church is made up of all born again believers everywhere, not just the RCC.

Yes of course. The church teaches that all followers of Christ are of the body of Christ. It's just that Catholics believe that they are more in line with the original teachings of Christ, so non-catholics would not be in full communion with Christ..but of course they can still be saved.

If the RCC is the true church only, why does some of it's teaching have no basis in scripture such as purgatory, paying to have dead relatives prayed out of purgatory, men naming other people to be saints, etc. etc.

It actually is scriptural, but to truly understand the church you must understand apostolic tradition, or the original teachings of Christ handed down through action or word. Before the Catholic church put together the bible, all people had were oral teachings carried through action. You want to rationalize away these traditions in absense of your knowledge of history, which unfortunately, many people like to do.

Plus I think they've misinterpeted this whole "Peter was the first Pope and the church is built on him" thing. The Church is built on what Peter said, not Peter Himself. And what did he say? "Thou art the Christ the Son of the living God." The church is built upon the foundation of Jesus Christ, NOT Peter. Peter was only a man. Why would I give absolute authority of the RCC over my life when it teaches these things. A simple misinterpetation of scripture and we have this "the church was founded on Peter" doctrine. Course, you believe otherwise and that's your privilege.

www.scripturecatholic.com
click on "primacy of peter"

If I don't consider a church to be the true church because of teachings and doctrines that disagree with scripture, why should I consider them to have the authority to dictate to me what the word of God means when I can read it for myself?

Nothing the Catholic church believes is in conflict with scripture.

The Holy Spirit living in me will guide me just the same as anyone else who belongs to Christ.

So the holy spirit lead the formation of the first protestant church (which broke off of the Catholic church) because it found the true interpretation of the bible. Then another person disagreed and found his own true interpretation, and so started another protestant church. Then another person came along and disagreed with that last person, and formed his own church because he thought he has the true interpretation. And another protestant church was formed...and another, and another. But what church has remained true to its foundation since the time of Christ? (insert "Catholic church" here)

 

[Lynn73]

So because I'm not Catholic, I'm not of the true church of Christ right? I'm one of those separted brethren. That might be just the way the Protestant looks at the Catholics, you know? Guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. I know that I belong to the Lord and am saved. And I'm just as in full communion with Christ as any Catholic. I don't need a priest to intercede for me, I already have one. His name is Jesus Christ. The only thing that might keep from from full communtion or fellowship with Christ is sin in my life, not belonging to the RCC hasn't anything to do with it. I go directly to the Father through Christ and confess my sins to Him. [ 1 John 1:9] He forgives me, I need no priest but Jesus. Halleluiah!