White "development of Papacy" lacking.

[simonthezealot]

Eusebius
Ignatius, the second to be appointed to the bishopric of Antioch in succession to Peter.


The one person who DO KNOW that succeeded only Peter

 

[JacktheCatholic]

Your church claims universal authority known for all ages but has no proof 160 years after Christ resurrection!

I see...

And if I had something from before 160 AD then you would something from 80 AD???

 

[JacktheCatholic]

Eusebius
Ignatius, the second to be appointed to the bishopric of Antioch in succession to Peter.


The one person who DO KNOW that succeeded only Peter

Peter merely appointed him to Antioch and not over the church.

Do you understand what the Keys denote?

 

[simonthezealot]

Another from Cyprian

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

Controversial to say the least:

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04583b.htm

The original passage, as found in most manuscripts and as printed in Hartel's edition, runs thus:

If any will consider this, there is no need of a long treatise and of arguments. 'The Lord saith to Peter: 'I say unto thee that thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build My Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it; to thee I will give the keys to the kingdom of heaven, and what thou shalt have bound on earth shall be bound in heaven, and what thou shalt have loosed shall be loosed in heaven.' Upon one He builds His Church, and though to all His Apostles after His resurrection He gives an equal power and says: 'As My Father hath sent Me, even so send I you: Receive the Holy Ghost, whosesoever sins you shall have remitted they shall be remitted unto them, and whosesoever sins you shall have retained they shall be retained', yet that He might make unity manifest, He disposed the origin of that unity beginning from one. The other Apostles were indeed what Peter was, endowed with a like fellowship both of honour and of power, but the commencement proceeds from one, that the Church may be shown to be one. This one Church the Holy Ghost in the person of the Lord designates in the Canticle of Canticles, and says, One is My Dove, My perfect one, one is she to her mother, one to her that bare her. He that holds not this unity of the Church, does he believe that he holds the Faith? He who strives against and resists the Church, is he confident that he is in the Church?

The substituted passage is as follows:

. . . bound in heaven. Upon one He builds His Church, and to the same He says after His resurrection, 'feed My sheep'. And though to all His Apostles He gave an equal power yet did He set up one chair, and disposed the origin and manner of unity by his authority. The other Apostles were indeed what Peter was, but the primacy is given to Peter, and the Church and the chair is shown to be one. And all are pastors, but the flock is shown to be one, which is fed by all the Apostles with one mind and heart. He that holds not this unity of the Church, does he think that he holds the faith? He who deserts the chair of Peter, upon whom the Church is founded, is he confident that he is in the Church?

 

[simonthezealot]

So let me get this right. This is your proof? This is a definitive claim. It is at the core of what Catholicism is claiming.

Am I really supposed to believe that whole church accepted this for 150 years and they just neglected to write it down??

 

[JacktheCatholic]

If so show proof of this in the first 150 years after Christ!

You do not need to use large, bold, bright letters. I can read it fine in #2 font.

Unless you are using this as way to be expressive in which case it seems like you are becomeing impatient. In which case i ask that you be patient with me.

I did find another clue:

Hermas

"Therefore shall you [Hermas] write two little books and send one to Clement [Bishop of Rome] and one to Grapte. Clement shall then send it to the cities abroad, because that is his duty" (The Shepherd 2:4:3 [A.D. 80]).

 

[JacktheCatholic]

Controversial to say the least:

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04583b.htm

The original passage, as found in most manuscripts and as printed in Hartel's edition, runs thus:

If any will consider this, there is no need of a long treatise and of arguments. 'The Lord saith to Peter: 'I say unto thee that thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build My Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it; to thee I will give the keys to the kingdom of heaven, and what thou shalt have bound on earth shall be bound in heaven, and what thou shalt have loosed shall be loosed in heaven.' Upon one He builds His Church, and though to all His Apostles after His resurrection He gives an equal power and says: 'As My Father hath sent Me, even so send I you: Receive the Holy Ghost, whosesoever sins you shall have remitted they shall be remitted unto them, and whosesoever sins you shall have retained they shall be retained', yet that He might make unity manifest, He disposed the origin of that unity beginning from one. The other Apostles were indeed what Peter was, endowed with a like fellowship both of honour and of power, but the commencement proceeds from one, that the Church may be shown to be one. This one Church the Holy Ghost in the person of the Lord designates in the Canticle of Canticles, and says, One is My Dove, My perfect one, one is she to her mother, one to her that bare her. He that holds not this unity of the Church, does he believe that he holds the Faith? He who strives against and resists the Church, is he confident that he is in the Church?

The substituted passage is as follows:

. . . bound in heaven. Upon one He builds His Church, and to the same He says after His resurrection, 'feed My sheep'. And though to all His Apostles He gave an equal power yet did He set up one chair, and disposed the origin and manner of unity by his authority. The other Apostles were indeed what Peter was, but the primacy is given to Peter, and the Church and the chair is shown to be one. And all are pastors, but the flock is shown to be one, which is fed by all the Apostles with one mind and heart. He that holds not this unity of the Church, does he think that he holds the faith? He who deserts the chair of Peter, upon whom the Church is founded, is he confident that he is in the Church?

Much of what you say is correct. But you fail to mention the "Keys".

The Keys are what give the Prime Minister a supreme authority over the ministers. It make the Prime Minister authority over the entire kingdom and not just a portion of it. The Keys can change what minister does in regards to binding and loosing.

The Keys belong to Jesus since the Kingdom belongs to Jesus because Jesus is the King.

But the Prime Minister is left in charge of it all and speaks for the King in all.

 

[JacktheCatholic]

Eusebius
Ignatius, the second to be appointed to the bishopric of Antioch in succession to Peter.


The one person who DO KNOW that succeeded only Peter

Was he the 2nd or 3rd in Antioch as Bishop? Third if I am not mistaken before he was sent to be eaten by wild beasts.

But this was a Bishop of Antioch and not the entire Kingdom. That authority can only belong to one when the King has given the Keys and Peter still has those keys at the time of Ignatius.

 

[JacktheCatholic]

So let me get this right. This is your proof? This is a definitive claim. It is at the core of what Catholicism is claiming.

Am I really supposed to believe that whole church accepted this for 150 years and they just neglected to write it down??

I only ask that you review the answers I give you and decide for yourself.

I do not see any fault in what I have posted and I am willing to review any counter claim you have.

 

[JacktheCatholic]

You do not need to use large, bold, bright letters. I can read it fine in #2 font.

Unless you are using this as way to be expressive in which case it seems like you are becomeing impatient. In which case i ask that you be patient with me.

I did find another clue:

Hermas

"Therefore shall you [Hermas] write two little books and send one to Clement [Bishop of Rome] and one to Grapte. Clement shall then send it to the cities abroad, because that is his duty" (The Shepherd 2:4:3 [A.D. 80]).

^
Clement had the authority to advise all cities since he had the seat of Peter.

 

[simonthezealot]

Hermas

"Therefore shall you [Hermas] write two little books and send one to Clement [Bishop of Rome] and one to Grapte. Clement shall then send it to the cities abroad, because that is his duty" (The Shepherd 2:4:3 [A.D. 80]).

This one goes on as such...

"But when I finish all the words, all the elect will then become acquainted with them through you. You will write therefore two books, and you will send the one to Clements and the other to Grapte. And Clements will send his to foreign countries, for permission has been granted to him to do so. And Grapte will admonish the widows and the orphans. But you will read the words in this city, along with the presbyters who preside over the Church. "
shepherd of hermes

 

[simonthezealot]

^
Clement had the authority to advise all cities since he had the seat of Peter.

^rather the presbyters did...
see my post above...

 

[simonthezealot]

This one goes on as such...

"But when I finish all the words, all the elect will then become acquainted with them through you. You will write therefore two books, and you will send the one to Clements and the other to Grapte. And Clements will send his to foreign countries, for permission has been granted to him to do so. And Grapte will admonish the widows and the orphans. But you will read the words in this city, along with the presbyters who preside over the Church. "
shepherd of hermes

No pope.

 

[JacktheCatholic]

This one goes on as such...

"But when I finish all the words, all the elect will then become acquainted with them through you. You will write therefore two books, and you will send the one to Clements and the other to Grapte. And Clements will send his to foreign countries, for permission has been granted to him to do so. And Grapte will admonish the widows and the orphans. But you will read the words in this city, along with the presbyters who preside over the Church. "
shepherd of hermes

But my quote still holds true and makes it's point.

 

[JacktheCatholic]

^rather the presbyters did...
see my post above...

It is sent by Clemente since he has the authority and then the Priests make it so.

It works the same way today.

 

[JacktheCatholic]

No pope.

Are we discussing the supremacy of the head Bishop in the seat of Peter who has the power of the Keys? Or are we discussing the history and use of the word 'Pope'? (I do not know the history of the use of this term but would be fun to review it)

We can see that there was a head Bishop with supreme authority and that the church recognized. We can also find where Bishops did not want to follow this authority as well. But historically we know there was a Head Bishop who was supreme .

 

[JacktheCatholic]

So let me get this right. This is your proof? This is a definitive claim. It is at the core of what Catholicism is claiming.

Am I really supposed to believe that whole church accepted this for 150 years and they just neglected to write it down??

Irenaeus


"The blessed apostles [Peter and Paul], having founded and built up the church [of Rome] . . . handed over the office of the episcopate to Linus" (Against Heresies 3:3:3 [A.D. 189]).


I know it says Peter and Paul but it references Linus.

 

[simonthezealot]

But my quote still holds true and makes it's point.

granted him to do so?
Are saying that shows universal authority, especially when read in context as I've shown?

 

[simonthezealot]

Irenaeus


"The blessed apostles [Peter and Paul], having founded and built up the church [of Rome] . . . handed over the office of the episcopate to Linus" (Against Heresies 3:3:3 [A.D. 189]).


I know it says Peter and Paul but it references Linus.

AND
Also as a bishop not the Universal leader.

 

[JacktheCatholic]

granted him to do so?
Are saying that shows universal authority, especially when read in context as I've shown?

I do not understand???

Are you saying that Clemente personally went to all the cities and spoke the words out loud to all?

If so, I think that is a false interpretation.

It would more likely better many letters sent by a servants and the letter would have Clemente's sign on it.