Peter’s Primacy

Catholic Exchange ^ | May 13, 2005 | Fr. William Saunders

[RnMomof7]

Could you show me where Jesus taught that ?

[eastsider]

It's true that there's often more jousting than dialogue. Still, for the benefit of the lurkers, it is important to me not to let the challenges go unanswered, especially the dishonest ones.

[Mark in the Old South]

Re: "If I remember correctly, Convert From ECUSA and Mark in the Old South also cited Our Lady's role in the conversions."

In my case it was the King James Bible. Many of the passages mentioned in the article were behind my acceptance of the Catholic Church. "The Mary Thing" as I used to call it came later. Some passages would remind me of the RCC veneration of Mary, Chapter 12 of Revelations for one, but also The Presentation at the Temple when Saint Simon speaks to The Blessed Virgin and makes clear she also will be a dividing point in the faith. The trouble was some references to a symbolic female that is less flattering such as the Whore of Babylon and several references in the Old Testament. And yet the OT has references that point to the BVM as the RCC thinks of her. My point being the position of Peter is hard to find fault, most argument just falls flat on their face. The BVM has good credentials as well but the Bible provides a counter argument. They can point to passages that can make the RCC practices be viewed in a bad light. In the end it was the overwhelming weight of other distinguishing features of the RCC faith that lead me to accept the Virgin Mary as the RCC sees her.

These include the Peter primacy, Confession (think last supper and the washing of the feet also OT rituals) Statues (the Orthodox are wrong on this one and some Protestants also; see the OT description of the Temple and the ark) Transubstatation (Protestants got this all wrong and even knowing this it is still hard to come to terms with it) Even the rebellion of Core (or Korah) as well as Moses at the rock (notice the use of the word folks)

I could go on and on but I kept seeing passages that made me think Catholic, never Orthodox or Lutheran or Episcopalian except to think "gee why don't they do that". Rarely does one see Baptist on their knees at Church. I wonder why, Christ was clear on this but they lean forward at best, at least the ones I went to. In the end it doesn't matter, they are not in the presence of their King the way a Catholic is when he is before the Holy Eucharist.

[Dionysiusdecordealcis]

You're relatively new here so I'll excuse your apparent looking for the worst in what I wrote. Most of the Romans here will tell you that I am hardly anti-Roman Catholic and am tied with Agrarian in the role of Orthodox cheerleader for +Benedict XVI. On the other hand, like many of the Latins here, I don't pretend that there are not differences in the way the East and the West "do" theology, traditionally, though the end spot is almost always the same place or that our doctrinal difference, few though they may be, are of no consequence. I feel that's just being fair to each other and to ourselves, especially in the face of the heterodox. As for +Francis, I have absolutely no idea what his theology was. I know he wasn't a Father of the Church, but have no problem with what he did. Its simply different from what we usually do.

I wasn't looking for the worst in what you wrote, honestly. I've been around long enough to distinguish at least to some degree between the various Orthodox or Evangelical Protestant posters.

The problem with what you wrote was that it was cryptic--a shoot from the hip labeling of Francis de Sales by someone who, by your own admission, didn't know anything about Francis. Throwing the label Scholastic at Francis de Sales made no sense unless you intended it as a general label for "Latins." It's that kind of super-quick generalization that is uncalled for. It was accompanied by an obviously positive, for you, label, "patristic." Without further explanation, juxtaposing the two can only imply broad brush East/West/Patristic/Scholastic caricatures. If you don't want to be taken for an unreflective, unnuanced Orthodox apologist, then it's precisely the kind of off-the-cuff response that you would want to avoid. I thought it needed to be pointed out because as a Catholic Christian (you do realize that the word "Latin" used in the way Orthodox, especially Greek Orthodox, use it, is not entirely value-free?) I know our Western tradition is much more complex than a Scholastic label permits. My own work has always been in non-scholastic, patristic-monastic areas, where I see a truly unified East-West heritage until the rise of the western Universities in the 1200s.

I did not interpret your patristic/scholastic comment as "anti-Roman." I did think it was simplistic in response to someone who had simply expressed his own admiration for Francis de Sales; I suspected it did not arise from acquaintance with Francis de Sales and thought it needed to be replied to. I meant nothing personal and, I repeat, I was not looking for the worst in what you wrote. I was resisting the easy labeling of the West as "scholastic."

[wagglebee]

I was still Anglican when the light bulb went on for me about her and I was in love with her - so to speak about two and a half years before I became Catholic.

I'm curious, if you don't mind discussing it, what happened for this to occur?

[kosta50]

Pyro:Wouldn't that make him Roman, or Croat?

He was definitely Roman. When he lived, the Slavs were somewhere behind the Ural mountains on their slow progression towards Europe.

[Knitting A Conundrum]

Mary sort of nudged me in, but the Eucharist kept me coming back for more....Went to daily mass on a semi-regular basis for almost two years before I was confirmed....taught me to appreciate the reality of Jesus in the Eucharist and thus in his churches where the Eucharist is reserved in a very special way....

[Kolokotronis]

"He was definitely Roman. When he lived, the Slavs were somewhere behind the Ural mountains on their slow progression towards Europe."

Ella, Kosta mou! You're supposed to let me pull the wool over the eyes of the Xenoi once in a great while! :)

Kosta's right guys. He ought to know!

[Knitting A Conundrum]

Dalmatia (from the Catholic Encyclopedia


The meaning of the name Dalmatia or Delmatia, which is of Arnautic origin, is "land of shepherds" (delminium — pasture for sheep). The earliest mention of the name occurs at the time of the fall of the southern Illyric kingdom, 167 B.C. The people who dwelt near the rivers Neretva and Krka formed a league against the advancing Romans. Their principal town was Delminium, on the present plain of Sinj, or possibly Duvno in Herzegovina, and after that city the tribes called themselves Delmati, or Dalmati, 170 B.C. The islands were peopled by the Greeks; but the mainland by the Illyrians. The Dalmatian league soon came into conflict with the Romans. In 153 B.C. the Roman Senate sent envoys to negotiate with the Dalmatians, but they returned complaining that they were received in an unfriendly manner, and that they would have been killed if they had not secretly escaped. During the next year war broke out. Finally Publius Cornelius Scipio Nasica conquered the land and demolished the city of Delminium. The Romans' success was incomplete; they must subdue the neighbouring Illyrians and Celts if they wished to retain the whole of Dalmatia. The two new consuls had to march from Gaul to Illyrium and occupy the city of Segestica, now Sisak, thence to invade Dalmatia and capture the city of Salona. The consul Metellus carried out this plan, defeated the enemy in 118 B.C., and celebrated a triumph at Rome, receiving the title Dalmaticus (117). The Roman Senate now created the large province of Illyricum, extending southward to the River Drim, northward as far as the Julian Alps and the River Sava. The principal strategic point and fortress in this new province was the city of Salona (Solin). But the Dalmatians did not patiently bear the Roman yoke and tribute. Many uprisings broke out until the time of Octavian, who came to Illyricum in 40 B.C., and subjugated all the tribes; he made the rivers Drava and Danube the northern boundaries of the Roman possessions and sailed on them in his triremes. Later, when emporer, he broke the power of the Dalmatian and Pannonian tribes who tried again to throw off the Roman rule. The insurrection started in the year 6 B.C. and ended in A.D. 9. The power of the rebels was crushed and their country devastated. Since the Punic wars Rome had not been in as critical a situation as during this insurrection suppressed by Tiberius.

From this date begins the Romanizing of Illyricum. This province now received the name of Dalmatia and comprised all the land south of the River Sava, within which were many famous watering places, such as Aquæ Jassæ (the Varazdinske toplice of today), Aquæ Balissæ (Lipik in Croatia), and much mineral wealth exploited by them, as appears from their remains today. The Roman rule in Dalmatia ended with the entry of Christianity and the invasion of the northern nations. The Romans persecuted the Christians in Dalmatia and Pannonia, but they flourished nevertheless. St. Paul sent his disciple Titus to Dalmatia, who founded the first Christian see in the city of Salona and consecrated it with his blood A.D. 65. St. Peter sent St. Domnius. Salona became the centre from which Christianity spread. In Pannonia St. Andronicus founded the See of Syrmium (Mitrovica) and later those of Siscia and Mursia. The cruel persecution under Diocletian, who was a Dalmatian by birth, left numerous traces in Old Dalmatia and Pannonia. St. Quirinus, Bishop of Siscia, died a martyr A.D. 303. St. Jerome was born in Strido, a city on the border of Pannonia and Dalmatia. After the fall of the Western Empire in 476, peace never came to Dalmatia. She successively fell into the power of Odoacer, Theodoric, and Justinian. The Goths were Arians, but they did not persecute the Catholics. Two provincial church councils were held at Salona — 530 and 532. The Western Empire was succeeded by the Ostro-Goths, after whose fall in 555 Dalmatia came under Byzantine power. In A.D. 598 the khan of the Avars advanced from Syrmium through Bosnia, devastated Dalmatia, and demolished forty cities. In A.D. 600 appeared the Slavs, who entered Dalmatia. Pope Gregory the Great wrote to Maxim, Archbishop of Salona: "Et de Slavorum gente, quæ vobis valde imminet, affligor vehementer et conturbor. Affligor in his, quæ iam in vobis patior; conturbor quia per Istriæ aditum iam Italiam intrare coeperunt".

[Mark in the Old South]

I have wondered if Mary had more of a hand than I give proper credit. Who knows what spirit moves us. We all hope it is a benign spirit and hope it is in the right direction. Sometimes it is obvious but in the important details it is not always so easy to tell. I don't think it was meant to be easy. What is the value if there is no struggle? But that brings us back to Simon's prophecy at the Presentation.

[Kolokotronis]

I won't use the term "Catholic" without the word Roman because its too broad and Latin does describe a Particular Church within The Church as opposed to the various Eastern Churches in communion with the Bishop of Rome or the Orthodox Churches. Latin carries with it no opprobrium at least from my point of view (my undergraduate degree was in Classics), rather like Scholastic which doesn't either. As a matter of fact, I wasn't "throwing the label Scholastic" at +Francis de Sales or anyone else. You say your work has always been in the patristic/monastic era of The Church prior to 1200. I'm happy to hear that; you go read about it and I'll head off to a monastery in Greece next Tuesday to live it for a while. Maybe at some point in the future we might be able to have a discussion less marked by suspicion and such condescension as "an unreflective, unnuanced Orthodox apologist" or " simplistic". I must say I think that probably we should leave off our discussions for a while in light of these exchanges. I can't see anything constructive coming up for now.

[Kolokotronis]

So...was he a Greek or an Albanian (Schtadi Illyri)? Either one will explain his bad temper, trust me on that one! :)

[AliVeritas]

Hey fellow NYer, what's up. Listen to this:
http://www.ewtn.com/vondemand/audio/resolve.asp?rafile=iq_3879.ra

Here's some references...you need more, holler.
Peace of Christ! Ciao.

Mt 10:1-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16; Acts 1:13; Lk 9:32 ... Peter always mentioned first, as foremost apostle.
Mt 18:21; Mk 8:29; Lk 12:41; Jn 6:69 ... Peter speaks for the apostles.
Acts 2:14-40 ... Pentecost: Peter who first preached.
Acts 3:6-7 ... Peter worked first healing.
Acts 10:46-48 ... Gentiles to be baptized revealed to Peter.
Jn 1:42 ... Simon is Cephas (Aramaic: Kepha for rock).
Mt 16:18-19 ... "on this Rock ... keys ... bind ... loose"
Is 22:22; Rev 1:18 ... keys as symbol of authority.
Jn 21:17 ... "feed my sheep" (Very important)
Lk 22:31-32 ... "Simon ... strengthen your brethren".
(Also very important, addresses him directly)
Lk 10:1-2, 16; Jn 13:20; 2 Cor 5:20; Gal 4:14; Acts 5:1-5 ... "vicars" (substitutes) of Christ.
Mk 6:20; Lk 1:70,2:23; Rom 12:1; Act 3:21, 1 Cor 7:14; Eph 3:5; Col 1:22 ... humans can be holy ("call no one holy").

Also: http://www.aculink.net/~catholic/prim.htm

[Pyro7480]

You can't fool me! I'm a historian. ;-)

[Kolokotronis]

"You can't fool me! I'm a historian. ;-)"

So... a Greek or an Albanian?

[Salvation]

Thanks for the ping. Good article.

[Pyro7480]

100% American ;-)

[Salvation]

Saint Peter and the Vatican, the Legacy of the Popes

Saint Peter and The Vatican - Legacy of the Popes

FEBRUARY 22, CHAIR OF PETER, APOSTLE

[Invincibly Ignorant]

I think this thread is going to be hijacked by Protestants. But that's my opinion.

Well duh! He mentions in the first sentence having a debate with a protestant. I think you fear disagreement.

[Kolokotronis]

"100% American ;-)"

St. Jerome??????????????????????? Now that is ethnocentrism!