Skip to comments.
In Defense of the Papacy: 9 Reasons True Christians Follow the Pope
stpeterslist ^
| February 21, 2013
| HHAMBROSE
Posted on 02/22/2013 5:43:18 PM PST by NYer
His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI receives a papal tirara - New Liturgical Movement
In Defense of the Papacy: 9 Reasons True Christians Follow the Pope
by
HHAmbrose on
Feb 21, 2013 •
11:44 pm No Comments
Listers, glory and honor to God for giving us the grace of the papacy. The Pope is the “Advocate of Christian Memory” and he holds the King’s people to the King’s laws until our Savior returns. Each year on February 22nd the Church celebrates the Cathedra Petri – the Chair of St. Peter.
This feast brings to mind the mission of teacher and pastor conferred by Christ on Peter, and continued in an unbroken line down to the present Pope. We celebrate the unity of the Church, founded upon the Apostle, and renew our assent to the Magisterium of the Roman Pontiff, extended both to truths which are solemnly defined ex cathedra, and to all the acts of the ordinary Magisterium.
The feast of the Chair of Saint Peter at Rome has been celebrated from the early days of the Christian era on 18 January, in commemoration of the day when Saint Peter held his first service in Rome. The feast of the Chair of Saint Peter at Antioch, commemorating his foundation of the See of Antioch, has also been long celebrated at Rome, on 22 February. At each place a chair (cathedra) was venerated which the Apostle had used while presiding at Mass. One of the chairs is referred to about 600 by an Abbot Johannes who had been commissioned by Pope Gregory the Great to collect in oil from the lamps which burned at the graves of the Roman martyrs. New Catholic Dictionary
To commemorate this holy feast day SPL brings you a defense of the papacy with references to Scripture, the Western Church Fathers, the Eastern Church Fathers, and of course, the Medieval Popes.
The article addresses the following questions:
- Did St. Peter hold any primacy amongst the Twelve Apostles?
- Did Christ charge St. Peter with the office of the papacy?
- Did St. Peter exercise his ministry from Rome?
- What about the controversy of Sts. Peter and Paul?
- Did the papacy continue after St. Peter and if so, to whom?
- Did the Early Church speak of a hierarchal Church with bishops?
- What of those who started their own “churches”?
- What did the Eastern Early Church Fathers say about the Petrine Ministry?
- Are all people subject to the papacy?
The following list is certainly not exhaustive. The Scripture studies alone could fill up volumes and a proper study of Church history is a lifetime of academic work; however, we’ve catalogued a quality sampling of sources with biblical and textual citations in order that you may be able to defend or maybe even discover for the first time the grace of the papacy.
Holy Scripture
1. St. Peter was Prince of the Apostles
Prince of the Apostles means that St. Peter held a certain primacy over the other eleven. Understanding St. Peters unique position among the twelve and the unique ministries he exercised lays an excellent groundwork for a discussion of Christs founding of the Papacy. There are three primary topics of focus for exploring the biblical articulation of the primacy of the Petrine ministry.
St. Peters Place of Primacy Among the Twelve
Sts. Peter, James, and John are a special group of disciples that are allowed to witness the Transfiguration and accompany Christ to the Mount of Olives. In each event, St. Peter, the Rock, is singled out. At the Mount of Olives, Christ finds all three asleep, but it is St. Peter he addresses. During the Transfiguration, it is St. Peter who speaks for the disciples. In St. Luke 5:1-11, Christ calls his first disciples, and the first is Simon Peter. According to Cardinal Ratzinger, the call of Peter appears as the original pattern of apostolic vocation par excellence. Every time the disciples are listed, St. Peter is listed first. Furthermore, when referring to the disciples, sometimes only St. Peter is mentioned by name, e.g., And Simon and those who were with him, and Now Peter and those who were with him. St. Peter is the only one to try to walk on the water (Mt 14:28ff) and he is the one that brings up the famous question of how many times we must forgive. Even St. Peter’s shadow was an instrument of healing.
Significance of the Name Change
While it was common for Rabbis to give nicknames or new surnames to their disciples, e.g., the Sons of Zebedee as the Sons of Thunder, it was uncommon to change a disciples first name. Christ gives Simon the new name Peter or Kephas (or Cephas) meaning rock. In the Old Testament, God changing someones name denoted a special calling, a new vocation, e.g., Abram to Abraham, Sarai to Sarah, Jacob to Israel, etc. St. Peter’s name change denotes that he will have a special vocation among the twelve. Obviously Christ was also referred to as the Rock, because he is the foundation of all things. However, in the rabbinical tradition, Abraham was also referred to as a rock: Look to the rock from which you were hewn
look to Abraham your father . Cardinal Ratzinger comments:
Abraham, the father of faith, is by his faith the rock that holds back chaos, the onrushing primordial flood of destruction, and thus sustains creation. Simon, the first to confess Jesus as the Christ and the first witness of the Resurrection, now becomes by virtue of his Abrahamic faith, which is renewed in Christ, the rock that stands against the impure tide of unbelief and its destruction of man.
The Papal Office Given to St. Peter by Christ
After the Resurrection, Christ appears to the Twelve and has a unique conversation with St. Peter. Christ, the Shepherd, asks St. Peter three times if he loves him. St. Peter responds yes all three times presumably this passage should reflect his three denials. Christ also tell St. Peter and Peter alone: feed my lambs, tend my sheep, and feed my sheep. As the Vicar of Christ, St. Peter must care for the flock. In Lk 22:31-34, two major Petrine themes are evident. First, Satan has taken a special interest in St. Peter. He will fail, but will repent. Second, after St. Peter has turned again to Christ, Jesus commissions him to strengthen the brethren. Another mission given only to St. Peter.
In Matthew 16:13-20, the most famous unique call is given to St. Peter: to be the foundation of the Church and to exercise the authority of keys of the kingdom. The office given to St. Peter is that of the Vicar within the Davidic Kingdom. The Vicar governs in the Kings stead, according to the Kings rules, while the King is gone. St. Peter is the Vicar of Christ, the Pope.
Concluding Thoughts and Suggested Reading
For all of this information plus a brief handling of the relationship between Sts. Peter and Paul, please reference 13 Biblical Reasons St. Peter is the Prince of the Apostles. The page citations and Scripture references for this section are taken from Cardinal Ratzinger’s Called to Communion, which was featured in The 6 Books by Pope Benedict XVI All Catholics Should Read.
A selection from “Christ’s Charge to Peter,” Raphael (1515)
2. Jesus Christ Founded the Papacy
According to Holy Scripture, the Office of the Papacy was instituted by Jesus Christ. In fact, he was the only person who had the authority to create such a position. SPL’s article 10 Biblical Reasons Christ Founded the Papacy discusses the following questions:
- What type of kingdom did Christ intend to bring?
- What role did Christ intend for Saint Peter?
- What is the biblical backing for St. Peters role in accordance with the Davidic Kingdom?
- What is the position and what is its purpose?
- What does the Catechism of the Catholic Church say about St. Peter and the Papacy?
- But in Greek, St. Peters name is Petros and Christ says, upon this petra, so Christ was not referring to St. Peter, was he?
- Isnt Christ The Rock?
- I am a Christian, how can I follow both Christ and the Pope?
- How can I have a personal relationship with Christ and have a middle man, the Pope?
- Scripturally, what would be the overall reason Christ would want a Vicar for his Church?
We will address the first three questions here, because they lay out a proper biblical understanding of the Office of the Papacy.
1. What type of kingdom did Christ intend to bring?
Jesus Christ was descended from King David and referred to as Son of David. King David was promised a descendent who would not only rule forever, but would sit on Davids throne forever; thus, any conversation of what is and what is not properly intended by Christ, regarding his Kingdom, must be couched within the template of the Davidic Kingdom.
2. What role did Christ intend for Saint Peter?
In the district of Caesarea Philippi, Christ asks his disciples Who do men say that the Son of man is? St. Peter responds, You are the Christ, the Son of the living God. Jesus then says to St. Peter:
And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it. I will give you they of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
Christs intention for the role of St. Peter within the kingdom is twofold: Christ changed Simon Bar-jonas name to Peter meaning rock and he will be a foundation for Christs kingdom on earth, the Church, and secondly, St. Peter is given the keys of kingdom, which come with great authority. It is important to note this is one of the few times Christ ever mentions the “Church.”
3. What is the biblical backing for St. Peters role in accordance with the Davidic Kingdom?
If Christ is giving St. Peter a role within his Church, his kingdom of God on earth, then it must be part of the Davidic Kingdom. The symbols of authority given to St. Peter are the keys of the kingdom. Looking to the Old Testament, it is clear that Christ is rewording a passage from Isaiah that speaks of a position within the Davidic Kingdom:
And I will place on his should the key of the house of David; he shall open, and none shall shut; and he shall shut, and none shall open. And I will fasten him like a peg in a sure place, and he will become a throne of honor to his fathers house.
Here a position within the Davidic Kingdom is described which has the key of authority to open and close, and is considered a position of security and authority when the King is away. Christ, who will sit on Davids throne forever, is using an Old Testament verse to elucidate a New Testament Kingdom position.
A section of the “Martyrdom of St. Peter” by Leonello Spada (15761622)
Early Church
3. St. Peter Exercised his Ministry from Rome
Bl. John Henry Newman said it best: To be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant. History paints an overwhelming picture of St. Peters apostolic ministry in Rome and this is confirmed by a multitude of different sources within the Early Church. Catholic Encyclopedia states:
In opposition to this distinct and unanimous testimony of early Christendom, some few Protestant historians have attempted in recent times to set aside the residence and death of Peter at Rome as legendary. These attempts have resulted in complete failure.
Protestantism as a whole seeks to divorce Christianity from history by rending Gospel message out of its historical context as captured by our Early Church Fathers. One such target of these heresies is to devalue St. Peter and to twist the authority of Rome into a historical mishap within Christianity. To wit, the belief has as its end the ultimate end of all Catholic and Protestant dialogue who has authority in Christianity?
The article 11 Reasons the Authority of Christianity is Centered on St. Peter and Rome is a sampling of the praise of and adherence to the Petrine Ministry – The Papacy. While the list gives three quality examples of Scripture connecting St. Peter with Rome, we will look here at a few choice quotes from the Early Church.
Taught in the Same Place in Italy
Bishop Dionysius of Corinth, in his letter to the Roman Church in the time of Pope Soter (165-74), says:
You have therefore by your urgent exhortation bound close together the sowing of Peter and Paul at Rome and Corinth. For both planted the seed of the Gospel also in Corinth, and together instructed us, just as they likewise taught in the same place in Italy and at the same time suffered martyrdom (in Eusebius, Church History II.25).
St. Peter Announced the Word of God in Rome
In his Hypotyposes (Eusebius, Church History IV.14), Clement of Alexandria, teacher in the catechetical school of that city from about 190, says on the strength of the tradition of the presbyters:
After Peter had announced the Word of God in Rome and preached the Gospel in the spirit of God, the multitude of hearers requested Mark, who had long accompanied Peter on all his journeys, to write down what the Apostles had preached to them (see above).
Come to the Vatican and See for Yourself
The Roman, Caius, who lived in Rome in the time of Pope Zephyrinus (198-217), wrote in his Dialogue with Proclus (in Eusebius, Church History II.25) directed against the Montanists:
But I can show the trophies of the Apostles. If you care to go to the Vatican or to the road to Ostia, thou shalt find the trophies of those who have founded this Church.”
By the trophies (tropaia) Eusebius understands the graves of the Apostles, but his view is opposed by modern investigators who believe that the place of execution is meant. For our purpose it is immaterial which opinion is correct, as the testimony retains its full value in either case. At any rate the place of execution and burial of both were close together; St. Peter, who was executed on the Vatican, received also his burial there. Eusebius also refers to the inscription of the names of Peter and Paul, which have been preserved to the present day on the burial-places there (i.e. at Rome).
Sts. Peter and Paul, pray for us.
4. The Early Church on Sts. Peter and Paul
“Many modern day academics enjoy setting St. Peter and St. Paul in enmity with one another,” states SPL author Catherine, “however, the over emphasis of Galatians 2:11-14 by modern scholarship fails to acknowledge that even though they had a disagreement their mission of spreading the Gospel was the same. In this spirit, I present to you five reflections by members of the early church on the mutual impact that St. Peter and Paul had on the early church. Prayerfully ask the Holy Spirit to let St. Peter and St. Pauls example of faithfulness unto death be your focus today and everyday.” Out of Catherine’s excellent list, we will focus on one particular passage by St. Irenaeus:
Since, however, it would be very tedious, in such a volume as this, to reckon up the successions of all the Churches, we do put to confusion all those who, in whatever manner, whether by an evil self-pleasing, by vainglory, or by blindness and perverse opinion, assemble in unauthorized meeting; [we do this, I say] by indicating that tradition derived from the apostles, of the very great, the very ancient, and universally known Church founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul; also [by pointing out] the faith they preached to men, which comes down to our time by means of the successions of the bishops. For it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its preeminent authority, that is, the faithful everywhere, inasmuch as the apostolical tradition has been preserved continuously by those [faithful men] who exist everywhere.
Against Heresies 3.3.2.
Along with the above quote, the other four passages from the Early Church demonstrate the Fathers focusing on Sts. Peter and Paul as brothers in the faith and fellow martyrs – not enemies vying for power within the Church. For a more biblical focus of the relationship between Sts. Peter and Paul see the above-mentioned list on St. Peter as Prince of the Apostles.
Crucifixion of St. Peter – Masaccio, AD 1426
5. The First Popes of the Catholic Church
In cataloguing the first ten popes of the Catholics Church, SPL hoped to address a few misconceptions. The first would be that the office of the papacy was simply given to St. Peter and then closed upon his death. The necessity of a Vicar of Christ with the Keys of Kingdom is present until the King returns and the Keys are returned to him. Secondly, we hoped to address the pernicious error that the papacy is a historical fiction within the Early Church and it did not materialize until medieval times. For our purposes, we’ll select the two popes that followed St. Peter from The First 10 Popes of the Catholic Church.
Pope St. Linus (67-76)
All the ancient records of the Roman bishops which have been handed down to us by St. Irenaeus, Julius Africanus, St. Hippolytus, Eusebius, also the Liberian catalogue of 354, place the name of Linus directly after that of the Prince of the Apostles, St. Peter. These records are traced back to a list of the Roman bishops which existed in the time of Pope Eleutherus (about 174-189), when Irenaeus wrote his book Adversus haereses. As opposed to this testimony, we cannot accept as more reliable Tertullians assertion, which unquestionably places St. Clement (De praescriptione, xxii) after the Apostle Peter, as was also done later by other Latin scholars (Jerome, Illustrious Men 15). The Roman list in Irenaeus has undoubtedly greater claims to historical authority. This author claims that Pope Linus is the Linus mentioned by St. Paul in his 2 Timothy 4:21. The passage by Irenaeus (Against Heresies III.3.3) reads:
After the Holy Apostles (Peter and Paul) had founded and set the Church in order (in Rome) they gave over the exercise of the episcopal office to Linus. The same Linus is mentioned by St. Paul in his Epistle to Timothy. His successor was Anacletus.
We cannot be positive whether this identification of the pope as being the Linus mentioned in 2 Timothy 4:21 goes back to an ancient and reliable source, or originated later on account of the similarity of the name.
Pope St. Anacletus (Cletus) (76-88)
The second successor of St. Peter. Whether he was the same as Cletus, who is also called Anencletus as well as Anacletus, has been the subject of endless discussion. Irenaeus, Eusebius, Augustine, Optatus, use both names indifferently as of one person. Tertullian omits him altogether. To add to the confusion, the order is different. Thus Irenaeus has Linus, Anacletus, Clement; whereas Augustine and Optatus put Clement before Anacletus. On the other hand, the Catalogus Liberianus, the Carmen contra Marcionem and the Liber Pontificalis, all most respectable for their antiquity, make Cletus and Anacletus distinct from each other; while the Catalogus Felicianus even sets the latter down as a Greek, the former as a Roman.
The Martyrdom of Saint Clement c. 1480
6. The Apostles Appointed Bishops
The Early Church was the Early Catholic Church. First Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians is an orthodox window into the infancy of the Church (AD 97) and particularly into the structure of the Church. The Early Church is not an ambiguous or mysterious time. It is a well recorded period with a great number of writings from the Early Church Fathers. Clement lived in Rome only a stone’s throw away from the Coliseum. He is seen as a successor to St. Peter and is considered the fourth Pope of Rome, following St. Peter, St. Linus and St. Anacletus.
Chapter XLII outlines a clear theology of succession from Christ to the Apostles to the Bishops of the Church. As an early Christian, how do you know if you belonged to the true Church? Well, does your community have a bishop? Did your bishop come from the Apostles who came from Christ our Lord who came from God the Father? It should be stressed this epistle is dated AD 97.
“The apostles have preached the gospel to us from the Lord Jesus Christ; Jesus Christ [has done so] from God. Christ therefore was sent forth by God, and the apostles by Christ. Both these appointments, then, were made in an orderly way, according to the will of God. Having therefore received their orders, and being fully assured by the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ, and established in the word of God, with full assurance of the Holy Ghost, they went forth proclaiming that the kingdom of God was at hand. And thus preaching through countries and cities, they appointed the first fruits [of their labours], having first proved them by the Spirit, to be bishops and deacons of those who should afterwards believe. Nor was this any new thing, since indeed many ages before it was written concerning bishops and deacons. For thus says the Scripture in a certain place, I will appoint their bishops in righteousness, and their deacons in faith.”
In Chapter XLIV, St. Clement shuts the book on any doubt that the apostles chose and declared men to lead as bishops after their death. It is apostolic succession in a clear and practical manner articulated in AD 97.
“Our apostles also knew, through our Lord Jesus Christ, that there would be strife on account of the office of the episcopate. For this reason, therefore, inasmuch as they had obtained a perfect fore-knowledge of this, they appointed those [ministers] already mentioned, and afterwards gave instructions, that when these should fall asleep, other approved men should succeed them in their ministry. We are of opinion, therefore, that those appointed by them, or afterwards by other eminent men, with the consent of the whole church, and who have blamelessly served the flock of Christ, in a humble, peaceable, and disinterested spirit, and have for a long time possessed the good opinion of all, cannot be justly dismissed from the ministry. For our sin will not be small, if we eject from the episcopate those who have blamelessly and holily fulfilled its duties. Blessed are those presbyters who, having finished their course before now, have obtained a fruitful and perfect departure [from this world]; for they have no fear lest any one deprive them of the place now appointed them. But we see that you have removed some men of excellent behaviour from the ministry, which they fulfilled blamelessly and with honour.”
It is important to note the universal authority in which Pope St. Clement I is writing. One cannot miss how early in the life of the Church this writing is and how the Church is already a hierarchal body that respects the teachings of the Bishop of Rome. Pope St. Clement I even commands the Corinthians at one point – this note and other are commented on in The Apostles Appointed Bishops: 9 Teachings from St. Clement AD 97.
The Schismatics of Dante’s Inferno by Gustave
7. Those Who Start Their Own Church Follow the Voice of Satan
The Pope as the Vicar of Christ and as the Advocate of Christian Memory stands as tent peg holding down the Universal Church of Christ, and no list on Church unity would be complete without the (in)famous epistle of St. Cyprian, AD 250.
Our Lord Jesus Christ is not returning to our world for a harem of “churches.” There is One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church and it was founded by Christ and charged by him to St. Peter and the Apostles. However, there are now and always have been those groups that attempt to rend Christ from his Church – to recreate that which God gave us, the Church. In AD 250, St. Cyprian wrote an outstanding work entitled On the Unity of the Church. The epistle focuses especially on the topic of schism and those who would set themselves up as Church leaders and/or start their own “churches.” Without question, these groups are proto-protestant groups and the saint’s arguments apply just as much to our modern schismatic and heretical groups as they did to his ancient schismatic groups.
The New Way of Satan
He [Satan] has invented heresies and schisms, whereby he might subvert the faith, might corrupt the truth, might divide the unity. Those whom he cannot keep in the darkness of the old way [paganism], he circumvents and deceives by the error of a new way [schism/heresy]. He snatches men from the Church itself; and while they seem to themselves to have already approached to the light, and to have escaped the night of the world, he pours over them again, in their unconsciousness, new darkness.
Upon This Rock
There is easy proof for faith in a short summary of the truth. The Lord speaks to Peter, saying, 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. And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound also in heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. And again to the same He says, after His resurrection, Feed my sheep.
Can the Spouse of Christ Be Adulterous?
The spouse of Christ cannot be adulterous; she is uncorrupted and pure. She knows one home; she guards with chaste modesty the sanctity of one couch. She keeps us for God. She appoints the sons whom she has born for the kingdom. Whoever is separated from the Church and is joined to an adulteress, is separated from the promises of the Church; nor can he who forsakes the Church of Christ attain to the rewards of Christ. He is a stranger; he is profane; he is an enemy. He can no longer have God for his Father, who has not the Church for his mother.
Those Who Start Their Own Church Vomit Poison
These are they who of their own accord, without any divine arrangement, set themselves to preside among the daring strangers assembled, who appoint themselves prelates without any law of ordination, who assume to themselves the name of bishop, although no one gives them the episcopate; whom the Holy Spirit points out in the Psalms as sitting in the seat of pestilence, plagues, and spots of the faith, deceiving with serpents tongue, and artful in corrupting the truth, vomiting forth deadly poisons from pestilential tongues; whose speech doth creep like a cancer, whose discourse forms a deadly poison in the heart and breast of every one.
Priests and Sacrifice
What sacrifices do those who are rivals of the priests think that they celebrate? Do they deem that they have Christ with them when they are collected together, who are gathered together outside the Church of Christ?
Without a doubt this epistle of St. Cyprian is one of the most quotable letters of the Early Church Fathers. For more commentary and more unabashed Catholic quotes visit Those Who Start Their Own Church Follow the Voice of Satan: 11 Teachings from St. Cyprian AD 250.
St. John Chrysostom, pray for us.
8. The Eastern Fathers Supported the Petrine Ministry
Often times the papacy is misunderstood a “characteristic” of Western Christianity. In fact, nothing could be farther from the truth. The Catholic Church embraces the Eastern Catholic Churches along with the Roman Church and they are united in doctrine under the Holy Father, the Pope. SPL has catalogue an extensive collection of quotes from the Eastern Church Fathers supporting the Petrine Ministry.
St. Sophronius, Patriarch of Jerusalem (d. A.D. 638)
Teaching us all orthodoxy and destroying all heresy and driving it away from the God-protected halls of our holy Catholic Church. And together with these inspired syllables and characters, I accept all his (the popes) letters and teachings as proceeding from the mouth of Peter the Coryphaeus, and I kiss them and salute them and embrace them with all my soul
I recognize the latter as definitions of Peter and the former as those of Mark, and besides, all the heaven-taught teachings of all the chosen mystagogues of our Catholic Church. – Sophronius, Mansi, xi. 461
St. Theodore the Studite of Constantinople (d. 826)
Writing to Pope Leo III:
Since to great Peter Christ our Lord gave the office of Chief Shepherd after entrusting him with the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, to Peter or his successor must of necessity every novelty in the Catholic Church be referred. [Therefore], save us, oh most divine Head of Heads, Chief Shepherd of the Church of Heaven. (Theodore, Bk. I. Ep. 23)
Sergius, Metropolitain of Cyprus (649)
Writing to Pope Theodore:
O Holy Head, Christ our God hath destined thy Apostolic See to be an immovable foundation and a pillar of the Faith. For thou art, as the Divine Word truly saith, Peter, and on thee as a foundation-stone have the pillars of the Church been fixed. (Sergius Ep. ad Theod. lecta in Sess. ii. Concil. Lat. anno 649)
SPL has listed over 50 quotes of the Eastern Church Fathers: The Early Church in Jerusalem Followed the Pope: 7 Quotes from History, Constantinople: 25 Quotes from the Eastern Fathers on the Petrine Ministry, and Rome is the Apostolic Throne: 24 Quotes from Alexandria, Antioch, and Cyprus.
St. Peter, Prince of the Apostles, Vicar of Christ, pray for us.
Medieval
9. All Human Creatures Are Subject to the Pope
The following is a short compilation of quotes taken from previous Ecumenical Pontiffs of Rome: Outside the Church there is no hope for salvation. These quotes show us the confidence that our previous Bishops of Rome have had in their authority given by God Himself to be the Vicar of Christ here on Earth. As St. Augustine said, Rome has spoken, the case is closed.
The universal Church of the faithful is one outside of which none is saved.
Pope Innocent III, ex cathedra, Fourth Lateran Council (1215 AD)
We declare, say , define, and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff.
Pope Boniface VIII, Unam Sanctam (1302 AD)
You see, dearly beloved sons and venerable brothers, how much vigilance is needed to keep the disease of this terrible evil from infecting and killing your flocks. Do not cease to diligently defend your people against these pernicious errors. Saturate them with the doctrine of Catholic truth more accurately each day. Teach them that just as there is only one God, one Christ, one Holy Spirit, so there is also only one truth which is divinely revealed. There is only one divine faith which is the beginning of salvation for mankind and the basis of all justification, the faith by which the just person lives and without which it is impossible to please God and to come to the community of His children.[Rom 1; Heb 11; Council of Trent, session 6, chap. 8.] There is only one true, holy, Catholic church, which is the Apostolic Roman Church. There is only one See founded in Peter by the word of the Lord,[St. Cyprian, epistle 43.] outside of which we cannot find either true faith or eternal salvation. He who does not have the Church for a mother cannot have God for a father, and whoever abandons the See of Peter on which the Church is established trusts falsely that he is in the Church.[St. Cyprian,de unitat. Eccl.] Thus, there can be no greater crime, no more hideous stain than to stand up against Christ, than to divide the Church engendered and purchased by His blood, than to forget evangelical love and to combat with the furor of hostile discord the harmony of the people of God.[St. Cyprian, epistle 72.]“
Blessed Pope Pius IX, Singulari Quidem
Happy Feast of the Chair of St. Peter, listers.
TOPICS: Apologetics; Catholic; History; Ministry/Outreach
KEYWORDS: catholic
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 241-260, 261-280, 281-300 ... 481-483 next last
To: NYer; boatbums
THANK YOU for your apology to boatbums and (I hope) by extension to all nonCatholic Christians. I was embarrassed and scandalized that a fellow Catholic would post an article whose title states that nonCatholics aren't "true" Christians. That kind of mindset is neither charitable nor in keeping with Catholic teaching. I can understand and empathize with any nonCatholic Christian who felt poked by a stick (or worse) by this post.
Please excuse me if my words come across as harsh. They aren't intended to be. I sometimes say something with the best of intentions and only later realize how thoughtless it was. I don't believe you had negative motives for your post but I can understand that others might disagree.
Peace be with you.
To: terycarl
You don't have to make Christians look bad in order to make Catholicism look good. Or maybe you do.
a strange comment indeed.....
Well I see from your other statements that it appears you still do have that need.
God is patient with you, so I will be too.
The fact that your Catholicism keeps drawing a circle with Biblical Christianity outside of Catholic Christianity causes God to draw a bigger circle encompassing Biblical Christianity and Catholic Christianity.
Any Catholics wishing to take part in Biblical Christianity God welcomes to break through the wall and join His True church.
The church that is made up of EVERY born again person that has a personal relationship with Jesus Christ and lives his/her life with Jesus inside them and them inside Jesus.
And as usual it is your statement--Catholicism is Christianity-- that is strange indeed.
Christianity is what was just explained to you above.
if you care to follow some lesser "denomination" so be it, but whatever it is, it is NOT full Christianity.
There are no second class Christians, you either are a Christian in it's fullness, or you are not.
You may follow your denomination, but Biblical Christianity has not followers of denominations, just followers of Jesus as the Bible commands.
For Catholics to put themselves above Biblical Christians is not from God.
Just because Catholism requires putting your denomination between you and God doesn't mean that Biblical Christianity has to follow that "strange" belief.
there can only be one true Christian Church on Earth
There is and it is explained above. It is NOT Catholicism.
Catholicism CAN be included, it's an individual decision.
Personal relationships with Jesus are just that...and between each individual and Jesus.
All other denominations are indeed Christian, but not FULLY Christian
LOL, there you go again as Reagan would say.
An individual is either fully Christian, or not Christian. Period.
You can't be "kinda" Christian any more than you can be "kinda" preganant. You either are or you are not.
Gosh, Catholics have such a hard time accepting Biblical Christians as complete Christians.
Well God does, His word confirms it.
All other denominations are indeed Christian, but not FULLY Christian. Close doesn't count, they fell away from the true Christian church and became outsiders looking in....not wrong, not evil, just incomplete.
There are literally millions of Biblical Christians that have never had anything to do with the Catholic Church, so to claim that they "fell away" from it is pure foolishness.
Biblical Christians ARE members of the True Christian church and yes...they do look into Catholism, but from a perspective of Jesus looking at a broken system that enslaves to traditons and following a man, the pope, instead of God Incarnate.
You can be set free.
John 8:31-32 "If you abide in My word, you are My disciples indeed. 32 And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free."36: If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed.
Jesus is standing at the door.
"Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. 8 For everyone who asks receives; the one who seeks finds; and to the one who knocks, the door will be opened." Matthew 7:7-8
262
posted on
02/24/2013 8:07:22 PM PST
by
Syncro
("So?" - Andrew Breitbart The King of All Media (RIP Feb 1, 1969 – Mar 1, 2012)
To: BlackElk
I am very confused by these pings. I am not participating in this thread.
To: terycarl; Nifster
nifster:You view history through the lens of Rome . I on the other hand have studied history....Rome claims much that is untrue and always has been. God on the other hand is truly infallible
terycarl: You have not studied history or you would never make the claim that Rome claims ANYTHING that is untrue
terycarl, are you calling nifster a liar?
That is not allowed on the Religion forum.
You should apologize.
What is it you have posted to Christians here? Oh yea, you should be ashamed. Own it.
264
posted on
02/24/2013 8:22:09 PM PST
by
Syncro
("So?" - Andrew Breitbart The King of All Media (RIP Feb 1, 1969 – Mar 1, 2012)
To: PeevedPatriot; NYer; boatbums
“...nonCatholics aren’t “true” Christians...”
I grew up knowing that occasionally there might be a Catholic who was a true Christian. I had some who were in my family (cousins, etc). I got a lively conversation going one time by stating that I believed John XXIII really knew the Lord...how sacrilegious...in the eyes of some of you reading this...
I would say today, without doubt, that there will be many more true followers of Christ in ‘Heaven’ that there are ‘Catholics’...some of those true followers will be Catholics, many will not be Catholic. All will be members of the one, holy, catholic church (small ‘c’ is not a typo).
All that being said, there are many ‘professing’ Christians who do not know Yehshua as Lord and Savior, do not have a personal relationship with Him.
I believe that personal relationship is key...knowing Him...I do not need an intermediary between Him and me. I do not need an intermediary to hear my ‘confession’. I do not need a ‘priest’ to celebrate communion with Him. We who know Him are kings and priests,
“John to the seven churches which are in Asia: Grace be unto you, and peace, from him which is, and which was, and which is to come; and from the seven Spirits which are before his throne; And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood, And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.”
(Revelation 1:4-6 KJV)
“And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth.”
(Revelation 5:10 KJV)
265
posted on
02/24/2013 8:41:17 PM PST
by
GGpaX4DumpedTea
(I am a Tea Party descendant...steeped in the Constitutional Republic given to us by the Founders.)
To: Syncro
**And as usual it is your statement--Catholicism is Christianity-- that is strange indeed.**
Have you ever attended a Catholic Mass?
It is divided into two parts -- the first part, The Liturgy of the Word, centered usually on an Old Testament Reading, a Psalm, and something from one of St. Paul's letters. Then the Gospel -- often with the words of Jesus Christ. Just who do you think Catholicism is centered on? It's Christ!!!!!
Hopefully you will not be repeating this untruth.
The second part is the Litrugy of the Eucharist is completely focused on Jesus Christ. The priest is the alter Christus there for us in place of Christ.
266
posted on
02/24/2013 8:48:54 PM PST
by
Salvation
("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
To: Syncro
**And as usual it is your statement--Catholicism is Christianity-- that is strange indeed.**
Have you ever attended a Catholic Mass?
It is divided into two parts -- the first part, The Liturgy of the Word, centered usually on an Old Testament Reading, a Psalm, and something from one of St. Paul's letters. Then the Gospel -- often with the words of Jesus Christ. Just who do you think Catholicism is centered on? It's Christ!!!!!
Hopefully you will not be repeating this untruth.
The second part is the Litrugy of the Eucharist is completely focused on Jesus Christ. The priest is the alter Christus there for us in place of Christ.
267
posted on
02/24/2013 8:49:31 PM PST
by
Salvation
("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
To: terycarl
we could start with something as simple as Peter having ever been in Rome....The New Testament is clear through Paul’s writings that Peter was the apostle carrying the message to the Jews and Paul was carrying the message to the Gentiles.
But why bother with basics???
268
posted on
02/24/2013 9:46:42 PM PST
by
Nifster
To: Salvation
The priest is the alter Christus there for us in place of Christ. The priest is another Christ in place of Jesus? [that is completely unscriptural and borders on blaspheme]
Why? What's wrong with having the REAL Jesus Christ via his Holy Spirit in your church service as the Biblical Christian services do?
**And as usual it is your statement--Catholicism is Christianity-- that is strange indeed.**
Sorry, but as you would see if you read my whole post I reject the fallacy that "Catholicism is Christianity" which discounts Biblical Christian Christianity and pretty much says it doesn't exist.
Millions of Biblical Christians who have never had any connection with the Catholic church would dispute that pretty strongly, led by the Holy Spirit.
269
posted on
02/24/2013 10:15:17 PM PST
by
Syncro
("So?" - Andrew Breitbart The King of All Media (RIP Feb 1, 1969 – Mar 1, 2012)
To: Steelfish
We are not talking here about camels or noses. Oh yes we are!
This is the camel's nose;They were handed down by what we have come to know as the oral tradition from Peter and his apostles to his successors the Popes may of whom were the early Church Fathers and saints of the Church.
Notice the "jump", the assumption that something crucial was passed down...but no definition of what that was in the slightest.
It IS THE SAME EXACT ARGUMENT some of the early gnostics made, except that there were being specific as to what information was explained much by;"Oh, we were told this by an apostle". "We were told these things, but not anyone else was told." Later gnostics, not having had much direct access to apostles, nor any records of some teaching or another having been given directly to them, claimed to have gotten things "through revelation".
[notice the italicized in the above]
When such departed from scripture, introducing new ideas, or adding to, distorting that which is contained in scripture, such was battled against by, as I made mention of "early church notables". In other places those can be seen to be referred to as "Early Church Fathers".
I've seen the argument you are trying to make here, be so thoroughly shredded it's not even funny. Yet it keeps coming back...because the same faulty premises keep getting repeated by folks whom should know better! (that might not be you).
Those that do know better, at least try to doll the argument up, by calling it "unpacking". The trouble with that is, once some of the stuff is unfolded, it's so far off track of the original message (as can be found in the scriptures) that it is opposition to scripture itself (and many times in opposition to the writings of "Early Church Fathers too!) being as it either adds new themes, or undoes old ones by changing definitions, sometimes in mid-sentence, adding requirements which makes grace itself (the unmerited favor of God) something one must "do works" to obtain.
Thank God for the Reformation. The approaches found there, towards "grace' and justification (this latter one of those things which can be seen to be redefined in mid-sentence in RCC pronouncements) which were pressed by the Reformers, have positively (for the good) affected RCC teachings, at least in some quarters. That it may be said that such as is now taught of in the RCC (at times and places), aligns much with that which the Reformers stressed as being of primary importance, which also can be found to be supported by "early church fathers", buttresses the case that either and both groups are on the right track when they do also stress the same "primary" principles.
So what is it exactly that was passed down from the ORIGINAL apostles, what theme or set of ideas that we cannot otherwise find CLEAR evidence of in what scripture we have? If you cannot show me that, then what is left but to fall back on the the later arising "traditions"?
We can in many ways show and reasonably track items like "papal supremacy" not being an early tenet of the church (and much resisted even within the Latin church when first being strongly pressed, somewhere around the sixth century, if memory serves) and so on.
I realize my having said so will invite someone to bring an out-of-context quote from some 3rd or 4th century "church father", but even those in context in which they are found, seldom if ever cut the mustard, besides being a bit too late to get under the wire (edge of the tent? haha) of being able to be plausible as "oral tradition" "passed by Christ" "to the Apostles" as is the case which is being presented.
So tell me;
WHEN exactly was this information, this otherwise unrecorded "oral tradition from Christ" first incorporated? Hundreds of years later? That's usually the case. If not --- please feel free to prove otherwise. Or drop the empty claim. Your choice.
To repeat myself for sake of clarity, WHAT was in this "oral tradition" not otherwise found in scripture?
Was there;
Important stuff, themes pressed as being somehow crucial. not directly addressed in scripture, not present in the law (Torah), nor touched upon or addressed by the prophets of Israel (books of the prophets) nor addressed by Christ nor His own Apostles' written works speaking specifically of events and the words of Christ? Let us include Paul's numerous Epistles, his extensive writings towards both "Law" and prophesy which Christ came to fulfill, including also that which is significant to the Gospel record found in the book of Luke (along with the other Gospels, themselves regarded to have been written directly by Apostles themselves, of course).
As towards things not found therein, but much pressed in later centuries, somehow... we are supposed to accept, "oh, this is the way it's always been from the beginning".??? This was handed down by Christ? For that IS what you are more or less advocating is "truth".
What indication (beyond the oft repeated assumptions you repeat here) is there that this unspecified, unwritten, unrecorded "oral" information, popping up centuries later "came from/through Peter" who recieved it directly from Christ? If you are trying to tie the "oral tradition" to words alleged to have been spoken of by Christ, to things which can be seen to have developed over time--- that argument is a both a loser and the very "camel's nose" I speak of.
Egads, what a load. The "camel" has dropped a pile. To those whom have grown up surrounded by the "smell", perhaps it is not as noticable? For myself, I'll accept no such uncouth creatures in my own dwelling place, temporary as that dwelling may be...
The bleating denials are just that. Just so much empty bleatings. Your argument lacks coherence (just like I said). Having high up muckyty-mucks in the RCC state the same doesn't make it into "truth", either. Just a "version" ... and one far from being unimpeachable.
270
posted on
02/24/2013 10:59:51 PM PST
by
BlueDragon
(what do you mean he has bullet holes in his mirrors?)
To: terycarl
you have to be kidding....Jesus was a human being and He said zillions of things that were not recorded...He didn't even know the apostles until He was an adult. How many wonderful things must He have said to His parents, relatives, friends, that we will never get to hear. Maybe one of His boyhood friends fell and was injured...perhaps Jesus wiped away the injury and comforted His friend.....they were ten years old, chances are that it didn't make the big book. For you, or anyone, to claim that everything that Jesus said was somehow recorded is nonsense!!! Perhaps in your rush to mock and ridicule you missed my entire point! I never said EVERYTHING Jesus ever said was recorded in Scripture. What I DID say is that what was written in Scripture was so we would believe and have eternal life, like John said many times in his writings. The problem with conjecture, and that IS what imaginings about Jesus during times not spoken of in Scripture are, is that any number of things can be described. We have several writings from people back then that purported to be eye witnesses to Jesus as a kid doing certain things such as healing little baby birds or cursing someone and something bad happened to them, stuff like that. There are thousands of stories that have been and will continue to be written about Jesus and, without some verifying proof, they are nothing more than fiction - someone's fanciful and creative imagination. If the believers back in Jesus' time didn't give them any credence then, who are we thousands of years later to come along and say, "Oh, that COULD have happened. We don't really know."?
What we DO know is that whatever DID make the "book" was intended to be there for specific reasons and, as it is Divinely-inspired and God-given, it is the objective authority we have for the rule of our faith. John said he wrote what he did so that we can KNOW we have eternal life. Did he leave out anything or fail to mention something critical to our salvation? Nope. So, of course Jesus said "zillions" of words, but we can have confidence that those words he said that we, today, need to know about are there in Scripture. Holy men of God "spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit" and that is what we have - God's love letter to us. The Holy Spirit did not gyp anyone. We don't need some theologians centuries after the fact to tell us all the stuff we SHOULD know about that got omitted.
271
posted on
02/24/2013 11:40:34 PM PST
by
boatbums
(God is ready to assume full responsibility for the life wholly yielded to Him.)
To: PeevedPatriot
That has been my intent for the last several years. I try very hard to stick to the discussion and not make personal insults. I’m not sure what you mean by “not taking the bait”. If you mean to simply IGNORE the offending threads, then sorry, I won’t, nor do I think any of us should. If someone posts something that is wrong or vindictive or condescending about my faith, I have every right to join the discussion. What I have asked repeatedly for is more discretion by those who are the usual posters of such threads. So far, I’ve seen little evidence they care and plenty that demonstrates they enjoy stirring the pot - complete with provocative titles. I don’t fall for the bait instigating me to get nasty where the RM has to intervene and most of us show plenty of self discipline by not falling for the game either. And, sadly, that was the game. I’m much more interested in speaking the truth and winning souls to Christ. Anyone who truly loves the Lord would do the same. Thanks for standing up for peace among brethren.
272
posted on
02/24/2013 11:57:28 PM PST
by
boatbums
(God is ready to assume full responsibility for the life wholly yielded to Him.)
To: GeronL; verga; wintertime; RitaOK
GeronL:
I agree with that and I firmly wish that the inter-religious sniping here come to an end. I have never doubted the good faith Christianity of Reformed Christians here. Likewise, I certainly hope that my fellow Catholics would also act in good faith and give credit where credit is due to our Reformed brothers and sisters in Christ. I would also like to see all Christians here pay proper respect to Jews and vice versa and to other faiths and vice versa. Also, believers and non-believers here ought to grant each other mutual respect.
In earlier years, I participated in the religious wars here until it struck me that overwhelmingly, those who participate on Free Republic are my fellow conservatives on matters of public policy and usually on matters of morals and on many shared concepts of faith, differ though we may on some points.
We ought to be united in the effort to resist and defeat our common enemies and the enemies of God and of His will. Those of us who are Christian should seek to follow the leadership of Jesus Christ and of His Father in Heaven and of the Holy Spirit.
I read posts from Reformed Christians that may temporarily boil my blood as yours is probably boiled by some Catholic posts. I tell myself to calm down, that the posts that aggravate me may well, in turn, be inspired by posts of fellow Catholics who have angered those Reformed Christians. Jesus Christ called upon us all to love one another as we have been loved and are loved by God. In the early days of Christianity, it was said that the Roman pagans knew the identities of the Christians because they were the ones who loved one another.
Each of us should strive to be as much more like Christ as we are able to the extent that we can discipline our sinful natures in order to move in that direction. Man fell when Adam and Eve sinned. It is our nature now to struggle against our own tendency to sin, each and every one of us falls short of the standard set by our Savior.
If it is OK with you, I am not going to recreate the lengthy post that I lost because I am older than I once was and tired and it is late at night and I prefer this post anyway as a response to you with whom I share so very many principles and beliefs. I know that you have no real beef with Catholics. You may disagree with us on this or that point of theology but that is very much a reflection of your principled approach and also of that of many Catholics. If I ever have offended you, I apologize because you did not and do not deserve it.
My specific disagreements with #57 were that, to the best of my knowledge, 1) no emperor or king or any other royal figure EVER crowned himself pope. If you know of any, please let me know the specifics, and 2) the title of pope is derived from the Italian il papa or the father and the Italian language, and the specific title of pope did not exist in Jesus Christ's time, and 3) The scriptural sources of the papacy are the Peter Passage in Matthew 16: 13-20 and Christ's guarantee to be with the Church to the end of the world. Matthew 28: 20. I also understand that you may well disagree with what I believe those passages to mean and I have no doubt that any disagreement is with respect and good faith as are mine.
May God bless you and yours, now and forever.
273
posted on
02/25/2013 12:14:47 AM PST
by
BlackElk
(Dean of Discipline, Tomas de Torquemada Gentlemen's Society: Rack 'em, Danno)
To: wintertime
It had appeared to me that you had been attacked in a post to which I was pinged as were you. I responded to that post and pinged you as a courtesy. If you wish me not to do so, I will respect your wishes. As you know, I very often agree with you on matters involving homeschooling and, ummmm, other venues for schooling, but have differences with you (as I do with many) on the specifics of religion. I mean you no disrespect.
May God bless you and yours, now and forever.
274
posted on
02/25/2013 12:43:45 AM PST
by
BlackElk
(Dean of Discipline, Tomas de Torquemada Gentlemen's Society: Rack 'em, Danno)
To: Syncro
Wow
Some of these claims are preposterous r they not?
I have Catholic blood kin and have never ever heard some of these exclusivity bagging rights
Alter Cristos?
Man....i would not say that in the middle of a summer thunderstorm in Dixie
Or in combat
Or on my lit de mort
275
posted on
02/25/2013 12:54:16 AM PST
by
wardaddy
(wanna know how my kin felt during Reconstruction in Mississippi, you fixin to find out firsthand)
To: BlackElk
Although I have differences with the Catholic Church, I would be pleased beyond words to have every Catholic in this nation fully practicing their faith.
Imagine the blessings, peace, and prosperity that everyone in this nation would enjoy.
Have a great day. :-)
To: terycarl
Exactly, and all of the other times that the Pope, or church officials are speaking, not ex cathedra, then they are just as fallible as the rest of us, and they can even, believe it or not, say and do things which are in opposition to Christ. Since that is most of the time, according to your own admission, your previous comment is pretty meaningless.
To: Mrs. Don-o
In other words, it was the Dark Ages only for the non Catholics...
Interesting thing that Middle Ages stuff...Who thought that up???
Middle Ages went from about 500 AD to 1500 AD give or take a few...The first 5 Centuries then were the beginning ages...That leaves the last 5 Centuries for the end of the ages...
Who ever thought that up must have believed in the 6 days of Creation...
278
posted on
02/25/2013 8:41:32 AM PST
by
Iscool
(I love animals...barbequed, fried, grilled, stewed,,,,)
To: Steelfish
What was pointed out to you was the sheer absurdity of this proposition because it suggests that Christ remained speechless when He performed a vast array of acts.Maybe, if one is ignorant of scripture, or just refuses to believe it...
But for those of us who do read and believe the scriptures, we know that John recorded everything that Jesus ever said that we needed to know for our salvation...
Of course Jesus wasn't silent...But we know that Jesus did not say nor teach anyone that there was more than we can find in the written scriptures that is required knowledge for our salvation...
This is why Peter and his successors were entrusted with teaching ONE TRUTH, not a multitude of interpretations that have been spawned since the schism.
Fact is, Peter didn't teach all that much...His epistles are more of an encouragement than doctrine...
So Jesus taught scores of truths...Paul taught a multitude of truths as well as Matthew...What truth did Peter teach???
The Church as the rock, is founded on scripture, tradition as handed down by the successors of St. Peter, revelation, and experience and has become the mustard tree that now covers all corners of the world.
Your Catholic religion is not a rock and certainly is NOT THE ROCK...
Think about it...Don't you think Peter cringes and covers his face in embarrassment and shame every time some schmuck bows down to one of your popes and calls him 'holy father'???
Act 10:25 And as Peter was coming in, Cornelius met him, and fell down at his feet, and worshipped him.
Act 10:26 But Peter took him up, saying, Stand up; I myself also am a man.
Among MANY of the truths that the apostles taught, one was that Christians do not bow down to another man...
279
posted on
02/25/2013 9:12:21 AM PST
by
Iscool
(I love animals...barbequed, fried, grilled, stewed,,,,)
To: Syncro
280
posted on
02/25/2013 9:20:09 AM PST
by
Iscool
(I love animals...barbequed, fried, grilled, stewed,,,,)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 241-260, 261-280, 281-300 ... 481-483 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson