Replies

One has to see just WHAT these are; don't you think?

Wouldn't Christ's Church know what they are?

Now in this respect there are several points of controversy between Catholics and every body of Protestants. Is all revealed truth consigned to Holy Scripture? or can it, must it, be admitted that Christ gave to His Apostles to be transmitted to His Church, that the Apostles received either from the very lips of Jesus or from inspiration or Revelation, Divine instructions which they transmitted to the Church and which were not committed to the inspired writings? Must it be admitted that Christ instituted His Church as the official and authentic organ to transmit and explain in virtue of Divine authority the Revelation made to men? The Protestant principle is: The Bible and nothing but the Bible; the Bible, according to them, is the sole theological source; there are no revealed truths save the truths contained in the Bible; according to them the Bible is the sole rule of faith: by it and by it alone should all dogmatic questions be solved; it is the only binding authority. Catholics, on the other hand, hold that there may be, that there is in fact, and that there must of necessity be certain revealed truths apart from those contained in the Bible; they hold furthermore that Jesus Christ has established in fact, and that to adapt the means to the end He should have established, a living organ as much to transmit Scripture and written Revelation as to place revealed truth within reach of everyone always and everywhere. Such are in this respect the two main points of controversy between Catholics and so-called orthodox Protestants (as distinguished from liberal Protestants, who admit neither supernatural Revelation nor the authority of the Bible). The other differences are connected with these or follow from them, as also the differences between different Protestant sects--according as they are more or less faithful to the Protestant principle, they recede from or approach the Catholic position.
Tradition and Living Magisterium

But most important are the words of our Savior, who founded a single church (Matt 16:17-19), "the pillar and foundation of truth (1 Tim 3:15)," to which we are to take our doctrinal disputes:

Matthew 18:17

If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector.

I didn't see you address this fundamental point.

This also follows logically, since the Church wrote, preserved and canonized Sacred Scripture. The Church gave us the Scriptures, not vice versa.

Ahh... but these were not complied 'til hundreds of years AFTER Matthew wrote what he did.

Effectively. There was a general consensus within the early Church regarding the authority of various books, but there were apocryphal books in circulation as well. The question arises, Who had the authority at the time (and now) to decide which was which? If you accept the current NT, you're accepting the canon of the NT established by the Catholic Church. If you reject the Church, you reject the canon of the NT.

Let's look at (Matt 16:17-19)... and some other verses, too.

Is Peter the 'rock'?

18. And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. 19. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven."

Let's correlate this verse with other parallel verses.

Isaiah 22:22
I will place on his shoulder the key to the house of David; what he opens no one can shut, and what he shuts no one can open.
Revelation 3:7
These are the words of him who is holy and true, who holds the key of David. What he opens no one can shut, and what he shuts no one can open.

In Isaiah 22, we see the existence of the historical office of the vice-regent of the Davidic kingdom, and its transferrance from Shebna to Eliakim. The authority of the vice-regent was symbolized by an over-sized key, which the vice-regent wore around his neck.

In Revelation 3:7, we see that Jesus is the eternal King of the House of David, and that he is "the power behind the key."

In in the passage you cite, we see Jesus give the key of the eternal House of David to Peter. Peter is the vice-regent of the eternal Davidic kingdom. This office is the papacy.

NIV 1 Corinthians 10:4 4. and drank the same spiritual drink; for they drank from the spiritual rock that accompanied them, and that rock was Christ.

Yet Christ names Simon, Cepha or "Rock." So which is it? This doesn't have to be an either/or, it can be a both/and. Christ is obviously the The Rock, but he renames Simon "Rock" because he has given Peter the key of the Davidic kingdom. Peter holds a position of authority given him by the ultimate Authority.

...No other rock...

So what did Jesus mean when he changed Simon's name to "Rock"?