The Primacy of Peter

Where Is That In The Bible | Patrick Madrid

[NYer]

For the ..... "rest of the story" .... you will have to purchase Patrick Madrid's book Where's That In The Bible.

[NYer]

For those who constantly raise this question :-)

[Robert Drobot]

Great thread NYer! Thanks!

[saradippity]

With this kind of information readily available in scripture,it is truly bewildering that so many non-Catholics and self identified catholics on both ends of the spectrum will argue against the Church's position on Peter and his Primacy.

[samiam1972]

I love that book! I have the other two, also. Can't remember the names right now and am too tired to look them up. They are equally as wonderful and concise as that one.

[NYer]

Bump! Think you may enjoy this.

[NYer]

Your thoughts?

[Mrs. Don-o]

Thanks, NYer! This is great. When I get a minute (busy day) I'm going to re-read it more carefull and memorize his main points for future FRemedial Catechism lessons... :->

[siunevada]

Gee, I was watching the local Calvary Chapel preacher on cable a few weeks ago when he hit Matthew 16 and the keys to the kingdom. He certainly had a novel approach.

He didn't spend a lot of time on it considering the gravity of what he was proposing for belief.

[Kolokotronis]

"Your thoughts?"

I think I've seen much better arguments than this! I will say that the appropriate canonical position of the Pope is that of first in honor, the primus inter pares not simply the "primus". When a Pope is elected who teaches the The Faith in all its fullness as preserved in the Orthodox Church and lived out by the People of God, then the proper canonical order will be restored...but not before that.

[NYer]

He certainly had a novel approach.

Do you recall any of what he said?

[NYer]

I think I've seen much better arguments than this!

What were they?

[siunevada]

Do you recall any of what he said?

The keys are the words of Sacred Scripture and the words Jesus said to Peter apply to every ordained minister.

[Cheverus]

Interesting intrepretation.

I believe Mr. Madrid would return to (sorry I am Catholic and cannot quote by chapter and verse) the section where "you" is used in addressing Peter and is thus thought of as individual investiture.

If I recall correctly, isn't there a second investiture after Peter when the remaining Apostles are invested?

Perhaps he focuses on the second more that the first....or perhaps very simply he has a translation that doesn't include the same wording.

In the spirit of respect for other religions I must confess that were each Christian to consider themselves corporate in the works of the "Church" (as used by Touchstone Magazine to refer to every Christian regardless of degree of Communion) the same as this minister seems to, perhaps Ut Unam Sint wouldn't be so far off.

Or at the very least there would be more amicable ecumenical relations.

[siunevada]

If I recall correctly, isn't there a second investiture after Peter when the remaining Apostles are invested?

Mt. 18:18?

Perhaps he focuses on the second more that the first....

Nope. He was reading Mt. 16:19. The keys to the kingdom.

[Kolokotronis]

"I think I've seen much better arguments than this!

What were they?"

In my opinion, gbcdoj is the "go to" guy on this subject. I'll leave the defense of the Latin's idea of the role of the Papacy to him! :)

[Cheverus]

Taking this discussion out one more step. Is there a similar such article which refers to tradition?

Since Catholic do take the both/and approach (yes I poached that from Grodi), any discussion would seem to merit the additional points from tradition.

[NYer]

Is there a similar such article which refers to tradition?

Yes .... the topic includes Tradition. The book, however, is at home. I'll have to look it up this evening. ;-D

[dangus]

There *are* indeed to separate investitures, one to Peter singularly, and the other to the apostles collectively: An ecumenical council's unanimous decrees are also considered infallible. But they have to represent the *collective* faiths of the all of the bishops (the heirs of apostolic authority), for no two people can have divergent views and be infallible!

[gbcdoj]

The best arguments I've seen for the primacy and infallibility of St. Peter and his successors are the following series of articles from Dom John Chapman's Studies on the Early Papacy:

St. Cyprian on the Church and the Papacy
St. Athanasius, Arianism, and the Holy See
St. John Chrysostom and the Apostle Peter
St. Jerome and Rome
The Condemnation of Pelagianism Part I
The Condemnation of Pelagianism Part II

These really sum up quite well the evidence from the early Church, and the article on St. John Chrysostom also treats of the Scriptural evidence through his interpretive grid. Well worth reading.