Replies

Again a mismash of ideas. All this is like saying, "Mary was a virgin so the Immaculate Conception must be true." (Along with Mary being a perpetual virgin-but that's another post.) Part of it is true (Mary being a virgin) while part is steeped in tradition (Immaculate Conception).

Each of your ideas like "keys of the Kingdom" or Peter being the "Rock" are easy to refute and I believe I used several passages that shows this not to be the case. The "binding" was given to all disciples as you admitted. (Matt 18)

As far as Christ establishing His church-the issue is meaningless since no one is arguing that point. You interpret Church to be the holy Catholic church. I interpret church to be the holy catholic church. Our interpretation of what constitutes "church" differs. You've been told that it is the Rome bureaucracy. I say it isn't.

The fact of the matter is that the Eastern Orthodox can trace their heritage as far back as the RCC but they have never recognized the authority of the Pope.

The fact of the matter is that the Eastern Orthodox can trace their heritage as far back as the RCC but they have never recognized the authority of the Pope

Absolutely false! I just got done researching this while talking with another Orthodox Christian. It is amazing the harmony that existed regarding who Peter was and the role of the Bishop of Rome. It wasn't until the late 700's when the Orthodox even began to consider your opinion (because of the Filioque, not Peter's successor wasn't qualified). For example, St. John Chrysostom (c. 400 AD) quotes some 90 times the primacy, no, WORLDLY rulership over the Church. If you like, I can post some quotes, but to keep this succinct, I'll give you the option to continue. ALL Seven Ecumenical Councils that the East recognize noted that the Pope was the de facto leader - the EAST THEMSELVES used Mat 16:18 and other verses to expound on the Pope's authority.

Regards