Peter & Succession (Understanding the Church Today)

Ignatius Insight ^ | 2005 | Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger

[NYer]

Joseph Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI, was for over two decades the Prefect for the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith under Pope John Paul II. He is a renowned theologian and author of numerous books. A mini-bio and full listing of his books published by Ignatius Press are available on his IgnatiusInsight.com Author Page.

[trisham]

Indirectly, however, this problem can be detected in the Gospels once we admit the principle of form critical method according to which only what was considered in the respective spheres of tradition as somehow meaningful for the present was preserved in writing as such.

************

Wow. That's quite a sentence, but then I haven't yet had even a sip of my tea. I had to read it twice. :)

[trisham]

It would be exciting to trace the influence on this process of the idea that the mission of Jerusalem had passed over to Rome, which explains why at first Jerusalem was not only not a "patriarchal see" but not even a metropolis: Jerusalem was now located in Rome, and since Peter's departure from that city, its primacy had been transferred to the capital of the pagan world. [4]

*************

Very interesting. This article is really a gem, a wealth of information.

[Uncle Chip]

"That the primacy of Peter is recognizable in all the major strands of the New Testament is incontestable."

----- incontestable by whom? certainly not in my strand of the New Testament.

[NYer]

----- incontestable by whom? certainly not in my strand of the New Testament.

One compelling biblical fact that points clearly to Simon Peter’s primacy among the 12 Apostles and his importance and centrality to the drama of Christ’s earthly ministry, is that he is mentioned by name (e.g. Simon, Peter, Cephas, Kephas, etc.) 195 times in the course of the New Testament. The next most often-mentioned Apostle is St. John, who is mentioned a mere 29 times. After John, in descending order, the frequency of the other Apostles being mentioned by name trails off rapidly.

When the names of all the Apostles are listed, Peter is always first. Judas Iscariot, the Lord’s traitor, is always listed last (cf. Matt. 10:2-5; Mark 3:16-19; Luke 6:14-17; and Acts 1:13). Sometimes Scripture speaks simply of “Simon Peter and the rest of the Apostles” or “Peter and his companions” (cf. Luke 9:32; Mark 16:7; Acts 2:37), showing that he had a special role that represented the entire apostolic college. Often, Scripture shows Simon Peter as spokesman for the entire apostolic college, as if he were the voice of the Church (cf. Mat. 18:21; Mark 8:29; Luke 8:45; Luke 12:41; John 6:68-69).

The Primacy of Peter - from Where's That In The Bible, by Patrick Madrid.

[NYer]

Fascinating stuff. It takes more than one sip of tea to transcent Ratzinger's flow of thought. On the other hand, it grows even more challenging after one sip of wine :-).

[Uncle Chip]

That Peter was first among the Apostles and the primary spokesman of the Apostles is without a doubt --- but only until Paul came on the scene and the Gospel began to go to the Gentiles. Peter was the Apostle to the Jews and first leader of the Jewish Church in Jerusalem. His ministry was to the Jews, not the Gentiles.

When Paul came on the scene and the Gospel began to be presented to the Gentiles, he overshadowed Peter and he became the primary Apostle. Aren't the Pauline Epistles, particularly Paul's Letter to the Romans, the heart of the Gospel to the Gentiles? Wasn't the Roman Church a Gentile Church? That Paul spent years in Rome and died there is a fact of history and attested to in the New Testament. Where Peter died is a matter of speculation and legend without New Testament attestation.

[trisham]

Fascinating stuff. It takes more than one sip of tea to transcent Ratzinger's flow of thought. On the other hand, it grows even more challenging after one sip of wine :-).

*************

I'll bet. :)

[trisham]

Uncle Chip

Since Sep 30, 2006

view home page, enter name:

Uncle Chip hasn't created an about page.

****************

Welcome to Free Republic. What is your religious affiliation?

[Uncle Chip]

Thank You. Biblical Christianity ---- and yours?

[Salvation]

**certainly not in my strand of the New Testament.**

Your New Testament was changed by Luther and does not have all the books. That really is too bad for you guys and gals.

[trisham]

Catholic, of course. :)

[Uncle Chip]

Mine has all the books. Do any of those extra books that yours has name Peter as the first Pope of Rome?

[Conservative til I die]

----- incontestable by whom? certainly not in my strand of the New Testament

Looking at things solely in the context of the New Testament, it is clear that Peter is the most important of the Apostles. He is mentioned the most, he is the one that recognizes Jesus as the Messiah and the Son of the Living God, he specifically is asked by Jesus after the Resurrection to feed His sheep, he's a leader of the Post-Resurrection Church in Acts.

One can infer from this that Peter had primacy among the Apostles. You certainly couldn't infer that about Philip or Thomas or Bartholomew.

[Conservative til I die]

When Paul came on the scene and the Gospel began to be presented to the Gentiles, he overshadowed Peter and he became the primary Apostle.

Paul had a different mission. But that doesn't mean he had more authority than Peter. Paul was an evangelist and preacher, whereas Peter was an authority and a leader.

[Salvation]

Exactly what Bible are your working from? Are you saying you have a Catholic Bible rather than a KJV?

No, yours does not have the "Wisdom" books. (If you are working from a KJV.)

Thus they speak to the Wisdom and truth of God's Word, the entire Bible. You have no idea what you are missing!

[Uncle Chip]

You are correct. But who was the founding apostle for the Gentile Church in the New Testament: Peter or Paul? Who had primacy when it came to doctrine? Peter or Paul?

[NYer]

That Paul spent years in Rome and died there is a fact of history and attested to in the New Testament. Where Peter died is a matter of speculation and legend without New Testament attestation.

Welcome to Free Republic!

That Peter died and was buried in Rome is a matter of historical record.

The archeological proof of the existence of St. Peters tomb under St. Peters basilica in Rome.

"Nero...publicly announcing himself as the first among God's chief enemies, he was led on to the slaughter of the apostles. It is, therefore, recorded that Paul was beheaded in Rome itself, and that Peter likewise was crucified under Nero. This account of Peter and Paul is substantiated by the fact that their names are preserved in the cemeteries of that place even to the present day. It is confirmed likewise by Caius, a member of the Church, who arose under Zephyrinus, bishop of Rome [about 200 AD.]. He, in a published disputation with Proclus, the leader of the Phrygian heresy, speaks as follows concerning the places where the sacred corpses of the aforesaid apostles are laid: "But I can show the trophies of the apostles. For if you will go to the Vatican or to the Ostian way, you will find the trophies of those who laid the foundations of this church." And that they both suffered martyrdom at the same time is stated by Dionysius, bishop of Corinth, in his epistle to the Romans, in the following words: "You have thus by such an admonition bound together the planting of Peter and of Paul at Rome and Corinth." [Eusebius, [A.D. 303] (Church History 2:25:5-8)]

Was St. Peter In Rome?

[Uncle Chip]

Peter had authority in Jerusalem to the Jews, but Paul had authority regarding the Gospel to the Gentiles. Did not Paul rebuke Peter at one point on this issue and Peter backed down? Who had more authority in that case: Peter or Paul? Who did the Gentile Churches consider their authority in the NT? Peter or Paul?