Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: narses

And if Joseph Ratzinger were actually Peter in disguise, then you’d have a case.


29 posted on 04/06/2008 11:50:41 PM PDT by sthguard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies ]


To: sthguard

Clueless. Biblical ignorance is the only possible way you can fail to understand that Our Lord gave that power to all the Apostles and to those they chose to join and succeed them.


30 posted on 04/07/2008 4:21:17 AM PDT by narses (...the spirit of Trent is abroad once more.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies ]

To: sthguard
Benedict XVI is the recognized successor of St. Peter.

The Apostolic Succession was recognized repeatedly by the early Church Fathers (e.g. St. Clement who lived and wrote in the 1st century) -- some of whom (e.g. St. Ignatius and St. Irenaeus) knew the Apostle John personally and studied with him.

In order to deny this, you have to think that holy men who actually spoke and studied with one of Jesus's apostles, and all of their successors, somehow "got it wrong" until the sixteenth century. . . . then, somehow, a few men who did not have the direct link with the Apostles suddenly "got it right". And, of course, if the early Church Fathers "got it wrong" . . . they were the men who compiled the Bible. What if they got that wrong, too? (Even Martin Luther couldn't bring himself to ditch the letter of St. James -- but it was close.)

It's much more straightforward and reasonable just to acknowledge the early history of the Church and disagree with it, if that's what you want to do.

35 posted on 04/07/2008 5:10:30 AM PDT by AnAmericanMother ((Ministrix of Ye Chase, TTGC Ladies' Auxiliary (recess appointment)))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson