St. Peter and the Primacy of Rome

So for the sake of me getting some work done here is what I propose:

You Catholics can pray that I come into your organization, Roman Catholicism, with the full import and meaning of that according to your understanding.

I will pray for those in your organization who are separated from Christ to become members of “the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven…” Hebrews 12:23

And may God answer each and every prayer which is pleasing in His sight.

*8though neither the article you posted, nor your subsequent arguments have done anything to establish the primacy of Peter or Rome in Jesus’ church.**

I beg your pardon. The church Christ established IS the Catholic Church.

You are choosing to see or not see; hear or not hear; understand or not understand. May God have mercy on you at the moment of your death.

Your denials now will haunt you then!

Repent and come home!

[quote]
No. The Spirit of Christ dwells in me. If you want to believe you are chewing a piece of literal human flesh and drinking literal human blood during Mass, that is up to you. I am content to receive the benefits of Christ’s suffering by faith, through the symbolic act of communion.
[/quote\]

So you deny Christ’s divinity?

[quote]
If you think you are saved by externals, that is your choice
[/quote]

It’s funny that you consider a sacrament an external, and then criticise it because you simply don’t understand what is going on in front of your eyes.

Look, it’s Christ’s words, not mine or yours. If you do not eat of his flesh or drink of his blood, you do not have life in you. I don’t seen any difference between denying his presence in the Eucharist from denying his sacrifice on the cross.

The fact is that even when Catholics question the Faith, they are still in the pews listening, learning and participating. We are not outside the Church making a church of our own.

When Catholics disagree with essential Catholic doctrine (such as abortion, contraception, woman priests, etc) they are by definition "outside of the Church", as has been loudly proclaimed numerous times by Catholics in this forum. The fact that they choose to continue to warm the pews (and take the Eucharist) is not evidence of "listening and learning", it is evidence that they are comfortable being heretical Catholics (i.e. non-Catholics). I was not comfortable in that position (unlike my family members); hence my departure some 25 years ago.

I was one who questioned my faith to the point of nearly leaving the Church. What brought me back was a careful reading of the Bible, history, the early Church Fathers, apologetics and actually participating in the Mass rather than being a disinterested spectator. It really was a question of authority... just as it is for much of the rest of Christianity. Certainly even a cursory view of history is all that is needed to see that we need the authority Christ gave His Church. When we stray from it, we set up our own authorities with private interpretations... and that has led to the fractalization of the Protestant world. Rather than the unity we preserve with God’s Grace and the prayers of Our Lord, the Protestant world demonstrates disunity and division.

Congratulations on your fidelity to Catholicism. As I stated earlier, you are in the minority. The majority of American Catholics feel comfortable denying essential Catholic doctrines. As far as the "fractionalization" of Protestantism, it is "fractionalized" mostly by issues that we would call important but non-essential. We consider those of other denominations brothers and sisters in the Lord, fellow members of the Church Universal. Hardly "disunity and division"

I was one who questioned my faith to the point of nearly leaving the Church. What brought me back was a careful reading of the Bible, history, the early Church Fathers, apologetics and actually participating in the Mass rather than being a disinterested spectator. It really was a question of authority... just as it is for much of the rest of Christianity. Certainly even a cursory view of history is all that is needed to see that we need the authority Christ gave His Church. When we stray from it, we set up our own authorities with private interpretations...

In your "careful reading of the Bible, history, the early Church Fathers, apologetics..." how did you decide that Rome was the "true" church without engaging in the very same private, fallible interpretation that you condemn as illegitimate?

Put another way, if your fallible reasoning faculties were sufficient to interpret the Bible, history, the early Church Fathers and apologetics to arrive at your conclusion regarding Rome's authority then you can't logically turn around and claim that very same principle as illegitimate for everyone else who uses it and arrives elsewhere.

Cordially,

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.