“You read what the earliest Church fathers thought about Peter, yet you disbelieve.”
I read what the Apostle Peter wrote about himself, and what Paul wrote about Peter in scripture, and discount the words of men writing hundreds of years later. Why? Because the scripture is the Word of God, and it seems God did not set Peter above all the others as Vicar.
Had God wanted to do so, it would have been simple. After the resurrection, Jesus could have said to Peter, “You are my Vicar...” but instead, Jesus spoke of sending the Holy Spirit, and the scripture plainly shows the Holy Spirit directing the Apostles and the Church. Not Peter.
So if I want to follow the Word of God, I consider Peter to be “a fellow elder and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, as well as a partaker in the glory that is going to be revealed”. Or I remember the rebuke Paul gave Peter in Galatians, and conclude Peter was not supreme over the Apostles, but “a fellow elder”.
“The book of Acts records that the Jerusalem Council was presided over not by Peter, but by Jesus’ brother James. Peter was sent by the Church along with John on a mission to Syria, an unlikely event if Peter was the defacto leader; while in one of the most dramatic events of the apostolic era, Paul actually rebuked Peter at Antioch for behaviour which was compromising the truth of the gospel (Gal. 2:11-14). Paul was responsible for establishing churches and setting up their ruling organizations across Europe and Asia Minor, but he says absolutely nothing in any of his epistles about the need to be in submission to Peter as the supreme head of the Church. In fact, Paul regarded himself as personally responsible for overseeing, guiding and protecting these fledgling believers. He considered himself to be on an equal plane with all the other apostles (2 Cor 12:11) — he was the apostle to the Gentiles while Peter was the apostle to the Jews. Paul operated independently and on his own authority, as opposed to being under the authority of Peter.”
http://www.the-highway.com/papacy_Webster.html
Please note that I reject Peter as the Vicar of Christ because that is how scripture treats him. No one reading scripture would conclude Peter had a position of authority over the other Apostles. To believe it, you must first listen to man instead of God, and give weight to men writing hundreds of years later and whose power required that Peter be ‘the first Pope’.
You might as well ask me to take the word of John McCain or Barry Obama over that of the Word of God...
bump