Was The Papacy Established By Christ?

triablogue ^ | June 23, 2006 | Jason Engwer

[DeprogramLiberalism]

>>>Neither the binding and loosing function and power nor the use of the keys to the kingdom was unique to Peter's authority, nor flowed from him (as per Rome). The use of the keys to the kingdom was the gospel, which Peter first preached to the Jews, as providing for forgiveness and regeneration by faith in the crucified and risen righteous Lord Jesus, was exercised by Peter before he was given the revelation of Acts 10 (which Paul received independent of Peter).<<<

You are flailing - I can tell that you have never heard any of this before. You have not thought it through, you have not studied it, and are operating by the seat of your pants.

I never said it was "as per Rome", and I resent that you imply that I am defending Rome. Hardly! The "keys" of Mt.16.19 were given to Peter alone as I illustrated in post #169, for a specific application (Rome claims it was universal and forever). The Church would have gone nowhere if the leaders were stoned to death for opposing the Law, which would have definitely happened the first time that they opposed it. Christ would have died for nothing! The Church had no choice other than to start out as a sect of Judaism until Ac.15, keeping the Old Covenant Law as any Jews did (despite that this directly contradicts the gospel). The disciples actually believed that this was right and proper at the time. In the beginning not one even imagined that Gentiles would be admitted into the Church without becoming Jews, because they all believed that Christ died only for Israel. Peter was the leader of the Church when they adopted this policy of keeping the Law in Ac.1, and was the deciding voice in abandoning the Law in Ac.15. Neither of these occurrences could have happened without God's sanction. God did this by giving Peter the "keys" to bind and loose the Law - both one-time events.

[betty boop]

Thanks to you, dear caww.

[MHGinTN]

Here is wisdom.

[DeprogramLiberalism]

You seem to think that I am defending the RC church - where did you get that idea?

[betty boop]

Thank you so very much, St_Thomas_Aquinas, for your illuminating post.

Unfortunately, because most of the sources you cite are from tradition, they will likely cut no ice with adherents of the "sola scriptura" point of view.

[ravenwolf]

This is erroneous because in the first place the doctrine of Rome on Peter is not based so much on what Peter or Paul wrote but on the gospels and the words to Peter in Mt. 16 and his leadership among the 11 in about half of Acts.

---

I have no argument about the official position of the Catholic Church or any other Church for that matter.

I am only saying for some one who knew both Peter and Paul
I have no doubt they would associate the Church with the least doctrine to Peter and not Paul, and the ones with the more strict doctrines to Paul.

Head coverings for Nuns stands out pretty bright even if the head coverings are misunderstood.

Church fathers also comes from Paul.

But my main point is that what ever one Church preaches the other is going to be against.

[ADSUM]

Jesus is everywhere in world where a Catholic Bishop or Priest consecrates the Host and Wine into the Body and Blood at Mass. Jesus is also present at Eucharist Adoration.

[MHGinTN]

Place marker

[RnMomof7]

Yet "substance" is not something that is ever extended in space. Physical bodies — the "accidents" of incarnation — are always spatially extended. If the Eucharist were to in any sense incorporate the idea of the transubstantiation of the accidents of Christ's Body (e.g., height, hair and skin color, weight, etc., etc.) then indeed, Catholics — and Greek Orthodox, et al. — would be practicing cannibalism. But this is not the case.

Yep ... if that is the real actual flesh and blood of Christ cannibalism is the correct word..

[RnMomof7]

Amen

[RnMomof7]

Do you still get hungry and thirsty? Do Catholics still die?

((((((crickets ))))))

[Elsie]

Jesus is everywhere in world where a Catholic Bishop or Priest consecrates the Host and Wine into the Body and Blood at Mass. Jesus is also present at Eucharist Adoration.

Catholic non-bible-based teaching.

---

Since when has Jesus EVER been recorded as being in TWO places at once?

[MHGinTN]

A mystery religion is hallmarked by magic, didn’t you know?

[caww]

Thanks RuMomof7....I agree with that as well.

[caww]

Jesus is not bound by catholic dictates......He is the Great I Am that I AM.....

[Mark17]

Do you still get hungry and thirsty? Do Catholics still die?

Do you suppose any of them might experience a Hebrews 9:27 moment?

[MHGinTN]

The parsing adherents are clintonizing what literal means. The mystery religion that is Catholicism rejects reason in favor of never defining transubstantiation. Blurring out the word ‘literal’ gives them wiggle room.

[terycarl]

Placemarker

what does that mean???

[af_vet_1981]

John 6 for example. In John's Gospel we see that Jesus has repeatedly resorted to metaphors about Himself (Door, Vine, Bread of Life, Way, etc.). This is necessary because He is a one-of-a-kind experience for those who encounter Him. Metaphor is precisely what one uses when one wishes to teach about something new and unfamiliar using analogy to something familiar.

I see abundant use of metaphor in the "I am the X" constructs, yet in the "This is/these are my X" sayings, only statements of literal truths, similar to the Resurrection and Ascension.

Here is a set from the books of the New Testament books:

This is my commandment, That ye love one another, as I have loved you.

And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.

And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body. And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it; For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.

And as they did eat, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and brake it, and gave to them, and said, Take, eat: this is my body. And he took the cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them: and they all drank of it. And he said unto them, This is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many.

For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread: And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me. After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come.
John, Catholic chapter fifteen, Protestant verse twelve,
Like, Catholic chapter twenty four, Protestant verse forty four,
Matthew, Catholic chapter twenty six, Protestant verses twenty six to twenty eight,
Mark, Catholic chapter fourteen, Protestant verse twenty two to twenty four,
First Corinthians, Catholic chapter eleven, Protestant verses twenty three to twenty six,
as authorized, but not authored by, King James

[terycarl]

I'm sorry you have so much apparent dislike for Protestants, of which I am not one

If you profess to be a follower of Christ, but are not a member of the one true Christian faith (Catholicism)...then you are a protestant.....what else is there????