The Papacy - Where Peter is, There is the Church

Catholic Legate ^ | September 23, 2004 | Father M. Piotrowski

[CouncilofTrent]

Yes I looked and hes OUTTA HERE!!!!!!!!

[CouncilofTrent]

Sure noob.

[Ruy Dias de Bivar]

***Yes.... Nice discussion on Saint Peter's going on here. The antagonist has been...ahem...dealt with by "ZOT" thanks to a Higher Power through the intervention of the Religious Admin. ***

Am I too late to pile on with the words of St. Paul?

"Be ye followers of ME as I am of CHRIST".

When Peter came to Antioch he was to blame for the desention when he ate with the saved Gentiles, till certain men came from James at Jerusalem and he separated himself and the jewish believers from the gentiles. Paul gave the "first POPE" a royal chewing out for his actions.

[Convert from ECUSA]

:) Great picture! Thanks for posting it, santorius!

[Convert from ECUSA]

Champagne for everyone!!!!!!!!

[mike182d]

So, in the original Greek text when St. Paul always calls Peter "Kephas," which is a Greek trasnliteration of the Aramaic word "kepha" - which just means "rock" and not "little stone or anything of the sort - it was completely arbitrary?

[mike182d]

"Be ye followers of ME as I am of CHRIST".

This is exactly the point: we are to be followers of Christ, but who is the Christ that we follow? Which one of us was actually a witness to the real person of Jesus as he was alive on earth? Who here is able to verify the testimony in the Gospels with their own personal accounts of Jesus walking on water, healing paralytics, raising from the dead, et cetera. Everything we know of Christ comes from the Church because the Apostolic Tradition that has existed for over 2000 years began with those who had first-hand accounts of Jesus and had the authority to comment on the experience of Him. Therefore, it would logically follow that to properly follow Jesus we would have to know who He truly is and in order to know who Christ truly is, we need Apostolic Tradition. Otherwise, there's absolutely no reason to believe in the four Gospels in the N.T. over the gospel or believe in a Trinity over Arianism. Belief in Christ and belief in the Authority of the Church are the same thing.

[mike182d]

sorry, its early in the morning. The last sentence should read "...over the gospel of Thomas."

[murphE]

"And why do we never see Catholics with persecution complexes ministering at all?"

I was pondering this question that the recently departed asked. I for one do not see the point in witnessing in words to those who are not seeking. It's not as if they would be receptive. If I am able to, I gladly respond to someone with sincere questions though. I also notice that Catholics here do not invade Protestant threads in the same manner, or frequency, in which they invade our threads.

If we did, just think of the field day we could have with this one:

If a Person Rejects Christ Before the Rapture, Can He Be Saved After the Rapture?

So many problems here, one hardly knows where to begin.

[CouncilofTrent]

I only once or twice went on a protestant thread to defend a historical fact (St. Batholomew's Day Massacre in particular) which the Calvinists were ignoring. I got myself waist high in crap that day..... You cant talk real history with many Protestants.

[netmilsmom]

>>I also notice that Catholics here do not invade Protestant threads in the same manner, or frequency, in which they invade our threads.<<

Amen my FRiend!!!

From this moment forward, I volunteer to be the official Anti-Catholic Troll Hunter.

Please ping me if you see one.
I'll try to come up with a cool graphic for it!

I don't want to be mean to anyone, however, I polled the holders of the Catholic ping lists a while ago to see how many of us go onto the non-Catholic threads to slam them. It was concluded that we don't. Because I am on Alouette's, SJackson's and Salem's ping lists, I see that no one goes on the Jews threads to "Minister" to them.
Only us.

[netmilsmom]

Wow!
A true hero!

Glad he's one of ours.

[Claud]

Am I the only Catholic who finds charges of "Catholic-bashing" and "Anti-Catholic" intensely distasteful? You don't find St. Peter calling the Romans Christian bashers. If people come in to disrupt, then let's in charity correct. And correct. And correct again. :)

Back to the content of this thread though, I read the "Bones of St. Peter" some time ago which details some of this material. It was fascinating, but the circumstances of the finding of the bones were a bit...well...I'll call it unfortunate. I believe Guarducci's analysis, but I have often wondered if any newer information has come to light?

[Jn316]

I'm not Catholic but I find it distateful. If anyone disagrees 'people' start crying like little girls. I can't believe 'he' got booted from this thread. What a joke. You *can* ignore his posts, not that they are inflammatory, and he would probably go away.

Now I'll be called names...

BTW, my boss and I manage to have discussions and disagree with each other w/o calling each other names.

[Jn316]

Another thing. Just the title of this thread just sits wrong with me. 'The Papacy - Where Peter is, There is the Church'

When I think Church I think Jesus, God. It just sits wrong with me to read the title. Peter is who Peter is. It's ALL about God.

[OLD REGGIE]

So, in the original Greek text when St. Paul always calls Peter "Kephas," which is a Greek trasnliteration of the Aramaic word "kepha" - which just means "rock" and not "little stone or anything of the sort - it was completely arbitrary?

Produce the Aramaic.

It makes little difference in any event. Jesus is the Rock on which His Church is built.

Food for thought:

Catholic Catechism

424 Moved by the grace of the Holy Spirit and drawn by the Father, we believe in Jesus and confess: 'You are the Christ, the Son of the living God. On the rock of this faith confessed by St. Peter, Christ built his Church.

==================================================================================================

Remember, in this man Peter, the rock. He’s the one, you see, who on being questioned by the Lord about who the disciples said he was, replied, ‘You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.’ On hearing this, Jesus said to him, ‘Blessed are you, Simon Bar Jona, because flesh and blood did not reveal it to you, but my Father who is in heaven. And I tell you’...’You are Peter, Rocky, and on this rock I shall build my Church, and the gates of the underworld will not conquer her. To you shall I give the keys of the kingdom. Whatever you bind on earth shall also be bound in heaven; whatever you loose on earth shall also be loosed in heaven’ (Mt 16:15 - 19). In Peter, Rocky, we see our attention drawn to the rock. Now the apostle Paul says about the former people, ‘They drank from the spiritual rock that was following them; but the rock was Christ’ (1 Cor 10:4). So this disciple is called Rocky from the rock, like Christian from Christ.

"Why have I wanted to make this little introduction? In order to suggest to you that in Peter the Church is to be recognized. Christ, you see, built his Church not on a man but on Peter’s confession. What is Peter’s confession? ‘You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.’ There’s the rock for you, there’s the foundation, there’s where the Church has been built, which the gates of the underworld cannot conquer

(John Rotelle, O.S.A., Ed., The Works of Saint Augustine (New Rochelle: New City Press, 1993), Sermons, Volume III/6, Sermon 229P.1, p. 327).

[mike182d]

Produce the Aramaic.

Are you denying that in Galatians Paul calls Peter Cephas four times in Greek or that kepha is an aramaic word or that Jesus spoke Aramaic. I'm not sure what exactly what you're requesting...

As I am at work at the moment, I provide the following for your consideration:

"Beyond the grammatical evidence, the structure of the narrative does not allow for a downplaying of Peter’s role in the Church. Look at the way Matthew 16:15-19 is structured. After Peter gives a confession about the identity of Jesus, the Lord does the same in return for Peter. Jesus does not say, "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. And I tell you, you are an insignificant pebble and on this rock I will build my Church. . . . I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven." Jesus is giving Peter a three-fold blessing, including the gift of the keys to the kingdom, not undermining his authority. To say that Jesus is downplaying Peter flies in the face of the context. Jesus is installing Peter as a form of chief steward or prime minister under the King of Kings by giving him the keys to the kingdom. As can be seen in Isaiah 22:22, kings in the Old Testament appointed a chief steward to serve under them in a position of great authority to rule over the inhabitants of the kingdom. Jesus quotes almost verbatum from this passage in Isaiah, and so it is clear what he has in mind. He is raising Peter up as a father figure to the household of faith (Is. 22:21), to lead them and guide the flock (John 21:15-17). This authority of the prime minister under the king was passed on from one man to another down through the ages by the giving of the keys, which were worn on the shoulder as a sign of authority. Likewise, the authority of Peter has been passed down for 2000 years by means of the papacy."

"The startling thing was that—aside from the single time that Abraham is called a "rock" (Hebrew: Tsur; Aramaic: Kepha) in Isaiah 51:1-2—in the Old Testament only God was called a rock. The word rock was not used as a proper name in the ancient world. If you were to turn to a companion and say, "From now on your name is Asparagus," people would wonder: Why Asparagus? What is the meaning of it? What does it signify? Indeed, why call Simon the fisherman "Rock"? Christ was not given to meaningless gestures, and neither were the Jews as a whole when it came to names. Giving a new name meant that the status of the person was changed, as when Abram’s name was changed to Abraham (Gen.17:5), Jacob’s to Israel (Gen. 32:28), Eliakim’s to Joakim (2 Kgs. 23:34), or the names of the four Hebrew youths—Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah to Belteshazzar, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego (Dan. 1:6-7). But no Jew had ever been called "Rock." The Jews would give other names taken from nature, such as Deborah ("bee," Gen. 35:8), and Rachel ("ewe," Gen. 29:16), but never "Rock." In the New Testament James and John were nicknamed Boanerges, meaning "Sons of Thunder," by Christ, but that was never regularly used in place of their original names, and it certainly was not given as a new name. But in the case of Simon-bar-Jonah, his new name Kephas (Greek: Petros) definitely replaced the old."

In light of Isaiah 22:22, as this book of the Old Testament has sometimes been called the 5th Gospel because of its relevance to Christ and the number of times that He refers to it, are you suggesting that Jesus is handing everyone who professes Christ as Lord the authority to "rule" over the inhabitants?

[OLD REGGIE]

http://www.frtommylane.com/homilies/ years_abc/dedication_basilica_john_lateran.htm

You sent me to the Default Error Page. Thanks.