Peter & Succession (Understanding the Church Today)

Ignatius Insight ^ | 2005 | Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger

[Quix]

Thanks for your humbling kind words.

Your wisdom is certainly fitting. And I tend to agree on all counts . . . though I probably persist more often longer than I should to engage the spiritually . . . less than transfigured.

[1000 silverlings]

But, what exactly are "all revelations of God"? This is an old bugaboo isn't it?

Not at all, 1000 silverlings

Thank you for the reply yourself, Alamo Girl!

Ergo, Here is something interesting that occurred to me last night:

If you reject the authority of men re God's Word, revelations, etc. who and how would you personally define a "prophet" or perhaps a "prophetess?"

Iknow Quix will be interested in this subject as well. Thanks

[annalex]

I see all of you in that Peter and Rome thread already, but for the others, this is it:

St. Peter and Rome

Let me also mention that whether or not Peter ever was in Rome (he demonstrably was) has little to do with his primacy, apostolic succession, or the fact that the Holy See is presently in Rome.

[Running On Empty]

What do you mean by "the spiritually ....less than transfigured"?

[InterestedQuestioner]

"So, I did manage 15 bowls today in far less time. Have 5 more to match agreed upon commitment. Will try to do another 4 for a margin. Will see how many make it through all the steps! Thankfully, the ones today were quite thin compared to usual. And, I was able to loosen up and experiment more. So, I think your prayers were answered. Thanks much."

Thanks for the note Quix, sounds like you've been very productive. I wish you well in your good work.

-iq

[InterestedQuestioner]

"I guess a more accurate question would have been, do you think that the first pope could have claimed to be Peter, or was mistakenly assumed to be the biblical Peter, but wasn't really Peter? Whether or not the biblical Peter was ever in Rome I mean."

No, I don't think that.

[InterestedQuestioner]

Hello Uncle Chip,

250 posts ago a very polite person told you he was finished speaking with you. He said he would be willing to continue a discussion with you when you demonstrated evidence of honesty and sincerity. You’ve since sent nearly 30 unsolicited emails to that person with no response, several demanding that he reply to you. You’ve even sent a dozen posts to me, including several demands that this person reply to you. Now, some would say that’s highly inappropriate behavior, and that you deserve to be banned from Free Republic. Most people, on the other hand, would simply agree that it was weird, and the individual made a highly intelligent decision to ignore you. Not me though, Uncle Chip, I wouldn’t dream of saying those things.

However, just to be clear, Uncle Chip, you and I don’t have a thesis. You have a thirty post history that might be construed by reasonable people as harassment. You and I have never discussed your claims about the position of St. Peter’s body when he was murdered. More to the point, I’m not interested in discussing it with you, since it has no bearing on this thread whatsoever. Don’t worry though, Uncle Chip, I won’t ping the mods. If someone else does, I would of course have to recognize that as an appropriate response to your 30 unsolicited posts to a person who told you he was finished talking with you.

If you want to prove St. Peter was crucified right side up in Rome, go right ahead knock yourself out. Post your evidence. Perhaps someone will even be interested. Heck, I’ll even take a look if you’d like. We know from accounts of the Roman Historian Tacitus that Christians were publicly tortured in Rome. They were executed by crucifixion, and by being fed to dogs. We also know they were used as human torches. Perhaps you can post your evidence that St. Peter was merely stopping by Rome for a hamburger when he was martyred near your evidence that his crucifixion was right side up.

As far as this thread is concerned, your questions about the orientation of St. Peter’s body when was murdered at Rome, and the length of his stay there are irrelevant. 25 months or 25 years, crucified right side up or upside down, it has no bearing on the facts of the case. The bottom line is that the Apostles Peter and Paul both went to Rome, both served there as Apostles, and both were martyred there. You agree with that don’t you, Uncle Chip?

Here’s your case up to this point.

1. You’ve been unable to post any evidence that indicates Peter was never in Rome. Neither has anyone else on this thread. That’s because no such evidence exists. You agree, correct?

2. You’ve been unable to locate where Peter died in Scripture. That’s because Scripture doesn’t say where he died. Correct?

3. The historical evidence is unanimous in affirming that St. Peter went to Rome, served as an Apostle there, and was martyred by crucifixion. You agree with too, correct, Uncle Chip?

[Quix]

Thanks thanks. 'Tis a worthy cause for indigent elderly care.

Did tolerably this afternoon. PTL.

[Uncle Chip]

Hello back to you, Interested Questioner

I will stop pinging Adiaireton8 if you will allow him to return to the land of the living threads to continue his rhetorical ministry.

Will you take his place in this research project? Will you help me to find all the evidence that will complete my treatise? What do you say?

[Cvengr]

I suspect your meaning is well intentioned, but perhaps confusing salvation with sanctification. Technically, Christ paid the price, the Father makes the call and the Holy Spirit regenerates the spirit. The act of regeneration is synonmous with salvation. It is a one time event. It is a birth of life. Sanctification continues over time until the first death by our ability to remain in fellowship with Him. Durung the Church Age, we are indwelled by the Holy Spirit upon regeneration. We are filled with the Spirit while we remain in fellowship with Him and do not sin after returning to Him. If we sin, we may return to Him by telling Him our sin through faith in Christ and returning to Him in our thinking. Then He is free to continue in His fellowhip with us.

The Church or body of believers do have some involvement, in that we witness the Gospel to an unbeliever and then when the Father is ready He makes the call. The Holy Spirit searches our hearts and makes our prayers known to Him and makes our faith effective for salvation in His work of regenerating our spirit.

The Church doesn't have the ability to regenerate the spirit of any fallen man. That is only within the capacity of God.

[Quix]

DON'T RECALL if I've noted that your exhortations are wise and fitting.

Thanks.

[Marysecretary]

I wholeheartedly believe that denominations will fall as our world begins to crumble. Man will see how fruitless it is to fight and argue amongst ourselves when our very lives are threatened. The time is coming, sooner than we think, and people will HAVE to turn to God and God alone. Unity comes when all else fails.

[adiaireton8]

So you think sanctification is not part of salvation? What does it mean to "work out your salvation"?

-A8

[Quix]

she possessed the fullness of the means of salvation
= = =

Just noticed that sentence/phrase on rereading your post.

I first find it an odd construct, notion. I suppose in a sense, it's technically accurate in some minimal sense of the words used--perhaps.

But on the whole, I find it a distrubing thought. I can't imagine an ORGANIZATION--especially a man constructed organization--but really--any organization made up of humans . . . possessing the fullness of anything.

We are too finite. Our organizations are too finite.

CERTAINLY WHEN IT COMES TO GOD AND SALVATION, A RESTORED RELATIONSHIP WITH HIM--ANYTHING HUMAN is far, far, far too finite, imho.

We do well to display the fullnes even 55% of the fullness of any tiny slice of God's plan and majesty about anything.

Now, certainly, INDIVIDUALS can possess Salvation because Salvation is an individual agreement, affirmation, commitment, covenant BETWEEN THE INDIVIDUAL AND GOD . . . and in some sense, the individual can possess all that's essential, necessary for that individual's relationship to be restored with God. But even there, the fullness will not be realized this side of Heaven, imho.

I can't actually think of a single Scriptural example of God blessing any ORGANIZATION as we construe organizations and construct organizations in our era.

Certainly he fought for and with the children of Israel . . . but that was a collection of tribal groups--still is . . . and God's being on their side was a fulfillment of God's promise to His buddy Abraham.

Certainly there is New Testament evidence of God blessing a meeting or even a series of meetings of folks who are very much in tune with and focused in earnest heart-felt worship of Him. And there's evidence of God blessing such meetings or even a series of meetings throughout history.

But I don't recall any examples of such blessings and anointings going longer than say 18 months, if that long.

As near as I can discern from Scripture and from history, God doesn't think much of human organizations. He sure didn't the group of saducees and pharisees--which probably came as close in Scripture as any group to our current notions of religious organizations.

If my sense of the above is not Scripturally accurate, I'd prefer to know it and see the Scriptures proving it wrong.

[Marysecretary]

Oh, I'm sure they do, wagglebee. I'm sure they do.

[Cvengr]

Sanctification begins in salvation. One might cease in their fellowship with God by becoming a carnal Christian, but never can a believer lose their salvation. Just as God gives human life, he gives spirit life. He describes salvation as a rebirth. We are saved from eternal condemnation by that rebirth. We are not repetitively or continuously born anew, we are only reborn once. We might repent and return to Him repetitively, but salvation is a one time event. Regeneration is not within the power of the church to bestow to any unbeliever.

[Quix]

She also was destined to be "universal" in time as well as in space, and it was to her that applied the promise of Christ to Peter and the other apostles that "the powers of death shall not prevail" against her (Mt 16:18).
= = = =

Uhhhhhhhhhh, no. That would not be correct at all.

It's clear from Scripture that Christ's Body is and certainly will be called out of every sort of people group on the planet--eventually, even tribal people groups--obviously many having never heard of anything remotely related to Rome.

But that's already happened as the life of Samuel Morris demonstrated around 1900. His story is in the little classic: THE MARCH OF FAITH.

Sammy was a chief's son of a tribe in Africa that had been warring with a neighboring tribe for centuries. And, the custom of that region was that the tribe that lost the war, would surrender their chirf's sons for torture until the ransome was paid.

Sammy had been tied to a post in the center of a clearing for days and tortured.

Now, in the middle of the night on, I think the 3rd evening, he hears a voice say:

GET UP AND RUN.

He's convinced he's hallucinating as he can hardly breath, hardly exist he's so exhausted, tortured, brutalized, suffering, in pain.

A 2nd time, he hears the voice with his ears:

GET UP AND RUN.

He's hanging desperately by his bonds to the post. He's limp. I's a struggle to breathe. He has no energy at all to run and is bound firmly to the post.

A third time, he hears more insistently and loudly:

IS SAID TO GET UP AND RUN.

He discovers instantly that not only have has bonds been loosed by some miraculous power, but he also miraculously had energy to get up and run. He quickly runs out of the tribal clearing of his enemies' camp.

In the jungle, he discovers there is a curious, mysterioius light which moves with the voice he first heard. The light leads him to water and food for I think 2-3 weeks. Eventually, the light and voice lead him to a walled compound. The voice then says:

IN THERE, YOU WILL LEARN OF ME.

The walled compound is a Protestant mission compound. I forget the flavor. I think it was interdenominational.

I think Sammy was around 16 years old at the time. He lived to be in his early 20's.

God was mightily with him. He would always pray looking up and talk to God just as though he was talking to a person standing or sitting beside him . . . as though he was talking to a beloved father.

Sammmy would speak at huge meetings throughout Engliand and I think the USA. It was common at those meetings . . . that whenever Sammy crossed the threshhold of the auditorium door--even unbenknownst to the attendees--even an obscure door in the back or side--the moment he crossed the threshhold, folks would run screaming to the front of the auditorium repenting, confessing and seeking Jesus as their savior--all without any pronouncements from the platform or even without folks knowing that Sammy had arrived.

According to the Roman believers' orthodox construction on relaity--such a phenomenon would not be possible. Salvation can only, in the Roman construction on reality, flow through the Roman hierarchy, traditions, ceremonies, rituals, etc. That is, that God has given them an exclusive monopoly on what Christ died to give all men freely.

Clearly, as the above and thousands of other examples prove, God disagrees about that supposed monopoly.

[1000 silverlings]

on what Christ died to give all men freely.

Bravo, Quix, well said!

[adiaireton8]

Actually shocked to see blind leaders of the blind crucify Him afresh.

Here's your dilemma: If it is just a piece of bread and a chalice of wine, then how exactly are they crucifying Christ? But if it is really Christ's body and blood, then the Catholics are right about the Eucharist.

-A8

[Quix]

Essentially, the most fitting word that comes to mind regarding that post is:

NONSENSE.

That one Scripture about:

FREELY YOU HAVE RECEIVED, FREELY GIVE

scuttles the whole notion of any human organization or any finite human group having a monopoly on what Christ shed His Precious Blood to scatter abroad so utterly freely:

WHOSOEVER WILL MAY COME.

It was not written:

Whosoever will who goes to the right human organization; marches in step with all the traditions, rituals, edicts, encyclicals, pontifications, rules, policies, dogma . . . of a certain finite human organization . . . who kowtow to the hierarchy in fitting contrition and submission; who jump through all the RELIGIOUS hoops . . . .

those and only those whosoevers may come to the gilded edifice and receive our pontifical, lofty, exclusive, monopolistic sanctions, our human authorized Salvation.

WE AND WE ALONE ARE THE EXCLUSIVE GATE KEEPERS BACK TO GOD. Deposit your coins appropriately.

No way Hosea! Not by a long shot.