VATICAN AIWSOTRMCPBWAWIC
STRIKES AGAIN
WITH IT'S CHRONIC
INFINITE ARROGANCE
AND OCEANS OF PRESUMPTION!
Not...going...to...take...the...bait.
Read these and enjoy! God bless...
http://www.staycatholic.com/ecf_primacy_of_rome.htm
http://www.americancatholictruthsociety.com/docs/ecfpapacy.htm
Early Church Fathers on the Papacy:
http://www.fisheaters.com/easternfathers.html
Eastern Fathers and the Primacy of Peter:
http://www.ignatiusinsight.com/features2007/sray_stpeterprimacy_apr07.asp
St. Peter and the Primacy of Rome:
http://www.catholic.com/library/Peter_Primacy.asp
Peter’s Primacy in Scripture:
http://www.scripturecatholic.com/primacy_of_peter.html
Peter the Rock:
http://www.catholic.com/library/Peter_the_Rock.asp
http://www.catholic.com/library/Peter_and_the_Papacy.asp
http://jimmyakin.typepad.com/defensor_fidei/2004/04/petros_vs_petra.html
Twelve Quotations from Ten Protestant Biblical Scholars:
http://catholicity.elcore.net/SimonIsTheRock.html
Peter then was true; or rather was Christ true in Peter? Now when the Lord Jesus Christ would, He abandoned Peter, and Peter was found a man; but when it so pleased the Lord Jesus Christ, He filled Peter, and Peter was found true. The Rock (Petra) made Peter true, for the Rock was Christ. - Augustine - A Library of the Fathers of the Holy Catholic Church (Oxford: Parker, 1845), Volume 20, Sermon 97.3, p. 686, (Sermon 147, Benedictine Edition).
In a passage in this book, I said about the Apostle Peter: 'On him as on a rock the Church was built.'...But I know that very frequently at a later time, I so explained what the Lord said: 'Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church,' that it be understood as built upon Him whom Peter confessed saying: 'Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God,' and so Peter, called after this rock, represented the person of the Church which is built upon this rock, and has received 'the keys of the kingdom of heaven.' For, 'Thou art Peter' and not 'Thou art the rock' was said to him. But 'the rock was Christ,' in confessing whom, as also the whole Church confesses, Simon was called Peter. But let the reader decide which of these two opinions is the more probable. - Augustine, The Fathers of the Church (Washington D.C., Catholic University, 1968), Saint Augustine, The Retractations Chapter 20.1.
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. - Augustine - 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.
A Catholic church historian (not even protestant mind you):
“Unanimous patristic consent as a reliable locus theologicus is classical in Catholic theology; it has often been declared such by the magisterium and its value in scriptural interpretation has been especially stressed. Application of the principle is difficult, at least at a certain level. In regard to individual texts of Scripture total patristic consensus is rare… But it does sometimes happen that some Fathers understood a passage in a way which does not agree with later Church teaching. One example: the interpretation of Peter's confession in Matthew 16.16-18. Except at Rome, this passage was not applied by the Fathers to the papal primacy…” -Yves Congar, Tradition and Traditions (New York: Macmillan Company, 1966), pp. 397-400.
Another CATHOLIC historian:
All this is intelligible enough, if we look at the patristic interpretation of the words of Christ to St. Peter. Of all the Fathers who interpret these passages in the Gospels (Matt. xvi.18, John xxi.17), not a single one applies them to the Roman bishops as Peter’s successors.” -J.H. Ignaz von Dollinger, The Pope and the Council (Boston: Roberts, 1869), pp.73-74.
Therefore the above begs the question:
Why are RCC apologists throwing out this misleading information?
In my opinion, (and I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt here) these apologists are probably not TRYING to be purposefully deceptive, but probably picking up patristic works such as "Jurgens’ The Faith of the Early Fathers," turning to the Doctrinal Index, and reading citations of the early fathers that are without context.
Context is everything ;)