Posted on 01/06/2013 3:56:49 PM PST by NYer
Bl. John Henry Newman said it best: “To be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant.” History paints an overwhelming picture of St. Peter’s apostolic ministry in Rome and this is confirmed by a multitude of different sources within the Early Church. Catholic Encyclopedia states, “In opposition to this distinct and unanimous testimony of early Christendom, some few Protestant historians have attempted in recent times to set aside the residence and death of Peter at Rome as legendary. These attempts have resulted in complete failure.” Protestantism as a whole seeks to divorce Christianity from history by rending Gospel message out of its historical context as captured by our Early Church Fathers. One such target of these heresies is to devalue St. Peter and to twist the authority of Rome into a historical mishap within Christianity. To wit, the belief has as its end the ultimate end of all Catholic and Protestant dialogue – who has authority in Christianity?
Why is it important to defend the tradition of St. Peter and Rome?
The importance of establishing St. Peter’s ministry in Rome may be boiled down to authority and more specifically the historic existence and continuance of the Office of Vicar held by St. Peter. To understand why St. Peter was important and what authority was given to him by Christ SPL has composed two lists – 10 Biblical Reasons Christ Founded the Papacy and 13 Reasons St. Peter Was the Prince of the Apostles.
The rest of the list is cited from the Catholic Encyclopedia on St. Peter and represents only a small fraction of the evidence set therein.
It is an indisputably established historical fact that St. Peter laboured in Rome during the last portion of his life, and there ended his earthly course by martyrdom. As to the duration of his Apostolic activity in the Roman capital, the continuity or otherwise of his residence there, the details and success of his labours, and the chronology of his arrival and death, all these questions are uncertain, and can be solved only on hypotheses more or less well-founded. The essential fact is that Peter died at Rome: this constitutes the historical foundation of the claim of the Bishops of Rome to the Apostolic Primacy of Peter.
St. Peter’s residence and death in Rome are established beyond contention as historical facts by a series of distinct testimonies extending from the end of the first to the end of the second centuries, and issuing from several lands.
That the manner, and therefore the place of his death, must have been known in widely extended Christian circles at the end of the first century is clear from the remark introduced into the Gospel of St. John concerning Christ’s prophecy that Peter was bound to Him and would be led whither he would not — “And this he said, signifying by what death he should glorify God” (John 21:18-19, see above). Such a remark presupposes in the readers of the Fourth Gospel a knowledge of the death of Peter.
St. Peter’s First Epistle was written almost undoubtedly from Rome, since the salutation at the end reads: “The church that is in Babylon, elected together with you, saluteth you: and so doth my son Mark” (5:13). Babylon must here be identified with the Roman capital; since Babylon on the Euphrates, which lay in ruins, or New Babylon (Seleucia) on the Tigris, or the Egyptian Babylon near Memphis, or Jerusalem cannot be meant, the reference must be to Rome, the only city which is called Babylon elsewhere in ancient Christian literature (Revelation 17:5; 18:10; “Oracula Sibyl.”, V, verses 143 and 159, ed. Geffcken, Leipzig, 1902, 111).
From Bishop Papias of Hierapolis and Clement of Alexandria, who both appeal to the testimony of the old presbyters (i.e., the disciples of the Apostles), we learn that Mark wrote his Gospel in Rome at the request of the Roman Christians, who desired a written memorial of the doctrine preached to them by St. Peter and his disciples (Eusebius, Church History II.15, 3.40, 6.14); this is confirmed by Irenaeus (Against Heresies 3.1). In connection with this information concerning the Gospel of St. Mark, Eusebius, relying perhaps on an earlier source, says that Peter described Rome figuratively as Babylon in his First Epistle.
Another testimony concerning the martyrdom of Peter and Paul is supplied by Clement of Rome in his Epistle to the Corinthians (written about A.D. 95-97), wherein he says (chapter 5):
“Through zeal and cunning the greatest and most righteous supports [of the Church] have suffered persecution and been warred to death. Let us place before our eyes the good Apostles — St. Peter, who in consequence of unjust zeal, suffered not one or two, but numerous miseries, and, having thus given testimony (martyresas), has entered the merited place of glory”.
He then mentions Paul and a number of elect, who were assembled with the others and suffered martyrdom “among us” (en hemin, i.e., among the Romans, the meaning that the expression also bears in chapter 4). He is speaking undoubtedly, as the whole passage proves, of the Neronian persecution, and thus refers the martyrdom of Peter and Paul to that epoch.
In his letter written at the beginning of the second century (before 117), while being brought to Rome for martyrdom, the venerable Bishop Ignatius of Antioch endeavours by every means to restrain the Roman Christians from striving for his pardon, remarking: “I issue you no commands, like Peter and Paul: they were Apostles, while I am but a captive” (Epistle to the Romans 4). The meaning of this remark must be that the two Apostles laboured personally in Rome, and with Apostolic authority preached the Gospel there.
Bishop Dionysius of Corinth, in his letter to the Roman Church in the time of Pope Soter (165-74), says:
“You have therefore by your urgent exhortation bound close together the sowing of Peter and Paul at Rome and Corinth. For both planted the seed of the Gospel also in Corinth, and together instructed us, just as they likewise taught in the same place in Italy and at the same time suffered martyrdom” (in Eusebius, Church History II.25).
Irenaeus of Lyons, a native of Asia Minor and a disciple of Polycarp of Smyrna (a disciple of St. John), passed a considerable time in Rome shortly after the middle of the second century, and then proceeded to Lyons, where he became bishop in 177; he described the Roman Church as the most prominent and chief preserver of the Apostolic tradition, as “the greatest and most ancient church, known by all, founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious Apostles, Peter and Paul” (Against Heresies 3.3; cf. 3.1). He thus makes use of the universally known and recognized fact of the Apostolic activity of Peter and Paul in Rome, to find therein a proof from tradition against the heretics.
In his “Hypotyposes” (Eusebius, Church History IV.14), Clement of Alexandria, teacher in the catechetical school of that city from about 190, says on the strength of the tradition of the presbyters: “After Peter had announced the Word of God in Rome and preached the Gospel in the spirit of God, the multitude of hearers requested Mark, who had long accompanied Peter on all his journeys, to write down what the Apostles had preached to them” (see above).
Like Irenaeus, Tertullian appeals, in his writings against heretics, to the proof afforded by the Apostolic labours of Peter and Paul in Rome of the truth of ecclesiastical tradition. In De Præscriptione 36, he says:
“If thou art near Italy, thou hast Rome where authority is ever within reach. How fortunate is this Church for which the Apostles have poured out their whole teaching with their blood, where Peter has emulated the Passion of the Lord, where Paul was crowned with the death of John.”
In Scorpiace 15, he also speaks of Peter’s crucifixion. “The budding faith Nero first made bloody in Rome. There Peter was girded by another, since he was bound to the cross”. As an illustration that it was immaterial with what water baptism is administered, he states in his book (On Baptism 5) that there is “no difference between that with which John baptized in the Jordan and that with which Peter baptized in the Tiber”; and against Marcion he appeals to the testimony of the Roman Christians, “to whom Peter and Paul have bequeathed the Gospel sealed with their blood” (Against Marcion 4.5).
The Roman, Caius, who lived in Rome in the time of Pope Zephyrinus (198-217), wrote in his “Dialogue with Proclus” (in Eusebius, Church History II.25) directed against the Montanists: “But I can show the trophies of the Apostles. If you care to go to the Vatican or to the road to Ostia, thou shalt find the trophies of those who have founded this Church”.
By the trophies (tropaia) Eusebius understands the graves of the Apostles, but his view is opposed by modern investigators who believe that the place of execution is meant. For our purpose it is immaterial which opinion is correct, as the testimony retains its full value in either case. At any rate the place of execution and burial of both were close together; St. Peter, who was executed on the Vatican, received also his burial there. Eusebius also refers to “the inscription of the names of Peter and Paul, which have been preserved to the present day on the burial-places there” (i.e. at Rome).
There thus existed in Rome an ancient epigraphic memorial commemorating the death of the Apostles. The obscure notice in the Muratorian Fragment (“Lucas optime theofile conprindit quia sub praesentia eius singula gerebantur sicuti et semote passionem petri evidenter declarat”, ed. Preuschen, Tübingen, 1910, p. 29) also presupposes an ancient definite tradition concerning Peter’s death in Rome.
The apocryphal Acts of St. Peter and the Acts of Sts. Peter and Paul likewise belong to the series of testimonies of the death of the two Apostles in Rome.
If Catholics feel free to contend for their faith, they have to expect that others are going to feel the same about THEIR faith.
If you see someone following what you perceive as error that is going to lead them to harm spiritually, do warn them or not?
Which is more loving? To warn them or to let them follow their own path to their detriment?
If I saw a truck bearing down on you about to make roadkill of you, would I be more loving to grab you and pull you out of the way or tell you to get out of the way, or to not warn you because you might be *offended* by me telling or making you to do something you don’t want to do?
Where is that in your catechism??? I've been led to believe that your priests while in the confessional are actually God speaking...
Besides, the problem isn’t the discussions, but the attitudes.
And the mockery and stupid cartoons.
If people stuck to the issues and quit making it personal as too often becomes, that would make a huge difference.
No, the Scripture doesn’t say that. Where does it say that Peter went after he escaped prison?
The biblical proof is that Peter DID NOT GO TO ROME...It feels good to holler sometimes, don't it...You can believe Rome...I'LL BELIEVE GOD...
Well sort of. The truth of what the churches say come from the Holy Tradition. The false things, no.
The Catholic church is replete with bad popes and immorality and corruption.
It’s not like it’s just a matter of one bad apple here or there.
While it has gotten better in recent years, it still has a long way to go.
It is not biblically shown that Peter was never in Rome.
The Jewish priesthood had lots of bad apples, too. That did not void their authority.If God’s covenant had a morals clause, there would be precious few Christians and Jews left. Indeed, that is the basic meaning of infallibility, that God will not abandon his Church.
The Jewish priesthood had lots of bad apples, too. That did not void their authority.If God’s covenant had a morals clause, there would be precious few Christians and Jews left. Indeed, that is the basic meaning of infallibility, that God will not abandon his Church.
yldstrk: ridiculous, you are being silly.
Paul didn't think so. And neither did Jesus...
You sure you want to argue with HIM?
Acts 9:15-16 15 But the Lord said to him (Ananias), “Go, for he is a chosen instrument of mine to carry my name before the Gentiles and kings and the children of Israel. 16 For I will show him how much he must suffer for the sake of my name.”
Acts 13:46-47 46 And Paul and Barnabas spoke out boldly, saying, “It was necessary that the word of God be spoken first to you. Since you thrust it aside and judge yourselves unworthy of eternal life, behold, we are turning to the Gentiles. 47 For so the Lord has commanded us, saying, “‘I have made you a light for the Gentiles, that you may bring salvation to the ends of the earth.’”
Acts 22:21 21 And he said to me, ‘Go, for I will send you far away to the Gentiles.’”
Acts 23:11 11 The following night the Lord stood by him (Paul) and said, “Take courage, for as you have testified to the facts about me in Jerusalem, so you must testify also in Rome.”
Acts 26:14-18 14 And when we had all fallen to the ground, I heard a voice saying to me in the Hebrew language,‘Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me? It is hard for you to kick against the goads.’ 15 And I said, ‘Who are you, Lord?’ And the Lord said, ‘I am Jesus whom you are persecuting. 16 But rise and stand upon your feet, for I have appeared to you for this purpose, to appoint you as a servant and witness to the things in which you have seen me and to those in which I will appear to you, 17 delivering you from your people and from the Gentiles—to whom I am sending you 18 to open their eyes, so that they may turn from darkness to light and from the power of Satan to God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins and a place among those who are sanctified by faith in me.’
Romans 11:13-14 13 Now I am speaking to you Gentiles. Inasmuch then as I am an apostle to the Gentiles, I magnify my ministry 14 in order somehow to make my fellow Jews jealous, and thus save some of them.
Romans 15:15-21 15 But on some points I have written to you very boldly by way of reminder, because of the grace given me by God 16 to be a minister of Christ Jesus to the Gentiles in the priestly service of the gospel of God, so that the offering of the Gentiles may be acceptable, sanctified by the Holy Spirit. 17 In Christ Jesus, then, I have reason to be proud of my work for God. 18 For I will not venture to speak of anything except what Christ has accomplished through me to bring the Gentiles to obedience—by word and deed, 19 by the power of signs and wonders, by the power of the Spirit of God—so that from Jerusalem and all the way around to Illyricum I have fulfilled the ministry of the gospel of Christ; 20 and thus I make it my ambition to preach the gospel, not where Christ has already been named, lest I build on someone else's foundation, 21 but as it is written, “Those who have never been told of him will see, and those who have never heard will understand.”
Galatians 1:15-17 15 But when he who had set me apart before I was born, and who called me by his grace, 16 was pleased to reveal his Son to me, in order that I might preach him among the Gentiles, I did not immediately consult with anyone; 17 nor did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were apostles before me, but I went away into Arabia, and returned again to Damascus.
Galatians 2:2 I went up because of a revelation and set before them (though privately before those who seemed influential) the gospel that I proclaim among the Gentiles, in order to make sure I was not running or had not run in vain.
Galatians 2:8-9 (for he who worked through Peter for his apostolic ministry to the circumcised worked also through me for mine to the Gentiles), 9 and when James and Cephas and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given to me, they gave the right hand of fellowship to Barnabas and me, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised.
Ephesians 3:1-10 For this reason I, Paul, a prisoner for Christ Jesus on behalf of you Gentiles— 2 assuming that you have heard of the stewardship of God's grace that was given to me for you, 3 how the mystery was made known to me by revelation, as I have written briefly. 4 When you read this, you can perceive my insight into the mystery of Christ, 5 which was not made known to the sons of men in other generations as it has now been revealed to his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit. 6 This mystery is that the Gentiles are fellow heirs, members of the same body, and partakers of the promise in Christ Jesus through the gospel.
7 Of this gospel I was made a minister according to the gift of God's grace, which was given me by the working of his power. 8 To me, though I am the very least of all the saints, this grace was given, to preach to the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ, 9 and to bring to light for everyone what is the plan of the mystery hidden for ages in God who created all things, 10 so that through the church the manifold wisdom of God might now be made known to the rulers and authorities in the heavenly places.
1 Timothy 2:7 For this I was appointed a preacher and an apostle ( I am telling the truth, I am not lying), a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and truth.
2 Timothy 4:17 But the Lord stood by me and strengthened me, so that through me the message might be fully proclaimed and all the Gentiles might hear it. So I was rescued from the lion's mouth.
I fail to see how any Catholic can deny the clear teaching of Scripture in this matter. There are the very words of Jesus Himself, commissioning Paul to be the apostle to the Gentiles. What more do you need?
Besides, the problem isn’t the discussions, but the attitudes.
And the mockery and stupid cartoons.
If people stuck to the issues and quit making it personal as too often becomes, that would make a huge difference.
people will argue about if peter went to Rome or not, i think he probably did and a lot of other places and so did the other Apostles but that is not the Gospel.
The Gospel is the Teaching of our Lord.
Jesus told the Apostles to preach the Gospel, as we can see they each did it in their own way but Church doctrine is not the Gospel.
I believe many Churches are more concerned with their power than the preaching of the gospel, many have fell into Apostasy but in spite of all of this the Gospel have some how leaked out and has been preached to the world.
We can not depend on the Church for protection, it is now in the hands of God, and our personal faith in our Lord and his gospel.
I believe this is just like politics, two people, one a democrat and the other a republican believe the same thing but are confused with the speech of the professional whores who are determined to rule regardless of any thing else.
Not that they are all bad, just an example.
Clash: Riot police are forced to defend themselves from broom-wielding holy men at the traditionally accepted birthplace of Jesus Christ, in the West Bank town of Bethlehem
I can tell you without doubt where it IS biblically shown that Peter traveled to..1.Caesarea, in Palestine. (Acts 10:24). And 2. Antioch in Syria. Where the Bible says he was warmly welcomed by the people and patted cheeks of children and blessed all the faithful.
No. Wait...it doesn't say that at all. It says that rather than having ANY MINISTRY THERE, Peter was REBUKED by Paul. (Gal. 2:11-14).
The hard biblical FACT to accept for the RCC is that Peter and the 11 ministered in Palestine only. (Acts 10:39, 21:17-20). And there IS a reason for this. Read Acts 8:1 for a start. "And Saul was consenting unto his death. And at that time there was a great persecution against the church WHICH WAS AT JERUSALEM; and they were all scattered abroad throughout the regions of Judea and Samaria, EXCEPT THE APOSTLES.". Until Israel, as a nation is set aside, in Acts 28, the apostles remained in that area, ministering to the Jews. And waiting for them, as a nation, to accept Christ as their Messiah, so He could return and set up His Kingdom, where they will reign with Him, on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.
That's what the Bible says. If you're interested..
Then there's no need for the priest.
1 John 1:8-10 8 If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. 9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. 10 If we say we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.
1 Timothy 2:5-6 5 For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, 6 who gave himself as a ransom for all, which is the testimony given at the proper time.
>> “Most Judeans slowly moved away from Hebrew to Aramaic since Assyrian Imperial times” <<
.
Sorry, no, that is absurd conjecture that is unsupported by the abundant evidence.
>> “Intersting, e-s, can’t you make up your mind? Is is Tammuz or Zeus or Apollo or Constantine?” <<
.
Its all the same: a total rejection of Yeshua’s commandments, especially not changing his times, and the avoidance of even the appearance of evil.
Nicolaitans all.
> “Anyone who he had told.” <<
.
With all of the detail of Acts 10, and 11?
I find that hard to believe. I’ve spent 50+ years giving instructions to people to do things; many times those that I was paying to do things, and rarely did I see even 10% of that kind of recall.
>> “For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus...” <<
.
It seems that most simply do not wish to accept that responsibility, so they gladly invent mediators out of thin air.
Authority of Christianity Is Centered on St. Peter and RomeLike many Catholic "teachers,", this author broad brushes all Christians outside of the Catholic church as Protestants.
All non Jewish people are Gentiles, all non Catholic people are not Protestants.
Newman said it best: "To be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant."The obsession with extra-Biblical pronouncements by the Catholic Church leaders has done that, not Protestants.Protestantism as a whole seeks to divorce Christianity from history by rending Gospel message out of its historical context as captured by our Early Church Fathers. One such target of these heresies is to devalue St. Peter and to twist the authority of Rome into a historical mishap within Christianity
There are millions of Christians that do not belong to Protestantism or Catholicism.
They are called "born again"--by themselves and Jesus:
Of course many Catholics and Protestants are born again, that is the sign of true Christianity and fulfillment of the assurity of everlasting life.
SALVATION & THE NEW
BIRTH
How to be Born Again
What is salvation and the new birth (
being born again ) ?
Let us start
by saying that the Bible calls it being "born again".
During Jesus'
ministry here on earth, a rabbi ( teacher of Jewish law ) named Nicodemus came
to interview Jesus
at night and stated, "we all know that God has sent you
to teach us, your miracles alone are proof enough of this.
Jesus then told
him, "That unless a person is born again ( anew, from above
) he cannot
ever see ( know, be acquainted with and experience ) the Kingdom
of God" Nicodemus then said to Jesus,
"how can a man be born when he
is old? Can he enter his mother's womb again and be born?" Jesus answered,
"I tell you, unless a man is born of water and ( even )
the Spirit ( Holy Spirit ), he cannot ( ever ) enter the
Kingdom of God.
What is born of ( from ) the flesh is flesh ( of the physical is physical ) and
what is born of
the Spirit is Spirit", John 3:2-6.
This is
the new birth, what is referred to as being "born again". Jesus Christ paid a
great price ( His life )
by suffering and dying on the cross to pay the
price for every sin that mankind had committed up till then
and every sin
humanity would commit in the future to open the way of salvation, the "new
birth".
What part does belief have in salvation (
the new birth ) ?
Jesus said in
John 3:15-16, "everyone who believes in Him ( who cleaves to Him, trusts Him and relies on Him ) may not perish
but have eternal life and ( actually
) live forever. For God so greatly loved the world that He
gave up His only begotten Son,
that whoever believes in ( trusts in, clings to, relies on ) Him
shall not perish, come to destruction,
be lost but have eternal everlasting
life".
The Bible makes it quite clear who and what His Church is.
Is is every single (not as opposed to married lol) born again Christian.
There is no overall authority except Jesus Christ.
Christains have no problem with Catholics being all caught up in their Catholisim, but please...We don't need to "come back to the mother church," we are the Church.
The Authority of Christianity is Centered on Jesus Christ.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.