“Among these [apostles] Peter alone almost everywhere deserved to represent the whole Church. Because of that representation of the Church, which only he bore, he deserved to hear ‘I will give to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven.’” St. Augustine of Hippo (”Sermon 295,” c. 411 A.D.)
“If the very order of episcopal succession is to be considered, how much more surely, truly and safely do we number them from Peter himself, to whom, as to one representing the whole Church, the Lord said, ‘Upon this rock I will build my Church...’ Peter was succeeded by Linus, Linus by Clement, Clement by Anacletus, Anacletus by Evaristus....” St. Augustine of Hippo (”Letter 53,” 412 A.D.)
“Who is ignorant that the first of the apostles is the most blessed Peter?” St. Augustine of Hippo (”Commentary on John,” c. 416 A.D.)
“If all men throughout the world were such as you most vainly accuse them of having been, what has the chair of the Roman church done to you, in which Peter sat, and in which Anastasius sits today?” (Against the Letters of Petilani 2:118 [A.D. 402]).
“If the very order of episcopal succession is to be considered, how much more surely, truly, and safely do we number them from Peter himself, to whom, as to one representing the whole Church, the Lord said, “Upon this rock I will build my church . . . “ [Matt. 16:18]. Peter was succeeded by Linus, Linus by Clement, Clement by Anacletus, Anacletus by Evaristus . . . “ (Letters 53:1:2 [A.D. 412]).
In Sermon 147 St. Augustine opens that sermon with: “1. YE remember that the Apostle Peter, the first of all the Apostles.”
“If the very order of episcopal succession is to be considered, how much more surely, truly, and safely do we number them [the bishops of Rome] from Peter himself, to whom, as to one representing the whole Church, the Lord said, ‘Upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not conquer it.’ Peter was succeeded by Linus, Linus by Clement . . . In this order of succession a Donatist bishop is not to be found” (Letters 53:1:2 [A.D. 412]).
Sermon 97 comes even closer:
3. 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. And what did He announce to him, when he answered a third time that he loved Christ, and a third time the Lord commended His little sheep to Peter? He announced to him beforehand his suffering. “When thou wast young,” saith He, “thou girdedst thyself, and wentest whither thou wouldest; but when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thine hands, and another shall gird thee, and carry thee whither thou wouldest not.” The Evangelist hath explained to us Christ’s meaning. “This spake He,” saith he, “signifying by what death he should glorify God;” that is that he was crucified for Christ; for this is, “Thou shalt stretch forth thine hands.” Where now is that denier? Then after this the Lord Christ said, “Follow Me.” Not in the same sense as before, when he called the disciples. For then too He said, “Follow Me;” but then to instruction, now to a crown. Was he not afraid to be put to death when he denied Christ? He was afraid to suffer that which Christ suffered. But now he must be afraid no more. For he saw Him now Alive in the Flesh, whom he had seen hanging on the Tree. By His Resurrection Christ took away the fear of death; and forasmuch as He had taken away the fear of death, with good reason did He enquire of Peter’s love. Fear had thrice denied, love thrice confessed.
http://www.a2z.org/acts/webster/webster2.htm
here’s a gem:
In James White’s book, The Roman Catholic Controversy, on page 245, he recommends his readers to read ‘The History of the Christian Church’ by Phillip Schaff. Curiously, Schaff affirms what White himself denies:
“Augustine, it is true, unquestionably understood by the church the visible Catholic church, descended from the apostles, especially from Peter; through the succession of bishops; and according to the usage of his time he called the Roman church by the eminence the sedes apostolic [Apostolic Chair]’. (History of the Christian Church, 3:307)
White in his book denies that the Fathers applied Matthew 16 to Peter. He tries to prove that Matthew 16 was understood differently by the Fathers than it is today by the Church. The use of this paragraph from Schaff demonstrates that Augustine did see Matthew 16 as applying to Peter and that Rome was viewed by Augustine as the Apostolic Chair. This is a significant admission.
Steve Ray further comments: “Schaff does continue that he feels that St. Augustine felt like that the bishop of Rome had limited authority. Being aware that Schaff is a non-Catholic and is not going to espouse the Catholic point of view on the papacy though he is more honest in his treatment of the Fathers than most of the current “Protestant Apologists” I know.
I am not trying to explain Schaff’s fuller theology nor to deny it, I am simply making a point that whereas White suggests that his readers refer to four “fine presentations available on the topic” to prove his point against the Church, Schaff actually states that Augustine recognized Rome as the Apostolic Chair because of Peter’s unique calling and passed on through succession.”
http://jloughnan.tripod.com/the_rock.htm
Religion Mod, why was post # 271 removed?