Replies

) Although non-Catholics interpret the bible differently, the answers based on scripture. Not only are there specific verses where Jesus gives such authority to Peter,

Oh, just STOP IT.

It's not simply a matter of "non-Catholics" interpreting scripture "differently", but is also a matter that the entire church did so in earliest centuries.

By which I mean many centuries passed before any bishop of Rome began to assert that they themselves above and beyond all others, were singularly "Peter's successor".

Which would leave the first many centuries church be a collection OF IDIOTS for having not noticed this now central feature of Roman Catholicism for SO LONG!

To more fully understand the history of the church, one simply must cease to be a Romanist --- or have to come up with special pleadings such as Newman's theories of "development", for among those things which cannot be found within the understandings of the earliest of ECF's, and what they spoke of as the original charter of the church --- is there being a singular 'papacy' in Rome (alone) or anywhere else which all others were to unilaterally submit themselves to.

Papacy as it is known today was simply not a feature of the early church. Deal with it -- and include that aspect in any pondering, writings or discussion regarding the matter -- or else one will be repeating untruths while representing those sort of thoughts/statements as being factual.

As to who sat in Moses's seat --- what was the practice of the Jews during the time or era of Christ?

Among the priests of the temple, the high-most position was not one of life-long duration, but rotated by turn among the many priests.

Caiaphas, being the chief priest at the time of the crucifixion of Jesus, prophesied concerning the situation as can be seen written of in John 11 [from Young's Literal Translation]

45 Many, therefore, of the Jews who came unto Mary, and beheld what Jesus did, believed in him;

A moment's interruption here, for this Mary was sister to Martha, and to Lazarus, whom the one known to us today as Jesus Christ raised [Lazarus] from the grave, as is detailed in in the same chapter link has been given to.

46 but certain of them went away unto the Pharisees, and told them what Jesus did;
47 the chief priests, therefore, and the Pharisees, gathered together a sanhedrim, and said, `What may we do? because this man doth many signs?
48 if we may let him alone thus, all will believe in him; and the Romans will come, and will take away both our place and nation.'
49 and a certain one of them, Caiaphas, being chief priest of that year, said to them, `Ye have not known anything,
50 nor reason that it is good for us that one man may die for the people, and not the whole nation perish.'
51 And this he said not of himself, but being chief priest of that year, he did prophesy that Jesus was about to die for the nation,

>> It’s not simply a matter of “non-Catholics” interpreting scripture “differently”, but is also a matter that the entire church did so in earliest centuries. <<

So you (falsely) claim. Tertullian (208 AD): “For though you think that heaven is still shut up, remember that the Lord left the keys of it to Peter here, and through him to the Church, which keys everyone will carry with him, if he has been questioned and made confession [of faith].”

Cyprian (248 AD): “He who deserts the chair of Peter, upon whom the Church was founded, does he trust himself to be in the Church?”

Irenaeus (178 AD): “By pointing out the apostolic tradition and faith announced to mankind, which has been brought down to our time by successions of bishops, in the greatest, most ancient, and well known church, founded and established by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul, at Rome, we can confound all who in any other way… gather more than they ought.”

Now, Ignatius (115 AD) appealed to the authority of bishops as apostolic successors: “void divisions, as the beginning of evil. Follow, all of you, the bishop, as Jesus Christ followed the father; and follow the presbytery as the apostles. Let no man do aught pertaining to the Church apart from the bishop. Wheresoever the bishop appears, there let the people be, even as wheresoever Christ Jesus is, there is the Catholic Church” What’s very surprising is that even though he is bishop at Antioch, he also looks to the chair of Peter to claim authority, when there are squabbles among bishops.

And of course, there is the biblical precedent that the apostles do not address questions directly to Jesus, but ask Peter to ask for them.

Many Protestants object saying Paul told Peter he was wrong. But that precisely proves the point! Paul saw Peter allowing people to violate to the doctrine that PETER established! Does Paul correct them? No, he gets PETER to correct PAUL’S own flock!