USCCB Eucharist Draft Document Focuses on Real Presence, Not Communion Denial

The Pillar ^ | 11/2/21

[marshmallow]

The draft text of a prospective U.S. bishops’ conference document on the Eucharist is focused on a call to “enter more deeply by faith and love into this great Mystery of Mysteries.”

A draft text of the document, which was finalized in September and circulated to the bishops last month, addresses the subject of “Eucharistic worthiness,” — the states of grace and sin which the Church teaches affect a Catholic’s suitability to receive the sacrament. But as drafters predicted in June, the draft includes no specific mention of high-profile Catholic politicians in favor of abortion.

It does not include any recommendations for the denial of Communion, despite some media predictions it would do so.

The 26 pages of a draft text obtained by The Pillar focus mostly on the Eucharist as a gift, as the real presence of Christ, and as a sign and cause of of communion with Christ and his Church.

[MHGinTN]

Not thumb His nose at them, to lock their gates maybe?

[moonhawk]

“Temprally invisible”? Whatever.

[imardmd1]

“Temprally invisible”? Whatever.

Sorry, I just mistyped it and didn't catch the error before it was posted.

Temporally (this material world) vs spirituallly (supernatural).

[MHGinTN]

If something is IN the Universe God has created then it has aspects of space and time:

Without space a thing does not exist
Without time, events do not occur

Even after God transforms us in the twinkling of an eye, we will still be IN the Universe God has created, albeit we will exist as higher variable beings, akin to the being to whom the hand writing on the wall in palace party central, Babylon, was existing IN the Universe but only the hand was IN the set of variables of the Palace.

Jesus after His resurrection came from and retruned to this greater variables realm. He passed through the men handling stone and ready to push Him from a cliff. And there are more examples of this greater variables realm. The Raptrure will transform those alive into greater variable beings so that we shall see Him as He is as the first fruits of new creation in this greater dimensional realm. When He transforms us, we will instantly no longer be in this limits well and no longer visible to those who are not transformed.

[imardmd1]

OK.

[daniel1212]

"And what more could be said that when Jesus declared the Eucharist and those listening left in revulsion that he let them leave. He didn’t explain like he did in the parables. He let them go."

Actually, contrary to your isolationist eisegesis, John 6:25–69 is part of a pattern in the Lord's teaching manifest in prior chapters and elsewhere, in which He often uses puzzling speech which calls for further inquiry in order to understand it, but which is also a test to separate those who will pursue the meaning vs, those who will not.

Thus we see many examples of the Lord speaking in an apparently physical ways in order to reveal the spiritual meaning to those who awaited the meaning, which, as elsewhere, the Lord revealed to true seekers while letting the carnally minded to their own delusions. And which is seen with His use of parables elsewhere: "Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand. And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive:" Matthew 13:13-14)

In Jn. 2:19,20, the Lord spoke in a way that seems to refer to destroying the physical temple in which He had just drove out the money changers, and left the Jews to that misapprehension of His words, so that this was a charge during His trial and crucifixion by the carnally minded. (Mk. 14:58; 15:29) Meaning that rather than the Lord having cleared up a misunderstanding before they left; He allowed them to reject their salvation on a mistake.

• Likewise, in Jn. 3:3, the Lord spoke in such an apparently physical way that Nicodemus exclaimed, "How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born?" (John 3:4)
• And in John 4 the Lord’s speech resuts in the women at the well presuming He was referring to physical water, (John 4:14,15)
• And then to the disciples thinking maybe someone brought their Lord food in response to His answer that He had food. (John 4:32-34)

And in which cases, as is characteristic of John, and as seen in Jn. 6:63, the Spirit of the Lord or Him personally goes on to distinguish btwn what is the below versus the above, the flesh and the Spirit, the temporal and the eternal, yet the Lord not personally clearly explaining this at the time:

Thus the words,

• “But he spake of the temple of his body. “ (John 2:21) which meaning was only revealed to His disciples after the resurrection. (John 2:22)
• "That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit," (John 3:6) - much leaves Nicodemus to figure it out, requiring seeking, rather than making it clear. Which actually requires hearing or reading more than that chapter, as with Jn. 6, revealing being born spiritually in regeneration. (Acts 10:43-47; 15:7-9; Eph. 1:13; 2:5)
• But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life (John 4:14) - yet here it is not made clear that this is thru heart-purifying regenerating faith. (cf. Acts 10:43–47; 15:7–9; Titus 3:5)
• Jesus saith unto them, My meat is to do the will of him that sent me, and to finish his work (John 4:34) yet which is understood in the light of such teachings as Matthew 4:4.

And which means that had those carnally-minded Jews in John 6, who were looking for physical food, (John 6:26) had continued on in seeking the spirtual meaning, then they would have understood, "As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me," (John 6:57) and "It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life." (John 6:63)

For "just how did Christ live by the Father"? The manifest answer is that the manner by which the Lord lived by the Father was as per Mt. 4:4: "Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God." Thus for the Lord Jesus who lived by every word of God, the doing of His will was "meat."

For as referred to above, once again using metaphor, the Lord stated to disciples who thought He was referring to physical bread,

Jesus saith unto them, My meat is to do the will of him that sent me, and to finish his work. (John 4:34)

And consistent with this the Lord revealed that He would not even be with them physically in the future, thus not being able to provide them with His literal flesh as they would have presumed He was saying must be done (versus the metaphysical gymnastics Catholicism engages in): “What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before? It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.” (John 6:62-63)

And which meaning of ingestion of God’s word, which Jeremiah says “were found, and I did eat them; and thy word was unto me the joy and rejoicing of mine heart: for I am called by thy name, O Lord God of hosts” Jeremiah 15:16) and which David said are “More to be desired are they than gold, yea, than much fine gold: sweeter also than honey and the honeycomb,” (Psalms 19:10) is the only meaning that comports with the rest of the NT.

For as seen in what follows in John, and the rest of the NT, the Holy Spirit only and always taught that that obtaining spiritual life was by receiving the word of the gospel, and never shows this was by actual physical ingestion of anything.

For instead, one "lives by" (upon) God's word as well, first by repentant faith in the gospel and then by feeding upon the word of God. For while the Lord's supper is nowhere referred to as spiritual food anywhere interpretive of John 6 (Acts thru Rev.) the word of God what is taught as being spiritual nourishment, being uniquely called "milk" and "meat" (1Co. 3:2; Heb. 5:13; 1Pt. 2:2) by which believers are "nourished" (1Tim. 4:6) and built up. (Acts 20:32)

For the word is what is to be salvitated for, chewed slowly yet thorughly, consumed, received meditated upon, giving spiritual life:

Ho, every one that thirsteth, come ye to the waters, and he that hath no money; come ye, buy, and eat; yea, come, buy wine and milk without money and without price. Wherefore do ye spend money for that which is not bread? and your labour for that which satisfieth not? hearken diligently unto me, and eat ye that which is good, and let your soul delight itself in fatness. Incline your ear, and come unto me: hear, and your soul shall live; and I will make an everlasting covenant with you, even the sure mercies of David. (Isaiah 55:1-3)

There simply is no other meaning which conflates with the rest of Scripture and esp. Acts thru Revelation which best reveals how the NT church church.

And therefore what we see in the only book with description of detail in the inspired record of how the NT church understood the gospels, it was of the Lord's supper being that of effectually remembering His death by thus showing it by sharing a meal with others who were bought by His sinless shed blood, thus declaring union with Christ and each other as being "one bread," analogous to how pagans have fellowship in their dedicatory feasts, (The Lord's Supper:metaphorical or metaphysical?)

[daniel1212]

"“Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you; he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him” (John 6:53–56)."

Then if you take this literally as other "verily, verily" statements, then it seems you must hold that no one who does not believe in transubstantiation is regenerated/has spiritual life in them. Or do you take a semi-literal approach to this as Catholicism does with "take, eat, this is My body.." meaning a christ whose physical appearance does not correspond to what he physically is, but instead appears as inanimate objects who look, behave, etc. and would scientifically test to be what they appear to be - as would the true body and blood of the incarnated Christ on earth;

And yet these inanimate objects are said to not even exist, the "true body and bloody Christ existing under their appearance instead, regardless of appearance, etc. Until that is, the non-existent bread and or wine begins to manifest (and here appearance become critical) corruption/decay, at which point Christ no longer locally exists under that appearance.

Meaning rather than a purely literal understanding of "take, eat, this is My body..." in which the apostles would be eating the manifestly physical body that would be manifestly crucified, then we have a metaphysical contrivance passing for a literal understanding. And when only the metaphorical understanding easily conflates with rest of Scripture, as the Jewish disciples were familiar with.

[daniel1212]

"Not an organization? Really?"

The only is the one true church is the body of Christ (Colossians 1:18) to which He is married, (Ephesians 5:25) the "household of faith," (Galatians 6:10) for it uniquely only and always consists 100% of true believers, and which spiritual body of Christ is what the Spirit baptizes ever believer into, (1Co. 12:13) while organic fellowships in which they express their faith inevitably become admixtures of wheat and tares, with Catholicism and liberal Protestantism being mostly the latter.

However, organic ecclesial fellowships (that is Rome's terms for non-Catholic churches since it considers them unworthy of the proper name "church") are also organizations, but the Catholic church is an organization with some true doctrines but as told you before(and by the grace of God, many, many, many, many , many times refuted your fallacious attempts to defend such), distinctive Catholic teachings are not manifest in the only wholly inspired substantive authoritative record of what the NT church believed (which is Scripture, in particular Acts through Revelation, which best shows how the NT church understood the gospels.

The degree that a church retains and preaches the convicting gospel of grace, of salvation by grace thru heart-purifying, justifying faith, then they are part of the church which the Lord promised would overcome the gates of Hell. However, your false church has sadly become as the gates of Hell for multitudes.

"Head of organization: Peter, the rock. Check."

No, for in contrast to Peter, that the LORD Jesus is the Rock (“petra”) or "stone" (“lithos,” and which denotes a large rock in Mk. 16:4) upon which the church is built is one of the most abundantly confirmed doctrines in the Bible (petra: Rm. 9:33; 1Cor. 10:4; 1Pet. 2:8; cf. Lk. 6:48; 1Cor. 3:11; lithos: Mat. 21:42; Mk.12:10-11; Lk. 20:17-18; Act. 4:11; Rm. 9:33; Eph. 2:20; cf. Dt. 32:4, Is. 28:16) including by Peter himself. (1Pt. 2:4-8) Rome's current catechism attempts to have Peter himself as the rock as well, but also affirms: “On the rock of this faith confessed by St Peter, Christ build his Church,” (pt. 1, sec. 2, cp. 2, para. 424) which understanding some of the ancients concur with.

The "this rock" upon which Christ said I will build My church is "petros," which is the word which is used for physical rocks, as in the rock a wise man builds his house upon: "He ...laid the foundation on a rock [petra]: and when the flood arose, the stream beat vehemently upon that house, and could not shake it: for it was founded upon a rock. [petra] (Luke 6:48) It is also used for the tomb of Christ which was carved out in the rock [petra]. (Matthew 27:60)

While men can argue about the significance of the difference between the Greek (the language the Holy Spirit chose to express the New Testament revelation in) words “Petros” (Peter, or stone in Jn. 1:42) and “petra” (rock) in Mt. 16:18, and what the LORD might have said in Aramaic (and your own appeal to a Hebrew Matthew was dealt with), the phrase “this stone” (“touton lithosis”), used to identify the cornerstone which is the foundation of the church, (Mt. 21:42) is only used of Christ as regarding a person. (Mt. 21:44)

It is by the “rock of this faith” that the church not only exists but it gains its members. (1Cor. 12:13; Eph. 1:13) And it is by the essential faith which Peter expressed that church overcomes: "Who is he that overcometh the world, but he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God?" (1Jn, 5:5; cf (1Jn. 2:13,14,25)

See more here on this issue.

"Leaders: 12 apostles. Check."

But which did not teach distinctive Catholic doctrines as seen in examinigng Scripture.

"The Eucharist is the real body and blood of our Lord. Nothing is more important or precious."

Rather, the sacerdotal priestly expiatory spiritual life-giving Catholic wafer/wine god in disguise was not what the NT church exampled or taught,

And NT pastors were not a separate class of normatively celibate sacerdotal Catholic priests whose primary active unique function was to offer the Eucharist as a sacrifice for sin and dispense it was spiritual food. Nor was there two different offices of presbuteros and episkopos.

[daniel1212]

"Or one of the 30,000 plus and growing denominations who claim they’re the church?"

Actually this is just another of your parroted polemical propaganda, except you add to it, for no only is the 30,000 denomination been examined and found wanting, and renounced even by your apologist Dave Armstrong, but the number of those who claim "they’re the church" as meaning The Church versus a church is just a minuscule amounts, and signifies a cult.

That both Rome and the EO's (with whom you have significant unresolved disputes after 1,000 years) claim to be the One True Church while both (Rome more) holding to distinctive Catholic teachings are not manifest in the only wholly inspired substantive authoritative record of what the NT church believed (which is Scripture, in particular Acts through Revelation, which best shows how the NT church understood the gospels) manifests their hubris on the broad way of elitist churches taking vast multitudes to Hell. Apart from a pious remnant of simple faith who find Christ amidst the trappings of institutionalized religion, which I was part of as an altar boy, lector and CCD teacher.

[Mark17]

I think there is no doubt he thumbed his nose at all of them. It DOES say he “preached” to the spirits in prison, indicating, he not only thumbed his nose at them, but he spoke to them as well. I imagine his voice thundered at them, and extrapolating a bit, maybe, even to this day, his voice still thunders throughout the dungeons of Tartarus. I have a feeling, whatever he said to them, probably was not well taken, and made them shudder. I doubt they will ever stop shuddering. I think these are the ones mentioned in Jude 6, and are chained up, waiting for the final judgment. They only have themselves to blame.

[daniel1212]

"To: MHGinTN “Bottom line, I am born again, and if it was then up to me to keep me born again could anyone be saved when it is spiritual powers which work to defeat the Gospel, and we have been told repeatedly in God’s Word that eternal life does not come by works of ‘righteousness’?” You said it all when you said, “I am born again.” Just as you can’t be “unborn” out of your mother’s womb, you can’t be “unborn” spiritually as the Holy Spirit has sealed you until The Day of Redemption. "

This issue should be a separate thread but, one is born of the Spirit by faith, not on the basis of any merit of works, yet like Abraham, living faith in the Lord and Savior is that which, results in obedience toward its Object. Indeed, everything we choose to do is a manifestation of what we truly believe, at least at the moment. Conversion is not simply believing in a promise abstract from the Lord who made it, and one cannot believe in the risen Lord Jesus - a person - and not seek to follow Him (according the light and grace they have). And it is those who do that the Lord promises eternal life to, and who cannot be plucked out of His hand. (Jn. 10:27)

This obedience of faith means that one will characteristically seek to live out that which they are in position - and repent when convicted of not doing so. (Colossians 3:1ff; Galatians 5:25; Rm. 8:16; Hebrews 6:9-10; 1 Jn. 1:7-10) "For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure." (Philippians 2:13) One cannot even come to God unless being drawn by Him, (Jn. 6:44) and granted repentance unto life (Acts 11:18) by Him who convicts of sin, (Jn. 16:8) and opens hearts, and gives heart-purifying regenerating faith. (Eph. 2:8,9; Acts 10:43; 15:7-9) Thus we cannot take any credit for any good we do. However, we can resist God and that is the only thing we can and must take credit for.

And since salvation is by God-given faith, thus the Lord - writing to believers as believers - exhorts and warns against departing from it, which would be pointless unless we can. Such a one which knowingly, will-fully impenitently chooses to continue in sin has denied the faith, (cf. 1 Timothy 5:8) Such will have forfeited what faith obtained if they die in that condition, having an "evil heart of unbelief in departing from the living God," drawing "back to perdition," so that Christ shall "profit you nothing," having "fallen from grace," not standing fast in "the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free," not holding fast "the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm unto the end," "the beginning of our confidence stedfast unto the end," so that the gospel labor on their behalf would be in vain, (Gal. 5:1-5; Heb. 3:6,12,14; 10:25-31, 38-39; 1 Thessalonians 3:5) Wherefore God chastens us to work repentance so "that we should not be condemned with the world." (1 Corinthians 11:32)

Texts in full:

And because ye are sons [Paul's audience], God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father. (Galatians 4:6)

Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again [those who were set free] with the yoke of bondage [going back into what they were set free from]. Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if [submission to Judaizers these believers are being warned against] ye be circumcised [signifying justification obtained by keeping all the law], Christ shall profit you nothing. For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law. Christ is become [an effectual change due to their choice] of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace[their former state]. For we [those who continue to believe] through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith. (Galatians 5:1-5)

Take heed, brethren, [contextually not a general sense, but as believers] lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God [a departure from their former state s believers]. But exhort one another daily, while it is called To day; lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin [a change of heart]. For we are made partakers of Christ, if we hold the beginning of our confidence stedfast unto the end [[perseverance of the saints]. (Hebrews 3:12-14)

Let us hold fast the profession of our faith without wavering [continued exhortation to persevere]; (for he is And let us consider one another to provoke unto love and to good works: Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, [indicating departing from the faith, as follows] as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching. (Hebrews 10:23-25)

For if [a choice brethren are warned against] we [not just you] sin wilfully [not out of weakness, but with full consent, as a decision not to continue but to depart, signified by giving up being with the believers] after that we have received the knowledge of the truth [a term which refers to believing, as per 1Tim. 2:4; 2Tim. 3:7], there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins [cf. Hebrews 6:6-8; a terminal condition of judgment, with no provision for repentance and forgiveness, having forfeited what saving faith obtained], But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries. (Hebrews 10:26-27)

He that despised Moses' law died without mercy under two or three witnesses: Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified [a past condition, appropriated by faith, now forfeited by a definite denial of the same] , an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace? (Hebrews 10:28-29)

Cast not away therefore your confidence, [the issue being faith, out of which obedience flows] which hath great recompence of reward. For ye have need of patience, that, after ye have done the will of God, ye might receive the promise [not that doing earns the promise, but that saving faith is that which finally perseveres, which faith as manifested in works God - who gave faith and the ability and motivation to obey - rewards under grace] For yet a little while, and he that shall come will come, and will not tarry.

Now the just shall live by faith [the just live by faith, not merely profess it, with such faith being what appropriates justification]: but if any man draw back [a denial of justifying faith], my soul shall have no pleasure in him [as solemnly, fearfully described above]. But we [who do not draw back, but persevere] are not of them who draw back unto perdition [contextually a terminal condition of judgment, with no provision for repentance and forgiveness due to treating Christ with contempt] but of them that believe to the saving of the soul. (Hebrews 10:35-39)

But when we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we should not be condemned with the world. (1 Corinthians 11:32)

For verily, when we were with you, we told you before that we should suffer tribulation; even as it came to pass, and ye know. For this cause, when I could no longer forbear, I sent to know your faith, lest by some means the tempter have tempted you, and our labour be in vain. (1 Thessalonians 3:4-5)

Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory [katechō:  hold fast: cf. 1Ths. 5:21] what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. (1 Corinthians 15:1-2)
Such departing from the the living God, drawing backing into perdition, falling from grace, etc., is likely the the "great transgression," (Psalms 9:13) that of having "wickedly departed from my God,"(2 Samuel 22:22) which David stated he did not do, despite his sins, for unlike apostates he overall kept the ways of the Lord, and confessed in repentance when convicted of not doing so, (2 Samuel 12:7-13)

Note again that the above verses are clearly written to believers as believers, exhorting them to continue in the faith and warning against rejecting it, and thus these cannot be dismissed as never having been born again , although there are those who left fellowship since they were never in Christ. (1 John 2:19)

[Mark17]

Words of wisdom, as usual bro. 👍

[Mark17]

SC, I think all Jesus meant, when he said he who endures to the end, will be saved, was talking only about those who physically survive the tribulation. That’s all it means. It has nothing to do with eternal salvation. It’s talking about the physical.
Here is another issue. Sometimes we have experiences, that require post trauma help. Can you imagine, what trauma, the tribulation survivors will experience, having physically survived the worst period in the history of the world? I think the trauma will be so severe, it will require divine intervention, to heal them. I think the Bible indicates that this is what will happen. God will heal them, though it may be angels, who actually do the heavy lifting, in God’s name.

[MHGinTN]

Wow and AMEN. A Sunday School lesson on Saturday night. WOW

[MHGinTN]

I am sorry Daniel1212 but your essay smacks too closely of saved by faith kept saved by works. I cannot agree with that if that is what you are asserting in an oblique fashion.

The term 'saving faith' when used to infer you must work to retain salvation is specious, not the Gospel of Grace. If God expected us to keep safe that which ONLY He can accomplish, well you have to be able to see the implications of such a flawed notion. This essay sounds too much like a sermon I watched from RC Sroul.

[daniel1212]

"Wow and AMEN. A Sunday School lesson on Saturday night. WOW"

Well, cut and paste with my stiff arthritic fingers amid hours of typing, from the most recent encounter with the parroted polemics.

[MHGinTN]

I actually do understand ... my eyes are trying to adjust to the cataract surgery and reading the computer screen at 200%, using 1.75 reading glases makes me have a headache and mild nausea. And even with that extreme enhancements I still don’t see well enough.

[daniel1212]

"I am sorry Daniel1212 but your essay smacks too closely of saved by faith kept saved by works. I cannot agree with that if that is what you are asserting in an oblique fashion. The term 'saving faith' when used to infer you must work to retain salvation is specious, not the Gospel of Grace"

There is nothing oblique, much less "of saved by faith kept saved by works," as instead there is an apparent failure to understand that saving faith in the Lord Jesus, if it is faith in Him and not just in a promise abstract from who and what Christ is, cannot help but to affect changes in life relative to the will of the Object of faith. Thus one is saved by faith which is imputed for righteousness, as per Romans 3-5, yet it will effect obedience as per Romans 6.

"If God expected us to keep safe that which ONLY He can accomplish, well you have to be able to see the implications of such a flawed notion. "

God simply expects us to continue in faith, which He gives and motivates us to walk in, instead of resisting God. Thus the exhortations to continue in the faith and the warnings against departing from the living God..

We must submit to the Truth of Scripture and you cannot dismiss the many texts I provided relative to these exhortations and warnings - to which more can be added - by dismissing such as that it smacks too closely of saved by faith kept saved by works. Rather, one is saved by the faith that works obedience by the Spirit

Time now to sleep.

[moonhawk]

Maybe we both did—I typed mine instead of C&P. I miss some of my typos due to macular degeneration.

My response was to the content, not the spelling.

[imardmd1]

The "this rock" upon which Christ said I will build My church is "petros,"

Begging your pardon, but I believe here you have made an error, which probably just escaped your copy-editing scrutiny before posting this comment. The Greek word here in the text is "petra," not "petros." You probably want to correct that in your text.

Petra refers to the miles-long sedimentary rock escarpment that Caesarea Philippi was built on, which they were actually standing on when Jesus precipitated this discussion. Jesus was remarking ong Simon's insignificance as compared to the massive geology underneath them, which He referred to as the solidness of the statement of the truth of Him that would be the figurative-literal foundational doctrine upon which His Spiritual "building" of the living stones of His "temple" of saints would arise.

Petra, massive; not "Petros" who was to become one of the "living stones" of its foundation, together with other apostles and prophets, with Himself being the Cornerstone (figuratively).

As you already know.