Replies

Hope this helps. This was written by a close friend, Tim Chichester, several years ago when he was dealing with a few Feeneyites.

Seems this subject comes up frequently. This was written by a friend.

Your lengthy line up of Roman Catholic scholars, clergy and Popes does not do much to advance the point of where salvation can be obtained. Everything posted depends on the papal infallibility doctrine for authority. What else would we expect from those whose "paycheck" was authorized by the Pope, if not the "subject" of their next barbeque.

If you want to prove anything to skeptics, it will have to be in the infallible Word of God. The only thing that I have heard on the authority of the successors of Peter is Matthew 16:18-19 And I say also unto you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatsoever you shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever you shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

The entire scriptural argument for infallibility through succession rides on these two verses being a literal handing over of Jesus' authority to Peter alone, even though four verses later He also calls Peter "Satan".

The question then arises: What did Jesus mean by the "Petros" "Petra" charge?

The "Petra" rock, througout the Bible, is a symbol of strength and foundation. What had Peter just done that warranted this response from Jesus? In an act of faith, Peter had recognized Jesus as the Son of the Living God. It was this act of faith, this recognition of Jesus as the Son of God, that was the "Rock" upon which Jesus would build His church,not the man,or his successors.

How can I be so sure of this? Because those who were there with Jesus and Peter actually recognized St James as the decision making head of the church. Acts 15:19 James,after hearing the witnesses on the circumcision question (including Peter)who testified before the assembled apostles and elders, renders the judgement: Therefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from the Gentiles are turned to God........."

This was not Peter making the determination it was James that the apostles and elders recognized as the leader of the Church. So did they just miss the jurisdictional transfer of power from Jesus to Peter or did they understand His true intent. It also seems that such an important transfer of power would have been a point recognized in the other three gospels, but it isn't.

Without such a transfer of power, Papal infallibility fails.

My second problem with the stand of the RC is that they are the Church. It is my understanding that the "Church" is the Body of Christ, not a building, denomination or religious entity. Whoever believes in Jesus as Saviour is a member of the Body and a member of the Church.

Keep in mind that either the Holy Spirit guides the Church or He doesn't

He doesn't..look around you...The Holy Spirit left at Trent when the church fathers denied the bible ..

BTTT!

((((PING))))

<> Smashing. God Bless you.

Back in the day...when I was "debating" schismtaics about EENS, I would ask them to open their Roman Missal to Jan 23rd and explain to me why St. Emerentiana was raised to the altars. She died a Catechumen; i.e., extra Ecclesia.<

I was mostly met by anger; although, several schismatics told me that, unbeknownst to us, she was secretly Baptised with water by the Holy Spirit. IN the immortal words of any livng Valley Girl, "Whatever."<>

One God. One morality. Decency toward others. Deed over creed.