GCM Home | Your Posts | Rules | DONATE | Bookstore | RSS | Facebook | Twitter | FAQs


Author Topic: Papacy - right or wrong?  (Read 86346 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

acmcccxlviii

  • Guest
Papacy - right or wrong?
« on: Mon Sep 20, 2010 - 09:48:27 »
  I recently heard a radio broadcast on the "Unbelievable" programme, which is a discussion programme between Christians and other Christians, atheists and those of other religions.  This edition was between a protestant and a catholic.
  One issue which was raised was the central one of whether there was any basis for the principle of Papacy (the situation where one man has absolute authority as the successor of Peter).  As far as I know, the only basis for this is Matt. 16, which tells of Jesus calling Simon "Peter"* and referring to the Rock as the Church.
  Would anyone like to comment as to the relevance and weight of these and/or other scriptures?

* Aramaic: Cephas; Greek: Petros/ Petra; Latin: (I think) Petrus

Christian Forums and Message Board

Papacy - right or wrong?
« on: Mon Sep 20, 2010 - 09:48:27 »

Offline Catholica

  • Modal Globerator
  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6258
  • Manna: 174
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Papacy - right or wrong?
« Reply #1 on: Mon Sep 20, 2010 - 10:07:44 »
Sure.  There are lots of scriptures that demonstrate the primacy of Peter among the apostles.  For example, he is almost always listed first.  He made the definitive doctrinal pronouncement at the council of Jerusalem.  The apostle John was first to the tomb but waited for Peter to enter first.  Jesus specifically tells Peter 3 times to feed my lambs, tend my sheep, feed my sheep.  Peter was the first apostle called.  Satan wanted to sift the apostles like wheat, but Jesus prayed specifically for Peter.  Peter specifically was promised the keys, in Matthew 16, and these keys stand for something of a very special office (see Isaiah 22:22) with authority over God's house.

As for Peter being the Rock and the petra/petros argument, we know that Jesus spoke Aramaic, and Peter's name was actually changed to Kepha (sometimes transliterated Cephas elsewhere in the NT).  So Jesus said that "I call you Kepha, and upon this Kepha I will build my Church".  The arguments around the Greek usually get into a petra = huge rock, petros = little rock argument.  But in truth, calling "Kepha"  "Petra" would be akin to calling him a feminine name, so the name was made masculine when Matthew was translated into Greek.  If the intent of the writer had been to call Peter "little rock" then they would have used the word "lithos".  No doubt that Jesus is the Rock of our faith, but Jesus called Peter "Rock" too, and by changing his name he exalted him, and the grammar gives us a Church founded upon a Rock, a living stone that Jesus selected.

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: Papacy - right or wrong?
« Reply #1 on: Mon Sep 20, 2010 - 10:07:44 »

acmcccxlviii

  • Guest
Re: Papacy - right or wrong?
« Reply #2 on: Mon Sep 20, 2010 - 10:28:30 »
  Thanks for replying.  I've only heard the arguments from the non-Catholic side, so I'm ignorant of most of the pro-Catholic stance.
  I'm not an expect on the New Testament and don't have a Bible with me at the moment, so I might make mistakes, but aren't others called to look after the flock, the Church, etc., if using somewhat different language?  What about the parable of the faithful slave who was given the task of looking after his master's belonging while he was away?  Was that instruction only for Peter, or was it to the Apostles generally and by extension, the other brothers?
  I'm aware of, and have given serious thought to, the linguistic details.  What you say seems, on prima-facie consideration to make sense.  Anti-papists tend to point out that Petros is fundamentally different to Petra (a large rock), stating that 'though Peter was "rock-like", he wasn't "The Rock", although the Catholic on the radio pointed out the point about the words' gender, which seems valid.
  This is a huge issue with huge implications, but if you'd like to talk further, you can reach me here or at acm1959@hotmail.co.uk.
  For instance, another connected point which was mentioned is that the doctrine of the infallibility of the Popes is a relatively new one, formed in 1870 and effected retrospectively.
  Bye, Chris.

Offline Catholica

  • Modal Globerator
  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6258
  • Manna: 174
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Papacy - right or wrong?
« Reply #3 on: Mon Sep 20, 2010 - 11:10:30 »
I can tell that you have a heart to learn.  Nothing wrong with asking questions, ever.  I'd love to talk with you on email.

We believe that all of the apostles had an authority equal to each other, but that Peter was given a place of primacy among the bishops.  So just as all apostles had authority, we believe that their successors (which the Church teaches are the bishops of the Catholic Church throughout the ages) also have that authority, though the primacy was reserved for the bishop of Rome, also called the Pope.  An ecumenical council, to my understanding, had to consist of most of the bishops of the world to really be called ecumenical, and one of those bishops had to be the bishop of Rome, and the other bishops had to be in union with the bishop of Rome.

Papal infallibility is another issue altogether.  I will contact you over email.

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: Papacy - right or wrong?
« Reply #3 on: Mon Sep 20, 2010 - 11:10:30 »

Offline winsome

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5103
  • Manna: 91
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Papacy - right or wrong?
« Reply #4 on: Mon Sep 20, 2010 - 12:00:37 »
Hi,

Catholica mentioned the keys but I thought I'd give a bit more explanation. I'm about to go on holiday so I may not be able to respond to any questions for a while.

To the angel of the church in Philadelphia, write this:
The holy one, the true,
    who holds the key of David,
    who opens and no one shall close,
    who closes and no one shall open,
says this………….
(Rev 3:7)

This Jesus who holds the key of David, who opens and closes is the same Jesus who says to Peter:

I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: Papacy - right or wrong?
« Reply #4 on: Mon Sep 20, 2010 - 12:00:37 »



Offline Debbie_55

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 2788
  • Manna: 168
  • Gender: Female
    • View Profile
Re: Papacy - right or wrong?
« Reply #5 on: Mon Sep 20, 2010 - 12:25:30 »
The rock Jesus was referring to in Matthew 16:18 was a rock that Jesus and Peter were literally standing on as they were in the city of Caesarea Philippi which was a pagan city that was built on a rock. His church would be built on the rock (not literally, but metaphorically speaking) of Caesarea Philippi—a rock literally filled with niches for pagan idols, where ungodly values dominated. The people there literally felt that the caves on this rock were actual gates to hell, thus the saying I will build my Church upon this rock and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it. (look up the history for yourself as I have) The rock meaning we are to preach against the gates of Hell to try and prevent people from going there as we bring Salvation through Christ to those who do not know Him.

No one person has any authority apart from what God gives them. God gives all who will confess and believe on His son Jesus Christ His power and authority through grace that we are commissioned to take His word out into the world according to Matthew 28:19,20. So no, Papacy has nothing to do with the rock or being a successor to Peter as we all are a successor to what Peter was called to do as we have that same calling from the Lord.

Offline chestertonrules

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 3210
  • Manna: 36
    • View Profile
Re: Papacy - right or wrong?
« Reply #6 on: Mon Sep 20, 2010 - 12:33:13 »
Here's a good summary including scripture and early Christian writings:

http://www.scripturecatholic.com/primacy_of_peter.html



Angelos

  • Guest
Re: Papacy - right or wrong?
« Reply #7 on: Mon Sep 20, 2010 - 12:50:30 »
I believe if we read Matthew 16:18, John 21:6, Luke 22:31 and Matthew 7:24 together we will get a more clear picture of what our Lord Jesus wanted.

In the absence of His human incarnation Jesus wanted someone (a human) to lead His physical Church and tend His whole flock In John 21:16 It becomes very clear: "16 He says to him again: Simon, son of John, do you love me? He said to him: yea, Lord, you know that I love you. He said to him: Feed my lambs. 17 He said to him the third time: Simon, son of John, do you love me? Peter was grieved because he had said to him the third time: Do you love me? And he said to him: Lord, you know all things: you know that I love you. He said to him: Feed my sheep"

Btw, the Greek words that are translated as "feed" also mean tend or "take care of" ποίμαινε τὰ προβάτιά μου; βόσκε τὰ προβάτιά μου

Here, our Lord charges Peter with the superintendency of all his sheep, without exception; and consequently of his whole flock, that is, of his own Church. We can argue who the successor of Peter is today, but Jesus in John 21 does leave a single successor, not a big group of bishops working separately from their ethnic silos.


Matthew 16: 18 And I say to you: That you are Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. In Greek "κἀγὼ δέ σοι λέγω ὅτι σὺ εἶ Πέτρος, καὶ ἐπὶ ταύτῃ τῇ πέτρᾳ οἰκοδομήσω μου τὴν ἐκκλησίαν, καὶ πύλαι ᾅδου οὐ κατισχύσουσιν αὐτῆς"


Upon this rock, etc... The words of Christ to Peter, spoken in the vulgar language of the Jews which our Lord made use of, were the same as if he had said in English, Thou art a Rock, and upon this rock I will build my church. So that, by the plain course of the words, Peter is here declared to be the rock, upon which the church was to be built: Christ himself being both the principal foundation and founder of the same. Where also note, that Christ, by building his house, that is, his church, upon a rock, has thereby secured it against all storms and floods, like the wise builder, (see Matthew 7:24-25.):

24 Every one therefore that hears these my words, and does them, shall be likened to a wise man that built his house upon a rock 24 Πᾶς οὖν ὅστις ἀκούει μου τοὺς λόγους [τούτους] καὶ ποιεῖ αὐτοὺς ὁμοιωθήσεται ἀνδρὶ φρονίμῳ, ὅστις ᾠκοδόμησεν αὐτοῦ τὴν οἰκίαν ἐπὶ τὴν πέτραν. In Matthew 7:24 and in Matthew 16:18 the Greeks words build (οἰκοδομήσω) and rock (Πέτρος, πέτρᾳ) are repeated.

So Jesus selected Peter to be the foundation of His Church due to Peter's resemblance to the wise man who heard Jesus' words and did (ποιεῖ ) them

Finally in Luke 22:31-33, Satan singles out Peter for an attack and Jesus gives special protection, so Peter can support the flock: "31 And the Lord said: Simon, Simon, behold Satan has desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat. 32 But I have prayed for you, that your faith fail not: and you, being once converted, support your brethren" Peter is the only Apostle that Jesus prays for for special protection from Satan, so he can lead His flock


Offline chestertonrules

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 3210
  • Manna: 36
    • View Profile
Re: Papacy - right or wrong?
« Reply #8 on: Mon Sep 20, 2010 - 13:16:14 »
The rock Jesus was referring to in Matthew 16:18 was a rock that Jesus and Peter were literally standing on as they were in the city of Caesarea Philippi which was a pagan city that was built on a rock. His church would be built on the rock (not literally, but metaphorically speaking) of Caesarea Philippi—a rock literally filled with niches for pagan idols, where ungodly values dominated. The people there literally felt that the caves on this rock were actual gates to hell, thus the saying I will build my Church upon this rock and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it. (look up the history for yourself as I have) The rock meaning we are to preach against the gates of Hell to try and prevent people from going there as we bring Salvation through Christ to those who do not know Him.

No one person has any authority apart from what God gives them. God gives all who will confess and believe on His son Jesus Christ His power and authority through grace that we are commissioned to take His word out into the world according to Matthew 28:19,20. So no, Papacy has nothing to do with the rock or being a successor to Peter as we all are a successor to what Peter was called to do as we have that same calling from the Lord.


Why did Jesus change Simon's name to Rock?

Why did Jesus give Simon alone the keys to the Kingdom?

Offline Debbie_55

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 2788
  • Manna: 168
  • Gender: Female
    • View Profile
Re: Papacy - right or wrong?
« Reply #9 on: Tue Sep 21, 2010 - 19:57:16 »
The rock Jesus was referring to in Matthew 16:18 was a rock that Jesus and Peter were literally standing on as they were in the city of Caesarea Philippi which was a pagan city that was built on a rock. His church would be built on the rock (not literally, but metaphorically speaking) of Caesarea Philippi—a rock literally filled with niches for pagan idols, where ungodly values dominated. The people there literally felt that the caves on this rock were actual gates to hell, thus the saying I will build my Church upon this rock and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it. (look up the history for yourself as I have) The rock meaning we are to preach against the gates of Hell to try and prevent people from going there as we bring Salvation through Christ to those who do not know Him.

No one person has any authority apart from what God gives them. God gives all who will confess and believe on His son Jesus Christ His power and authority through grace that we are commissioned to take His word out into the world according to Matthew 28:19,20. So no, Papacy has nothing to do with the rock or being a successor to Peter as we all are a successor to what Peter was called to do as we have that same calling from the Lord.


Why did Jesus change Simon's name to Rock?

Why did Jesus give Simon alone the keys to the Kingdom?

Jesus never changed Peter's name to Rock as Jesus said in Matthew 16:18 that thou are Peter and upon this rock (meaning the rock they were standing on) I will build my church.

Jesus gave Peter the keys to the Kingdom, which means knowledge, power and authority, as Jesus knew where Peter's heart was and that he was submissive to the authority of God.

Visionary

  • Guest
Re: Papacy - right or wrong?
« Reply #10 on: Tue Sep 21, 2010 - 20:53:10 »
I have never heard that interpretation before Debbie. Literally build his church on the rock they were standing on?

May I explain???  "upon this rock"--Blessed are you Simon, for this was not revealed to you by man, but my Father in heaven. He was telling Peter his foundation was secure having been shown who the Son was by the Father

...Luke 10:22,23

Luke 6:48 Jesus is the rock!

Offline Wycliffes_Shillelagh

  • Down with pants! Up with kilts!
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 11834
  • Manna: 345
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Papacy - right or wrong?
« Reply #11 on: Wed Sep 22, 2010 - 11:37:11 »
Why did Jesus change Simon's name to Rock?
Actually, Petros means "pebble."  ::giggle::

Angelos

  • Guest
Re: Papacy - right or wrong?
« Reply #12 on: Wed Sep 22, 2010 - 12:09:45 »
Why did Jesus change Simon's name to Rock?
Actually, Petros means "pebble."  ::giggle::

Not sure if this is a joke. but in Greek pebble = votsalo; petra (or vrahos) = rock. Since I'm a native Greek speaker, I'm pretty sure about this

Offline Catholica

  • Modal Globerator
  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6258
  • Manna: 174
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Papacy - right or wrong?
« Reply #13 on: Wed Sep 22, 2010 - 12:35:33 »
Why did Jesus change Simon's name to Rock?
Actually, Petros means "pebble."  ::giggle::
The book of Matthew wasn't originally written in Greek, nor did Jesus speak Greek.  We see from other places something that makes more sense, where Peter's real name, Aramaic "Kepha" is transliterated "Cephas".  In its original language, Matthew 16:18 reads "You are Kepha and upon this Kepha I build my Church."  Kepha means Rock.  The Greek translators could not call Peter "petra" because that name is feminine, so instead they made his name Masculine, but something is lost in the translation.


Offline stevehut

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 3769
  • Manna: 70
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Papacy - right or wrong?
« Reply #14 on: Wed Sep 22, 2010 - 13:52:05 »
Actually, Petros means "pebble."  

This is true, and any honest study of the Koine text will bear it out.  Petra would be a boulder or a rock cliff.

Offline stevehut

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 3769
  • Manna: 70
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Papacy - right or wrong?
« Reply #15 on: Wed Sep 22, 2010 - 14:02:45 »
A problem for anyone who believes that Peter is the "rock" upon which the church is built:

1 Corinthians 3:11
For no one can lay any foundation other than the one already laid, which is Jesus Christ.

In reading the Matthew text, it seems strange to me that Jesus would talk to Peter, and then in mid-sentence shift to talking about him as if he's not there.

My own study of the Scripture, from many angles, has led me to believe that the "Rock" has to do with what Peter just said: "You are the Christ."  Up until this time, no one knew this.  Just imagine if Jesus had died before anyone figured out that he was the Messiah.

Offline Wycliffes_Shillelagh

  • Down with pants! Up with kilts!
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 11834
  • Manna: 345
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Papacy - right or wrong?
« Reply #16 on: Wed Sep 22, 2010 - 14:09:17 »
Why did Jesus change Simon's name to Rock?
Actually, Petros means "pebble."  ::giggle::
Not sure if this is a joke. but in Greek pebble = votsalo; petra (or vrahos) = rock. Since I'm a native Greek speaker, I'm pretty sure about this
Modern Greek is about as similar to ancient Greek as modern Italian is to ancient Latin.

I am sure it is an advantage to you that you speak it, some things remaining the same, but the two are not the same languages.

Jarrod

Offline Wycliffes_Shillelagh

  • Down with pants! Up with kilts!
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 11834
  • Manna: 345
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Papacy - right or wrong?
« Reply #17 on: Wed Sep 22, 2010 - 14:34:01 »
Why did Jesus change Simon's name to Rock?
Actually, Petros means "pebble."  ::giggle::
The book of Matthew wasn't originally written in Greek, nor did Jesus speak Greek.  We see from other places something that makes more sense, where Peter's real name, Aramaic "Kepha" is transliterated "Cephas".  In its original language, Matthew 16:18 reads "You are Kepha and upon this Kepha I build my Church."  Kepha means Rock.  The Greek translators could not call Peter "petra" because that name is feminine, so instead they made his name Masculine, but something is lost in the translation.
Good argument.  Some things to pick on though:

1) Whether Matthew was originally written in Hebrew or Greek is a matter of conjecture.  The church fathers from the 3rd and 4th centuries couldn't agree on this point, so I find it doubtful that we know better than they.

2) If Jesus grew up in Egypt and Galilee, then He probably spoke Greek, as it was the more common language in both places.  He undoubtedly spoke Aramaic as well, the Bible attesting to it with notes from the original authors in several places, and it also attests He was able to read Hebrew (though it was a dead language used only by scholars in His day and time).

3) My lexicon of Syriac (Jennings) indicates that the word used in this verse means "a stone, a piece of a (larger rock)."  It also indicates that the Syriac word is (also) a feminine ending, so the problem of gender between the words remains in this language.

In short, all of the same issues remain, you've just changed the language we're arguing in/about.

Jarrod

Offline Catholica

  • Modal Globerator
  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6258
  • Manna: 174
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Papacy - right or wrong?
« Reply #18 on: Wed Sep 22, 2010 - 14:56:46 »
Why did Jesus change Simon's name to Rock?
Actually, Petros means "pebble."  ::giggle::
The book of Matthew wasn't originally written in Greek, nor did Jesus speak Greek.  We see from other places something that makes more sense, where Peter's real name, Aramaic "Kepha" is transliterated "Cephas".  In its original language, Matthew 16:18 reads "You are Kepha and upon this Kepha I build my Church."  Kepha means Rock.  The Greek translators could not call Peter "petra" because that name is feminine, so instead they made his name Masculine, but something is lost in the translation.
Good argument.  Some things to pick on though:

1) Whether Matthew was originally written in Hebrew or Greek is a matter of conjecture.  The church fathers from the 3rd and 4th centuries couldn't agree on this point, so I find it doubtful that we know better than they.

2) If Jesus grew up in Egypt and Galilee, then He probably spoke Greek, as it was the more common language in both places.  He undoubtedly spoke Aramaic as well, the Bible attesting to it with notes from the original authors in several places, and it also attests He was able to read Hebrew (though it was a dead language used only by scholars in His day and time).

3) My lexicon of Syriac (Jennings) indicates that the word used in this verse means "a stone, a piece of a (larger rock)."  It also indicates that the Syriac word is (also) a feminine ending, so the problem of gender between the words remains in this language.

In short, all of the same issues remain, you've just changed the language we're arguing in/about.

Jarrod
Ok, but Peter is referred to as Cephas, and how did he get that name?  The simple answer is that Jesus named him Kepha.  And Syriac is not the same as Aramaic.  In Aramaic words did not have gender.

Offline Wycliffes_Shillelagh

  • Down with pants! Up with kilts!
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 11834
  • Manna: 345
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Papacy - right or wrong?
« Reply #19 on: Wed Sep 22, 2010 - 17:47:47 »
Ok, but Peter is referred to as Cephas, and how did he get that name?  The simple answer is that Jesus named him Kepha.  And Syriac is not the same as Aramaic.  In Aramaic words did not have gender.
Syriac is a dialect of Aramaic, as far as I know.

Also, who told you Aramaic words don't have gender?  Semitic languages don't have a strict morphology for gender like Greek words, but gender is inherent in many/most words.  Suffices -H and -IT feminize otherwise "male" words, for instance.

EDIT: I assumed you knew that the text you quoted from "...Kepha and upon this Kepha..." is from the Peshitta, an ancient manuscript written in Syriac.

Jarrod


Offline Catholica

  • Modal Globerator
  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6258
  • Manna: 174
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Papacy - right or wrong?
« Reply #20 on: Wed Sep 22, 2010 - 19:38:55 »
Ok, but Peter is referred to as Cephas, and how did he get that name?  The simple answer is that Jesus named him Kepha.  And Syriac is not the same as Aramaic.  In Aramaic words did not have gender.
Syriac is a dialect of Aramaic, as far as I know.

Also, who told you Aramaic words don't have gender?  Semitic languages don't have a strict morphology for gender like Greek words, but gender is inherent in many/most words.  Suffices -H and -IT feminize otherwise "male" words, for instance.

EDIT: I assumed you knew that the text you quoted from "...Kepha and upon this Kepha..." is from the Peshitta, an ancient manuscript written in Syriac.

Jarrod
Hi Jarrod, you are right, I stand corrected.  I learned this from somewhere and it stuck in my head, under further inspection, you are right, Aramaic words don't have as many gender possibilities as Greek, but they still have gender.  Either way, we know that the name given to Peter was Kepha, as evidenced especially in John 1:42 (transliterated to Greek, Cephas) which means "massive stone" and not "little pebble" as some like to portray Jesus as saying.

Thanks for your charitable response and correction.  I hate when I say something that isn't true.

Offline Debbie_55

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 2788
  • Manna: 168
  • Gender: Female
    • View Profile
Re: Papacy - right or wrong?
« Reply #21 on: Thu Sep 23, 2010 - 15:20:28 »
I have never heard that interpretation before Debbie. Literally build his church on the rock they were standing on?

May I explain???  "upon this rock"--Blessed are you Simon, for this was not revealed to you by man, but my Father in heaven. He was telling Peter his foundation was secure having been shown who the Son was by the Father

...Luke 10:22,23

Luke 6:48 Jesus is the rock!

Not on the literal rock they were standing on, but of what the foundation of the rock represented as Peter knew who Jesus was as Messiah as Gods Spirit showed this to him. Upon this foundation, not the literal rock, but the foundation of Gods Spirit in us are we to preach against the gates of Hell or against the evil one (Satan) that is in the world.

My question is why do some of you capitalize the word rock as Peter the Rock as it is not capitalized in scripture as when you capitalize it then it becomes a definition of character or makes it look like Peter is the rock and not the literal rock they were standing on?

marc

  • Guest
Re: Papacy - right or wrong?
« Reply #22 on: Thu Sep 23, 2010 - 15:28:39 »
I haven't read this thread, but I want to make a guess about the contents. Catholics say the papacy is right and protestants say it's wrong. Am I right? What do I win?

Offline The Great Baptizmo

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 524
  • Manna: 130
  • Ron Paul 2012
    • View Profile
Re: Papacy - right or wrong?
« Reply #23 on: Thu Sep 23, 2010 - 16:00:44 »
I haven't read this thread, but I want to make a guess about the contents. Catholics say the papacy is right and protestants say it's wrong. Am I right? What do I win?

The Great Baptizmo bows to Jesus Christ and not the papacy.   The Great Baptizmo says forbidding marriage among clergy is clearly a doctrine of demons.

Offline Wycliffes_Shillelagh

  • Down with pants! Up with kilts!
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 11834
  • Manna: 345
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Papacy - right or wrong?
« Reply #24 on: Thu Sep 23, 2010 - 17:15:53 »
Hi Jarrod, you are right, I stand corrected.  I learned this from somewhere and it stuck in my head, under further inspection, you are right, Aramaic words don't have as many gender possibilities as Greek, but they still have gender.  Either way, we know that the name given to Peter was Kepha, as evidenced especially in John 1:42 (transliterated to Greek, Cephas) which means "massive stone" and not "little pebble" as some like to portray Jesus as saying.

Thanks for your charitable response and correction.  I hate when I say something that isn't true.
No worries, we all do that from time to time.  It bothers me when I do that, too.  And good for you for admitting it and moving forward.  That shows character.

Anyway, "Kepha" isn't a boulder, and it's not a pebble either.  Kepha is just "stone."  The word actually refers to the hardness of the material, with no inference about the size, whether gargantuan or tiny. ::smile::

As for how Peter got the name, the John 1 seems to indicate that Jesus had nicknamed him that upon their first meeting.  Apparently, Peter was kind of a hardass - if you'll forgive the expression, I think that best communicates what the nickname means.

Jarrod

Offline Selene

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1877
  • Manna: 148
  • Gender: Female
    • View Profile
Re: Papacy - right or wrong?
« Reply #25 on: Thu Sep 23, 2010 - 20:01:27 »
The Great Baptizmo bows to Jesus Christ and not the papacy.   The Great Baptizmo says forbidding marriage among clergy is clearly a doctrine of demons.

How is it a doctrine of demons?  Explain.

Offline The Great Baptizmo

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 524
  • Manna: 130
  • Ron Paul 2012
    • View Profile
Re: Papacy - right or wrong?
« Reply #26 on: Thu Sep 23, 2010 - 20:52:50 »
The Great Baptizmo bows to Jesus Christ and not the papacy.   The Great Baptizmo says forbidding marriage among clergy is clearly a doctrine of demons.

How is it a doctrine of demons?  Explain.

God's Word says so.

1 Tim 4

 1But the Spirit explicitly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons,  2by means of the hypocrisy of liars seared in their own conscience as with a branding iron,  3men who forbid marriage and advocate abstaining from foods which God has created to be gratefully shared in by those who believe and know the truth.

Angelos

  • Guest
Re: Papacy - right or wrong?
« Reply #27 on: Thu Sep 23, 2010 - 21:00:02 »
The Great Baptizmo bows to Jesus Christ and not the papacy.   The Great Baptizmo says forbidding marriage among clergy is clearly a doctrine of demons.

How is it a doctrine of demons?  Explain.

God's Word says so.

1 Tim 4

 1But the Spirit explicitly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons,  2by means of the hypocrisy of liars seared in their own conscience as with a branding iron,  3men who forbid marriage and advocate abstaining from foods which God has created to be gratefully shared in by those who believe and know the truth.


Actually Eastern Catholic priests can and do get married. Not being married is not a Catholic dogma for priests. There are no Catholics who forbid marriage. Being a Roman Catholic priest is a choice. A priest can quit being a priest and get married or he can choose to be a priest and not get married. Same thing with being a monk.


Offline Selene

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1877
  • Manna: 148
  • Gender: Female
    • View Profile
Re: Papacy - right or wrong?
« Reply #28 on: Thu Sep 23, 2010 - 21:09:31 »
The Great Baptizmo bows to Jesus Christ and not the papacy.   The Great Baptizmo says forbidding marriage among clergy is clearly a doctrine of demons.

How is it a doctrine of demons?  Explain.

God's Word says so.

1 Tim 4

 1But the Spirit explicitly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons,  2by means of the hypocrisy of liars seared in their own conscience as with a branding iron,  3men who forbid marriage and advocate abstaining from foods which God has created to be gratefully shared in by those who believe and know the truth.

As Angelos pointed out, the Catholic Church does not and never forbid marriage.  If a person wants to be a priest, he already understands that he will not marry.   In 1 Corinthians 7:8, St. Paul says that it is good to be single.  When St. Paul says this, is he forbidding marriage? 

Offline Jaime

  • (Pronounced Hi-Me, not Ja-Me)
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 30695
  • Manna: 627
  • Gender: Male
  • I AM A DEPLORABLE
    • View Profile
Re: Papacy - right or wrong?
« Reply #29 on: Thu Sep 23, 2010 - 21:52:56 »
Why will he not marry, if not forbidden to by the church?

In the verse you quoted, the next verse says it is better though to marry than to burn with desire, as may have been the case with quite a few unmarried priests over the years.

Offline Catholica

  • Modal Globerator
  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6258
  • Manna: 174
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Papacy - right or wrong?
« Reply #30 on: Thu Sep 23, 2010 - 22:31:38 »
Why will he not marry, if not forbidden to by the church?

In the verse you quoted, the next verse says it is better though to marry than to burn with desire, as may have been the case with quite a few unmarried priests over the years.
He will not marry because he makes a choice to make a vow to not marry.  Sometimes, priests fall away, and then they are laicized, and then they sometimes marry, and those marriages are blessed by the Church.

Some are given a gift of celibacy, and that is something that a man must discern he has before approaching the priesthood.  There are some priests who did not properly discern.  Most priests are just fine with their vow and quite happy that way.

Offline The Great Baptizmo

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 524
  • Manna: 130
  • Ron Paul 2012
    • View Profile
Re: Papacy - right or wrong?
« Reply #31 on: Fri Sep 24, 2010 - 06:21:44 »
The Great Baptizmo bows to Jesus Christ and not the papacy.   The Great Baptizmo says forbidding marriage among clergy is clearly a doctrine of demons.

How is it a doctrine of demons?  Explain.

God's Word says so.

1 Tim 4

 1But the Spirit explicitly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons,  2by means of the hypocrisy of liars seared in their own conscience as with a branding iron,  3men who forbid marriage and advocate abstaining from foods which God has created to be gratefully shared in by those who believe and know the truth.

As Angelos pointed out, the Catholic Church does not and never forbid marriage.  If a person wants to be a priest, he already understands that he will not marry.   In 1 Corinthians 7:8, St. Paul says that it is good to be single.  When St. Paul says this, is he forbidding marriage? 

Angelos did some ducking and dodging.  It is a dogma that priests should not be married.  There is a difference between saying it is good, and making it a requirement.    The Catholic Church does indeed forbid marriage.  "If you want to make a choice to become a priest, you will not marry."  That is forbidding marriage.  Doctrine of Demons.  Period.

As far as the EOC goes, I didn't even mention them.  Don't consider them "The Catholic Church."

Angelos

  • Guest
Re: Papacy - right or wrong?
« Reply #32 on: Fri Sep 24, 2010 - 07:13:04 »
The Great Baptizmo bows to Jesus Christ and not the papacy.   The Great Baptizmo says forbidding marriage among clergy is clearly a doctrine of demons.


How is it a doctrine of demons?  Explain.


God's Word says so.

1 Tim 4

 1But the Spirit explicitly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons,  2by means of the hypocrisy of liars seared in their own conscience as with a branding iron,  3men who forbid marriage and advocate abstaining from foods which God has created to be gratefully shared in by those who believe and know the truth.


As Angelos pointed out, the Catholic Church does not and never forbid marriage.  If a person wants to be a priest, he already understands that he will not marry.   In 1 Corinthians 7:8, St. Paul says that it is good to be single.  When St. Paul says this, is he forbidding marriage?  


Angelos did some ducking and dodging.  It is a dogma that priests should not be married.  There is a difference between saying it is good, and making it a requirement.    The Catholic Church does indeed forbid marriage.  "If you want to make a choice to become a priest, you will not marry."  That is forbidding marriage.  Doctrine of Demons.  Period.

As far as the EOC goes, I didn't even mention them.  Don't consider them "The Catholic Church."


Baptizmo, I was not referring to the EOC (Orthodox) I was referring to the Eastern Catholic Churches. These are Catholics, in full communion with Rome, who live in Eastern Europe, North Africa, and the middle East.

As per wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Catholic_Churches#Clerical_celibacy

"The Eastern Catholic Churches are... Churches in full communion with the Bishop of Rome—the Pope. They preserve some of the centuries-old liturgical, devotional, and theological traditions of the various Eastern Christian Churches they were once associated with. Although the Churches they formerly were associated with are not all in communion with one another, the Eastern Catholic Churches are in communion with each other and with the Latin or Western Church. However, they vary in theological emphasis, forms of liturgical worship and popular piety, canonical discipline and terminology. They all recognize the central role of the Bishop of Rome within the College of Bishops and his infallibility when speaking ex cathedra. The communion of the members of these Churches with the Church of Rome means that they are out of communion with the other Eastern Christian Churches, which in general do not admit them to receive the Eucharist and the other sacraments."

Eastern and Western Catholic churches have different traditions concerning clerical celibacy. These differences and the resulting controversies have played a role in the relationship between the two groups in some Western countries.

Most Eastern Churches distinguish between "monastic" and "non-monastic" clergy. Monastics do not necessarily live as monks or in monasteries, but have spent at least part of their period of training in such a context. Their monastic vows include a vow of celibate chastity.

Bishops are normally selected from the monastic clergy, and in most Eastern Catholic Churches a large percentage of priests and deacons also are celibate, while a portion of the clergy (typically, parish priests) may be married."

The Roman Catholic Church is just the biggest part of the Catholic Church, not all of it. The fact that Catholic Churches are allowedto have non-celibate priests is proof that it is not a dogma, but a tradition that, as the Pope has said, can change.

You don't seem very knowledgeable about the Catholic Church...next time to avoid embarassing yourself stop pretending knowing things you don't

Offline Catholica

  • Modal Globerator
  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6258
  • Manna: 174
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Papacy - right or wrong?
« Reply #33 on: Fri Sep 24, 2010 - 07:37:13 »
The "doctrine of demons" which is mentioned in this chapter is reference to the Gnostic heresy, which taught that flesh was evil and therefore so was marriage.  Another heresy, sometimes called the Albigensian heresy, which some Protestants try to claim for their own, also forbid marriage.

The Catholic Church defends marriage.  The priestly celibacy vow is simply a discipline.  If you don't know the difference between a discipline and a dogma, please learn the difference before saying anything more about the Catholic Church, because I don't know of any Christian who loves Jesus would want to be responsible for spreading lies.   ::disco::


k-pappy

  • Guest
Re: Papacy - right or wrong?
« Reply #34 on: Fri Sep 24, 2010 - 11:04:23 »
Catholica, Angelos, if you wish to defend the doctrines of the catholic church, it can best be done with scripture.  Personal attacks only hinder your argument, AND they violate the forum rules.

Bond

 

     
anything