Beggars All: Reformation And Apologetics: “No coincidence that the first works of papal history are fictitious accounts written by the popes”

Beggars All: Reformation And Apologetics: “No coincidence that the first works of papal history are fictitious accounts written by the popes”

Beggars All: Reformation And Apologetics: Scott Windsor (3): Defense of the Papacy from the Early Church

Beggars All: Reformation And Apologetics: Scott Windsor (3): Defense of the Papacy from the Early Church

Beggars All: Reformation And Apologetics: Built on Sinking Sand: The “Scriptural” Foundation for the Papacy (2)

Beggars All: Reformation And Apologetics: Built on Sinking Sand: The “Scriptural” Foundation for the Papacy (2)

Here is Part One.

Concordat Watch

Concordat Watch is a website dedicated to exposing the truth about agreements, called concordats, made between the Catholic Church and the governments of countries.
Here is one web page on the website that shows how the innocent are trampled in the Roman Catholic Church's quest for power and money. The article begins:

The Polish Government can afford to subsidise Church influence in every corner of society, from chaplains throughout the civil service to holiday pay for the monks and nuns who teach religion in state schools. Yet it is unable to provide free school lunches for Polish children, a quarter of whom are malnourished. This is an itemised list of state subventions to the Church for 2008.

Here is a FAQ page that gives some basic questions and answers about concordats. Following is one quote from the page about what a concordat is:

It's a commitment to give the Church certain legal and financial privileges forever, unless the Church agrees to relinquish them. You can change a law if enough representatives vote to do so, but you cannot change a concordat without agreement from the Vatican, because it is classed as an international treaty. Once in place, therefore, concordats are removed from democratic control.

The basic premise of the website is that these 'concordats', which are sometimes called by other names to disguise what they are, are a danger to the civil rights of the citizens of the countries where they are enacted. Concordat Watch calls for true separation of church and state. I want to clarify that there is a true concept of separation, which our founding fathers endorsed; and there is a false concept of separation which today's liberals call for. The false concept is that there can be now mention, symbol, prayer, etc. of Christianity in or related to any state-run property or organization. They don't seem to care if other religions are represented; only Christianity, especially Biblical Christianity, is abhorred.
The true concept of separation of church and state is that the state shall make no law that inhibits the free practice of religion, and that no church shall control the government and so inhibit the civil rights and free practice of religion for the citizens. Thus, there is a wall of separation between church and state, but not so that no mention of God is allowed on state property, for example.

Here is another section from the FAQS page about how the concordat effects the citizens:
What powers are conferred on the Vatican and what liberties do citizens of concordat nations sacrifice, if any?

It varies from country to country, because concordats demand whatever the Vatican thinks the market will bear. Current concordats in countries like Poland and the Dominican Republic forbid anyone married in a Catholic Church to ever sue for a civil divorce. The Polish concordat phrases it with great delicacy (1993, Article 10.2), calling for the state to put in place the enabling legislation which would enforce "concordat marriage". But the Dominican one (1954, Article 15.2) is franker: "by virtue of contracting Catholic marriage, spouses renounce the possibility of divorce, which shall not be applicable to these Canon marriages". Here we see how a concordat can deny some citizens their rights under civil law in a direct fashion.

Generally, however, this is done in a more roundabout way. The concordat grants taxpayers’ money to Catholic social services (for example in Germany Catholic hospitals are funded to 98.2% by the state) yet it also stipulates that Church institutions are to be run according to Canon (Church) Law, and not civil law. This means that if you work at a Catholic school, hospital, care home, etc., you can be fired for changing your religion, being gay, living with a partner, or even remarrying. Thus you can be denied your rights under civil law indirectly, that is, if you want to retain your job.

Furthermore, with such generous state subsidies there are many places in, for example, Germany, where Catholic social services are the major or even sole employer in some field. This can result in people feeling they must go to church and even force their families to attend, in order to have a chance to get a job. It’s this unofficial erosion of liberty which is the most worrying thing. No concordat is going to come right out and say: “You must give money to the Church if you want to make sure that someday your handicapped child gets a place in a Church-run (yet state-subsidised) sheltered workshop.” But the concordat sets things up so that this can happen.

My conclusion:
Is the church meant to be a political state that makes agreements that enable it to entwine itself into the workings of governments in order to gain power over the citizens and money for its own purposes, to the detriment of the weakest members of society? OR is the church meant to be the body of Christ that appears in local bodies all over the world and which live to love God, love each other, love their neighbors, and make disciples of all nations, teaching them to obey the commands of Christ; not by compulsion and power of a hierarchy, but by the word of God worked out in love by each member.

Power Corrupts Both Protestant and Roman Catholic 'Hierarchies'

Roman Catholic historian Lord Acton famously wrote "Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely." He was speaking of the papacy, the leadership of his own church throughout history. This is true of any church or state hierarchy that lusts for power, not just the papacy. I found an article that enforces this truth about some of the conservative evangelical leadership, who became involved in a power struggle in Guatamala, and caused many to be led astray, and many of the weak to be trampled underfoot by those who should have shown love to them as our Lord taught us. The article is called "The Fundamentalist Surge in Latin America."

Luke 22:35-53 A Prophecy of the Sufficiency of Scripture and of the successors of Peter

Luke 22:
35 And He said to them, “When I sent you without money bag, knapsack, and sandals, did you lack anything?”
So they said, “Nothing.”
36 Then He said to them, “But now, he who has a money bag, let him take it, and likewise a knapsack; and he who has no sword, let him sell his garment and buy one. 37 For I say to you that this which is written must still be accomplished in Me: ‘And He was numbered with the transgressors.’ For the things concerning Me have an end.”
38 So they said, “Lord, look, here are two swords.”
And He said to them, “It is enough.”
...........................
47 And while He was still speaking, behold, a multitude; and he who was called Judas, one of the twelve, went before them and drew near to Jesus to kiss Him. 48 But Jesus said to him, “Judas, are you betraying the Son of Man with a kiss?”
49 When those around Him saw what was going to happen, they said to Him, “Lord, shall we strike with the sword?” 50 And one of them struck the servant of the high priest and cut off his right ear.
51 But Jesus answered and said, “Permit even this.” And He touched his ear and healed him.
52 Then Jesus said to the chief priests, captains of the temple, and the elders who had come to Him, “Have you come out, as against a robber, with swords and clubs? 53 When I was with you daily in the temple, you did not try to seize Me. But this is your hour, and the power of darkness.”

Jesus said to sell their garments and buy a sword. They didn't understand that He was not speaking of a physical sword, but a spiritual one: the word of God. The two swords are the word of God: old testament and new testament. Jesus said of the two swords, "It is enough." The scripture is sufficient for all our needs as God's people.
When Jesus was being taken, one of them, whom we know from the gospel of John as the Apostle Peter, struck the servant of the High Priest with the sword and cut off his right ear. Jesus rebuked Peter (in John) and in Luke said to permit what was happening. It is interesting that the one Peter struck was the servant of the High Priest. Jesus is our High Priest and 'Peter' has struck the servant of the High Priest many times throughout history. The popes have struck out with the sword against Christ's servants who carry the sword of the Word instead of the physical sword. They have misunderstood as Peter did that Jesus said the sword of the Word is enough. Someday 'Peter' will understand that he has denied his Lord, perhaps when the final cock crows as morning is about to break, and the Lord turns and looks at 'Peter' again; then he'll remember the Word of the Lord and understand his sin.

.

Historical Literature on the Earliest Papacy: John Bugay

Here's an article on John Bugay's blog about recent scholarship that has shed light on teachings about the early papacy. I cited this in a comment to Leo, who thinks the papacy has existed since the Apostle Peter, when it clearly is a much later development.

A Question

I just read a new article on Berean Beacon called "Papacy Set to Recapture England". If you want to read it, you can download it by clicking on the title at the top of the website. While reading it, a question occurred to me: If one disagrees with the doctrines of justification and regeneration as taught by the reformed churches, as Cardinal John Henry Newman did, why does that make it necessary to run to Rome and swallow all the errors of Roman doctrine and practice, such as the Papacy, transubstantiation, Mary worship, etc.? Why not study the Bible and fellowship in a local church that teaches Biblical doctrine? No one has everything completely correct, but committing spiritual adultery with the Papal system is not an option. Their history is full of violence against God's people, and their so-called 'history' is full of outright forgeries, quotes from the Fathers taken out of context, and dependence upon the uninspired writings of mere men, rather than dependence upon the inspired scriptures interpreted by the Holy Spirit. And it seems that it is very important to some Catholics for you to admit that Mary is the 'Blessed Virgin' and 'The Mother of God' and to try praying to her. Why is that, I wonder? Because their religion is at heart a religion that places Mary between people and God, or in some cases replaces God with Mary. Again, why swallow poison mixed with a little goodness? Why do we have to choose between two corrupt institutions, when there are true churches right down the road from all of us?

Beggars All: Reformation And Apologetics: The nonexistent early papacy

Beggars All: Reformation And Apologetics: The nonexistent early papacy

The Pope’s Plans on Organizing Political, Economic and Religious Activities Worldwide: Richard Bennett

Here is an article by Richard Bennett of Berean Beacon called "The Pope’s Plans on Organizing
Political, Economic and Religious Activities Worldwide". Here is a link to the Vatican document, Caritas In Veritate.

Richard's concerns may seem far-fetched, but it was not so long ago in history that the papacy had much more political power than it has now. Time will tell, and prophecy already has foretold these things. See my series of posts on 'The Harlot Church'. This false church that has left her husband and linked with worldly governments, first as her protectors and then also in order to gain power for herself, has been seen before and it is prophesied that she'll be seen again at the end, persecuting the true church whose faith will be tested and perfected by the trials she endures. The Lord tells all believers who recognize the Great Whore of Babylon to “Come out of her, my people, lest you share in her sins, and lest you receive of her plagues. For her sins have reached to heaven, and God has remembered her iniquities." Revelation 18:4-5 This first of all means to come out of any church that has killed or persecuted believers in Christ in the past, or is doing it in the present. The Roman Catholic Church is not the only one who has done this, though it far exceeds any other in this. Many protestant churches have histories of this as well. It means to recognize our sins and repent of them. See Revelation 2 and 3 which contains Jesus Christ's judgments and commands to the churches. We shouldn't assume that we are innocent without examining ourselves and our churches in light of God's word. Please read and pray with the fear of the LORD.

Cardinal Ratzinger: "The One who is to come will have the traits of the Jesus who has already come"

A while back I read the following quote by the then Cardinal Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI, and then I couldn't find it again for a while. I recently looked it up again and found some articles on it and the original document from which the quote is taken. Following is the link to the original Vatican document and then the quote from it which really bothered me, as it seems to say that Ratzinger believes that the Messiah who is to come is not the same person as the Messiah who came 2000 years ago, but will have the same traits as He did. Following the quote are some more links discussing the document and the quote.
Does Pope Benedict believe in the second coming of Jesus Christ, or is he looking for another Messiah? Will he lead those who trust in him to follow 'another christ' who is not Jesus Christ?


Document: "The Jewish People and Holy Scriptures in the Christian Bible"

"Jewish messianic expectation is not in vain. It can become for us Christians a powerful stimulant to keep alive the eschatological dimension of our faith. Like them, we too live in expectation. The difference is that for us the One who is to come will have the traits of the Jesus who has already come and is already present and active among us." (n.21)

Here is an article on the web page of Sacred Heart University that discusses the document and some of the reactions to it. However, they don't seem to be worried about the strange wording which bothered me and a few others.


Here are some more links about the quote and the document:
http://www.fivedoves.com/letters/apr2005/donnad425-1.htm

http://zenit.org/article-3425?l=english

Apostolic Constitution of Pope Paul VI: Indulgentiarum Doctrina: Part Two

An excerpt from Indulgentiarum Doctrina, Chapter 2:

Following in the footsteps of Christ,(16) the Christian faithful have always endeavored to help one another on the path leading to the heavenly Father through prayer, the exchange of spiritual goods and penitential expiation. The more they have been immersed in the fervor of charity, the more they have imitated Christ in his sufferings, carrying their crosses in expiation for their own sins and those of others, certain that they could help their brothers to obtain salvation from God the Father of mercies.(17) This is the very ancient dogma of the Communion of the Saints,(18) whereby the life of each individual son of God in Christ and through Christ is joined by a wonderful link to the life of all his other Christian brothers in the supernatural unity of the Mystical Body of Christ till, as it were, a single mystical person is formed.(19)

Thus is explained the "treasury of the Church"(20) which should certainly not be imagined as the sum total of material goods accumulated in the course of the centuries, but the infinite and inexhaustible value the expiation and the merits of Christ Our Lord have before God, offered as they were so that all of mankind could be set free from sin and attain communion with the Father. It is Christ the Redeemer himself in whom the satisfactions and merits of his redemption exist and find their force.(21) This treasury also includes the truly immense, unfathomable and ever pristine value before God of the prayers and good works of the Blessed Virgin Mary and all the saints, who following in the footsteps of Christ the Lord and by his grace have sanctified their lives and fulfilled the mission entrusted to them by the Father. Thus while attaining their own salvation, they have also cooperated in the salvation of their brothers in the unity of the Mystical Body.

"For all who are in Christ, having his spirit, form one Church and cleave together in him" (Eph. 4:16). Therefore the union of the wayfarers with the brethren who have gone to sleep in the peace of Christ is not in the least weakened or interrupted, but on the contrary, according to the perpetual faith of the Church, is strengthened by a communication of spiritual goods. For by reason of the fact that those in heaven are more closely united with Christ, they establish the whole Church more firmly in holiness, lend nobility to the worship which the Church offers to God here on earth and in many ways contribute to building it up evermore (1 Cor. 12: 12-27). For after they have been received into their heavenly home and are present to the Lord (2 Cor. 5:8), through him and with him and in him they do not cease to intervene with the Father for us, showing forth the merits which they have won on earth through the one Mediator between God and man, Jesus Christ (1 Tim. 2:5), by serving God in all things and filling up in their flesh those things which are lacking of the sufferings of Christ for his Body which is the Church (Col. 1:24). Thus by their brotherly interest our weakness is greatly strengthened.(22)

For this reason there certainly exists between the faithful who have already reached their heavenly home, those who are expiating their sins in purgatory and those who are still pilgrims on earth a perennial link of charity and an abundant exchange of all the goods by which, with the expiation of all the sins of the entire Mystical Body, divine justice is placated. God's mercy is thus led to forgiveness, so that sincerely repentant sinners may participate as soon as possible in the full enjoyment of the benefits of the family of God.

The concept of the communion of the saints is certainly real and important, but the scripture speaks of it in the sense that we are one body, and can pray for and encourage each other; we suffer and rejoice together. However, scripture does not say that believers can expiate their own sins or those of fellow believers by prayers or actions. Scripture, on the contrary, says Jesus Christ is the only one who atones for our sins:

The word expiate is not used in the Bible, but the definition following says it is the same as to 'atone'.
Definition of expiate from dictionary.com:
ex·pi·ate (ěk'spē-āt')
v. ex·pi·at·ed, ex·pi·at·ing, ex·pi·ates

v. tr.
To make amends or reparation for; atone: expiate one's sins by acts of penance.
v. intr.
To make amends; atone.

The scriptures tell us Who atones for our sins:
Psalm 65:3
3 Iniquities prevail against me;
As for our transgressions,
You will provide atonement for them.

Psalm 79:9
9 Help us, O God of our salvation,
For the glory of Your name;
And deliver us, and provide atonement for our sins,
For Your name’s sake!

Ezekiel 16
60 “Nevertheless I will remember My covenant with you in the days of your youth, and I will establish an everlasting covenant with you. 61 Then you will remember your ways and be ashamed, when you receive your older and your younger sisters; for I will give them to you for daughters, but not because of My covenant with you. 62 And I will establish My covenant with you. Then you shall know that I am the LORD, 63 that you may remember and be ashamed, and never open your mouth anymore because of your shame, when I provide you an atonement for all you have done,” says the Lord GOD.’”

Some of the translations don't use the word atone or atonement in the New Testament, but the concept of 'propitiation' or 'reconciliation' is used:

Propitiation:
that by which God is rendered propitious, i.e., by which it becomes consistent with his character and government to pardon and bless the sinner. The propitiation does not procure his love or make him loving; it only renders it consistent for him to execise his love towards sinners. In Rom. 3:25 and Heb. 9:5 (A.V., "mercy-seat") the Greek word _hilasterion_ is used. It is the word employed by the LXX. translators in Ex. 25:17 and elsewhere as the equivalent for the Hebrew _kapporeth_, which means "covering," and is used of the lid of the ark of the covenant (Ex. 25:21; 30:6). This Greek word (hilasterion) came to denote not only the mercy-seat or lid of the ark, but also propitation or reconciliation by blood. On the great day of atonement the high priest carried the blood of the sacrifice he offered for all the people within the veil and sprinkled with it the "mercy-seat," and so made propitiation. In 1 John 2:2; 4:10, Christ is called the "propitiation for our sins." Here a different Greek word is used (hilasmos). Christ is "the propitiation," because by his becoming our substitute and assuming our obligations he expiated our guilt, covered it, by the vicarious punishment which he endured. (Comp. Heb. 2:17, where the expression "make reconciliation" of the A.V. is more correctly in the R.V. "make propitiation.")
Easton's 1897 Bible Dictionary

Scripture says Jesus Christ made propitiation for the sins of the people:
Hebrews 2:17 Therefore, in all things He had to be made like His brethren, that He might be a merciful and faithful High Priest in things pertaining to God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people. 18 For in that He Himself has suffered, being tempted, He is able to aid those who are tempted.

1 John 2: 1 My little children, these things I write to you, so that you may not sin. And if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous. 2 And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world. (This also shows that when we sin, Jesus is our mediator and advocate sitting at the right hand of God after finishing His sacrifice on the cross; His sacrifice is not being perpetually or repeatedly offered; IT IS FINISHED;Hebrews 10:12: "But when this priest had offered for all time one sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God.")

1 John 4:10 In this is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins.

Scripture says that if believers sin, they are forgiven and cleansed if they confess their sins to God:
1 John 1:9 If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

Scripture says that we receive justification and forgiveness (atonement) by faith in Jesus Christ, apart from works (including works of penance and indulgences):
Romans 3:21 But now the righteousness of God apart from the law is revealed, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, 22 even the righteousness of God, through faith in Jesus Christ, to all and on all who believe. For there is no difference; 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, 25 whom God set forth as a propitiation by His blood, through faith, to demonstrate His righteousness, because in His forbearance God had passed over the sins that were previously committed, 26 to demonstrate at the present time His righteousness, that He might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.

Apostolic Constitution of Pope Paul VI: Indulgentiarum Doctrina: Whereby The Revision of Sacred Indulgences is Promulgated

An excerpt from Indulgentiarum Doctrina, Chapter 1:

3. It is therefore necessary for the full remission and—as it is called—reparation of sins not only that friendship with God be reestablished by a sincere conversion of the mind and amends made for the offense against his wisdom and goodness, but also that all the personal as well as social values and those of the universal order itself, which have been diminished or destroyed by sin, be fully reintegrated whether through voluntary reparation which will involve punishment or through acceptance of the punishments established by the just and most holy wisdom of God, from which there will shine forth throughout the world the sanctity and the splendor of his glory. The very existence and the gravity of the punishment enable us to understand the foolishness and malice of sin and its harmful consequences.

That punishment or the vestiges of sin may remain to be expiated or cleansed and that they in fact frequently do even after the remission of guilt(8) is clearly demonstrated by the doctrine on purgatory. In purgatory, in fact, the souls of those "who died in the charity of God and truly repentant, but before satisfying with worthy fruits of penance for sins committed and for omissions (9) are cleansed after death with purgatorial punishments. This is also clearly evidenced in the liturgical prayers with which the Christian community admitted to Holy Communion has addressed God since most ancient times: "that we, who are justly subjected to afflictions because of our sins, may be mercifully set free from them for the glory of thy name.(10)

Scipture tells us Who was subjected to afflictions because of our sins:
Isaiah 53

1 Who has believed our report?
And to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed?
2 For He shall grow up before Him as a tender plant,
And as a root out of dry ground.
He has no form or comeliness;
And when we see Him,
There is no beauty that we should desire Him.
3 He is despised and rejected by men,
A Man of sorrows and acquainted with grief.
And we hid, as it were, our faces from Him;
He was despised, and we did not esteem Him.
4 Surely He has borne our griefs
And carried our sorrows;
Yet we esteemed Him stricken,
Smitten by God, and afflicted.
5 But He was wounded for our transgressions,
He was bruised for our iniquities;
The chastisement for our peace was upon Him,
And by His stripes we are healed.
6 All we like sheep have gone astray;
We have turned, every one, to his own way;
And the LORD has laid on Him the iniquity of us all.
7 He was oppressed and He was afflicted,
Yet He opened not His mouth;
He was led as a lamb to the slaughter,
And as a sheep before its shearers is silent,
So He opened not His mouth.
8 He was taken from prison and from judgment,
And who will declare His generation?
For He was cut off from the land of the living;
For the transgressions of My people He was stricken.
9 And they made His grave with the wicked—
But with the rich at His death,
Because He had done no violence,
Nor was any deceit in His mouth.
10 Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise Him;
He has put Him to grief.
When You make His soul an offering for sin,
He shall see His seed, He shall prolong His days,
And the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in His hand.
11 He shall see the labor of His soul,and be satisfied.
By His knowledge My righteous Servant shall justify many,
For He shall bear their iniquities.
12 Therefore I will divide Him a portion with the great,
And He shall divide the spoil with the strong,
Because He poured out His soul unto death,
And He was numbered with the transgressors,
And He bore the sin of many,
And made intercession for the transgressors.

Scripture tells us Who 'has wiped out the handwriting of requirements that was against us...and has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross'; we who no longer bear any guilt will receive no punishment because He was afflicted for us:

Colossians 2:8 Beware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the tradition of men, according to the basic principles of the world, and not according to Christ. 9 For in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily; 10 and you are complete in Him, who is the head of all principality and power.
11 In Him you were also circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the sins of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, 12 buried with Him in baptism, in which you also were raised with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead. 13 And you, being dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He has made alive together with Him, having forgiven you all trespasses, 14 having wiped out the handwriting of requirements that was against us, which was contrary to us. And He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross. 15 Having disarmed principalities and powers, He made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them in it.

Video: Pope Prays in Mosque--from Understand the Times

Following is a video called 'Pope Prays in Mosque' that I found on the 'Understand the Times International' page on Youtube. This goes along with my earlier post 'The Pope's Push for a One-World Religion'.

The Pope's Push for a One-World Religion by Mike Gendron

I found another good article by Mike Gendron (see the post below called 'Eat My Flesh and Drink My Blood') called 'The Pope's Push for a One-World Religion' in which Gendron warns about the Vatican's strategy to unite all Christendom under papal control and goes on further to warn that the Vatican doesn't stop at trying to unite Christendom but is working to 'bring ALL religions under the power and influence of the papacy.' Here are two excerpts from the article, but please read the entire article at the link above.

The Vatican’s Strategy

It is indeed disturbing to see so many evangelicals unaware of the Vatican’s strategy for bringing the world under the dominion of the papacy. The Vatican has made a concerted effort since 1965 to bring their "separated brothers’ back home to "holy mother the church." In his 1995 encyclical Et Unum Sint, Pope John Paul II said he intends "to promote every suitable initiative...to increase the unity of all Christians until they reach full communion" and "to encourage the efforts of all who work for the cause of unity." The pope’s stated desire is "to gather all people and all things into Christ, so as to be for all—an inseparable sacrament of unity... expressed in the common celebration of the Eucharist." During a week of prayer for Christian unity Pope John Paul II said, "I gladly take this opportunity to call the attention of all believers to the ecumenical commitment that marked VC II. The council rightly defined the division among Christians as a scandal. The council Fathers felt the need to beg pardon of God and of their brethren for the sins committed against unity." He asked Catholics "to cultivate an authentic spiritual ecumenism" through the Virgin Mary [not through the Lord Jesus]. The success of the pope’s push for unity can be seen by the announcement made last year by the Archbishop of Canterbury. He urged all Christians to recognize the Pope as the supreme authority of a new global church (6/99 CRN News). In a document called The Gift of Authority, he describes the Pope as a "gift to be received by all the churches." It would do us all well to heed the words of C.H. Spurgeon, "Ignorance has been one of the grand agents of Popery ever since her establishment; by it, the eyes of men have been so blinded that they can scarcely discern between good and evil, and follow implicitly any guide even until they fall into the ditch of perdition."

The Vatican’s ecumenical movement goes beyond the unity of all professing Christians. Their strategy is to bring all religions under the power and influence of the papacy. Pope John Paul II has been traveling the world to build bridges to all non-Christian religions. In a recent speech he said, "Christians and Muslims, we meet one another in faith in the one God...and strive to put into practice...the teaching of our respective holy books. Today, dialogue between our two religions [Roman Catholicism and Islam] is more necessary than ever. There remains a spiritual bond which unites us and which we must strive to recognize and develop." Even Mother Theresa had the ecumenical spirit as noted from her book Servants of Love. She stated, "we went every day to pray in some temple or church. The Archbishop gave us permission to do so. We prayed with the Jews, the Armenians, the Anglicans, the Jains, the Sikhs, the Buddhists, and the Hindus. It was extraordinary. All hearts united in prayer to the one true God."

Notice the statement "He asked Catholics "to cultivate an authentic spiritual ecumenism" through the Virgin Mary [not through the Lord Jesus]." This is obviously an older article because it speaks of JP2 as the present pope, but Pope Benedict XVI apparently is continuing on similar course. The fact that the 'Virgin Mary' is to be the uniting spirit of this movement is significant. People of many religions revere the Mary of Roman Catholicism and have been seeing Marian apparitions that teach them to honor her and build churches for her and that she will bring peace to the world, etc. This is a lying spirit because, if one reads the things it has said, it does not give glory to God alone and does not speak according to what is taught in the Bible, God's inspired word.
Notice also the statement 'In a document called The Gift of Authority, he describes the Pope as a "gift to be received by all the churches."' We would do well to remember that the Trojan Horse was also a gift.
In a related article, the new pope has recently made a bold move to extend papal authority over Anglican Christians.

Peter: the first rock built upon the Rock

In the Visits to Candyland blog post I linked to in my last post I made some comments about Peter that I want to keep a record of, so I am making them into a new post. Please read my earlier post and the ones I linked to there, including the one about St. Francis de Sales by Kelly on Visits to Candyland. Following are my comments.

Very interesting, Kelly.
I agree with many of St. Francis de Sales' points about Peter. I don't agree with his assessment of Luther and Calvin's interpretation of Matt. 16:17-19. I don't agree with the implication that Peter's 'primacy' (I think there is a better word for Peter's position) is the beginning of a succession of a single line of apostolic authority. I know that is not the subject of this but it is implied.
I am doing some reading and will have more to say about the post, if I am permitted.
Here is my recent post called 'Who is the Rock?' about the Matthew 16 passage: http://pilgrimsdaughter.blogspot.com/2009/10/who-is-rock.html In my post there are some quotes from Augustine that give good understanding of the passage.

---------------------------------


OK. One or two thoughts. If in Matt. 16 Jesus IS calling Peter the rock upon which the church is built, is He not also including the other Apostles in this while singling Peter out as the one who is a leader in doing the things that all the Apostles will do, and that indeed the whole church will do in the future as it grows? For example, as we said in the last post, Peter was given the lead in first giving the gospel to each major group: Jews, Samaritans, Gentiles. He was the spokesman, the one everyone could see out front, showing the boldness, authority and power of Christ, not his own authority and power. This is shown again as he, along with John, encounter the lame man at the Gate of the Temple and Peter heals him just as Jesus would have done, in Jesus' name. Then when all the people come running, he boldly preaches the gospel, glorifying Christ and convicting of sin, showing he is full of the Spirit. He and John are arrested by the Sanhedrin and Peter boldly preaches to them. He always points to Jesus, giving God the glory, and reflecting the person of Christ in his behavior. The only other person we see in scripture who is shown this way in detail (though I believe the other Apostles behaved with this authority and boldness and had healing power from the Spirit as well) is Paul. Peter is the spokesman, the one who goes first, and has the privilege of preaching first, laying the foundation.

Another thought, If Jesus IS NOT calling Peter 'the rock' (Petra), Jesus may still be giving him this first privileged office of being the head spokesman and example of Christ for the church and the world. I believe that Jesus was referring to Himself as petra, but laying Peter down as the first stone built upon Him. All future bishops and people would look to Peter as their example in boldness and Spirit-filled preaching of the gospel, and in always giving Christ the glory.

-----------------------------------

I just thought of something based on what I said in the last comment about Peter preaching first and laying the foundation. In a way Peter, in preaching the gospel in Acts 2 and beginning the Church (in Christ's name and power) is laying down Christ to the people as the cornerstone, and Peter laid down himself by faith as the first stone built upon Christ when he made the confession in Matthew 16 that Jesus is the Christ. He was the spokesman for the Apostles who all believed this (except Judas) and he was given the privilege to continue this office and be the first to preach it to his fellow men. Peter, after Christ, is our first example of Christ-likeness.

------------------------------------


In my post 'Who is the Rock?' I quoted from the following passages from Augustine which came from an article by William Webster which has a link on my post.
Remember, in this man Peter, the rock. He's the one, you see, who on being questioned by the Lord about who the disciples said he was, replied, 'You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.' On hearing this, Jesus said to him, 'Blessed are you, Simon Bar Jona, because flesh and blood did not reveal it to you, but my Father who is in heaven. And I tell you'...'You are Peter, Rocky, and on this rock I shall build my Church, and the gates of the underworld will not conquer her. To you shall I give the keys of the kingdom. Whatever you bind on earth shall also be bound in heaven; whatever you loose on earth shall also be loosed in heaven' (Mt 16:15-19). In Peter, Rocky, we see our attention drawn to the rock. Now the apostle Paul says about the former people, 'They drank from the spiritual rock that was following them; but the rock was Christ' (1 Cor 10:4). So this disciple is called Rocky from the rock, like Christian from Christ.
Why have I wanted to make this little introduction? In order to suggest to you that in Peter the Church is to be recognized. Christ, you see, built his Church not on a man but on Peter's confession. What is Peter's confession? 'You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.' There's the rock for you, there's the foundation, there's where the Church has been built, which the gates of the underworld cannot conquer.1

Its clear, you see, from many places in scripture that Peter can stand for, or represent, the Church; above all from that place where it says, To you will I hand over the keys of the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall also be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven (Mt. 16:19). Did Peter receive these keys, and Paul not receive them? Did Peter receive them, and John and James and the other apostles not receive them? Or are the keys not to be found in the Church, where sins are being forgiven every day? But because Peter symbolically stood for the Church, what was given to him alone was given to the whole Church. So Peter represented the Church; the Church is the body of Christ.13

Augustine, I think, is saying that Peter represents the church or stands for the whole church, what he was given is also given to the whole church,(and here's my addition to Augustine) but he is the first; the example; the spokesman.

Here is a passage from 1 Peter that adds to this idea: 1 Peter 4:10 As each one has received a gift, minister it to one another, as good stewards of the manifold grace of God. 11 If anyone speaks, let him speak as the oracles of God. If anyone ministers, let him do it as with the ability which God supplies, that in all things God may be glorified through Jesus Christ, to whom belong the glory and the dominion forever and ever. Amen.

Here Peter is saying that all believers are stewards of God's grace, not just one man as was mentioned in an earlier post about Peter and the popes. He says that if any believer speaks,'let him speak as the oracles of God', so each believer can speak God's word boldly by the power of the Spirit. I believe we are all successors of Peter, and he is our first spokesman and example.

Here is another passage from 1 Peter in which he says all believers are living stones coming to the first living stone, Christ. Peter doesn't set himself apart from the other stones built upon Christ, but always points to Christ.

1 Peter 2:
4 Coming to Him as to a living stone, rejected indeed by men, but chosen by God and precious, 5 you also, as living stones, are being built up a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. 6 Therefore it is also contained in the Scripture,


“ Behold, I lay in Zion
A chief cornerstone, elect, precious,
And he who believes on Him will by no means be put to shame.”

7 Therefore, to you who believe, He is precious; but to those who are disobedient,


“ The stone which the builders rejected
Has become the chief cornerstone,”

8 and


“ A stone of stumbling
And a rock of offense.”

They stumble, being disobedient to the word, to which they also were appointed.
9 But you are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, His own special people, that you may proclaim the praises of Him who called you out of darkness into His marvelous light; 10 who once were not a people but are now the people of God, who had not obtained mercy but now have obtained mercy.

----------------------------------

I guess I should add to what I already said that based on what I have read in scripture I don't agree with de Sales on what he said about Peter's authority:
Thus they were foundations of the Church equally with him as to the conversion of souls and as to doctrine; but as to the authority of governing, they were so unequally, as S. Peter was the ordinary head not only of the rest of the whole Church but of the Apostles also. For Our Lord had built on him the whole of his Church, of which they were not only parts but the principal and noble parts.

I believe Peter's gift from the Lord in Matt. 16 was to be the first stone built on Christ AND the first to build upon the foundation of Christ in preaching the Word. I don't see any authority over the other Apostles or bishops exercised by Peter in scripture that was not exercised by the other Apostles and even by the other elders like James the brother of the Lord. I see the authority and boldness of preaching the gospel.

The Primacy of Peter: Visits to Candyland

There's a good discussion going on over at Visits to Candyland about the Primacy of Peter.

The Tale of the Fisherman and His Wife: Part Two

Because 'The Tale of the Fisherman and His Wife' is a 'fairy tale' and it's origin is unknown, it is certainly not to be considered in the same light as a scriptural parable; yet it seems to have been created by someone who had an understanding of the Bible and of what the desire for power and wealth can do in a person and in the church of God. It is not giving a direct point-for-point comparison to Christ and His church, yet I think the intent was to say something about both. Certainly the fisherman does not fully correspond to Christ in his character, yet in some points he does, especially in the way that He must sorrow over the choices made by those who call themselves His followers and the way He allows them to fail and take the consequences for it. The fisherman's wife then, I believe, corresponds to the one who is the Bride of Christ, the church. In scripture the Bride is shown in two ways, both described as a 'woman'; she is shown as a faithful yet persecuted woman, and she is also shown as a faithless and persecuting woman. This fairy tale gives a good description of how and why a church could become a faithless and persecuting wife: because of a selfish and prideful lust for wealth and power.


The following historical information is taken from 'The Spirit of Roman Catholicism' by Mary Anne Collins, Chapter 8, pp. 31-33. The author describes a contrast between two historical bishops of Rome and what happened to cause this change in mindset in the leadership of the church.

A TALE OF TWO BISHOPS

The degree of change which Constantine caused in the Church can be illustrated by looking at the lives of two Bishops of Rome. So let’s go back in history for about 100 years before Christianity became “politically correct,” to look at the life of Bishop Pontian. Then we will compare Pontian’s life with the life of Bishop Silvester, who lived during the time of Emperor Constantine.

(The following information about Bishops Pontian and Silvester comes from Malachi Martin, “The Decline and Fall of the Roman Church,” pages 19-38.)

Pontian became the Bishop of Rome in the year 230 A.D. He was made bishop suddenly and unexpectedly when his predecessor was arrested and killed by Roman authorities.

On September 27, 235 A.D., Emperor Maximinus decreed that all Christian leaders were to be arrested. Christian buildings were burned, Christian cemeteries were closed, and the personal wealth of Christians was confiscated.

Bishop Pontian was arrested the same day. He was put in the Mamertine Prison, where he was tortured for ten days. Then he was sent to work in the lead mines of Sardinia.

When prisoners arrived at Sardinia, their left eye was gouged out and a number was branded on their forehead. Iron rings were soldered around their ankles, linked together with a six-inch chain which hobbled them. A tight chain around their waist was fastened to their ankle-chain in such a way that they were permanently bent over.

The prisoners worked for 20 hours a day, with four one-hour breaks for sleep. They had one meal of bread and water per day. Most prisoners died within six to fourteen months from exhaustion, malnutrition, disease, beatings, infection, or violence. Some went insane or committed suicide.

Pontian only lasted four months. In January, 236 A.D., Pontian was killed and his body was thrown into the cesspool.

What happened to Pontian was not unusual. Many Christians were sent to the Sardinian lead mines, or persecuted in other ways. If a man accepted the position of being a Christian leader, he knew that his life from that time on was likely to be short and painful. There were 14 Bishops of Rome in the 79 years between Pontian and Silvester.

Then along came Constantine.

In 314 A.D., Emperor Constantine crowned Silvester as Bishop of Rome. Silvester lived in luxury, with servants waiting on him. Constantine confessed his sins to Silvester and asked for his advice. Silvester presided over worldwide Church councils. He had a splendid palace and a sumptuous cathedral. He had power, prestige, wealth, pomp, and the favor of the Emperor.

Churchmen wore purple robes, reflecting the purple of Constantine’s court. That was an external change. The most important change was an internal one. The Church took on the mentality of Rome. Under Silvester, the internal structure of the Church took on the form and practice and pomp of Rome.

Silvester died in December, 336 A.D. He died peacefully, in a clean, comfortable bed, in the Roman Lateran Palace. He died surrounded by well dressed bishops and priests, and attended by Roman guards. His body was dressed in ceremonial robes, put in an elegant casket, and carried through the streets of Rome in a solemn procession. He was buried with honor and ceremony, attended by leading members of Roman society.

It is understandable that many Christians would have preferred an officially approved status for the Church. But what was the result?

Before Constantine, the church was a band of heroic men and women who were so committed to serve the Lord Jesus Christ that they would endure any hardship. After 314 A.D., the Church became infiltrated by opportunists who were seeking power and political advancement. Church leaders were no longer in danger of persecution. Rather, they enjoyed power, prestige and luxury.

Did the Roman Empire surrender to Christianity? Or did Christianity prostitute itself in order to gain benefits from the Roman Empire? [Note 9]

The temptation for an ungodly alliance with the Roman Empire was very great. But at what cost?

Luke 9:23 Then He said to them all, “If anyone desires to come after Me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow Me. 24 For whoever desires to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for My sake will save it.

Luke 22:24 Now there was also a dispute among them, as to which of them should be considered the greatest. 25 And He said to them, “The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them, and those who exercise authority over them are called ‘benefactors.’ 26 But not so among you; on the contrary, he who is greatest among you, let him be as the younger, and he who governs as he who serves. 27 For who is greater, he who sits at the table, or he who serves? Is it not he who sits at the table? Yet I am among you as the One who serves.

John 13:12 So when He had washed their feet, taken His garments, and sat down again, He said to them, “Do you know what I have done to you? 13 You call Me Teacher and Lord, and you say well, for so I am. 14 If I then, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also ought to wash one another’s feet. 15 For I have given you an example, that you should do as I have done to you. 16 Most assuredly, I say to you, a servant is not greater than his master; nor is he who is sent greater than he who sent him. 17 If you know these things, blessed are you if you do them.

2 Corinthians 11:24 From the Jews five times I received forty stripes minus one. 25 Three times I was beaten with rods; once I was stoned; three times I was shipwrecked; a night and a day I have been in the deep; 26 in journeys often, in perils of waters, in perils of robbers, in perils of my own countrymen, in perils of the Gentiles, in perils in the city, in perils in the wilderness, in perils in the sea, in perils among false brethren; 27 in weariness and toil, in sleeplessness often, in hunger and thirst, in fastings often, in cold and nakedness— 28 besides the other things, what comes upon me daily: my deep concern for all the churches. 29 Who is weak, and I am not weak? Who is made to stumble, and I do not burn with indignation?

Hebrew 11:
30 By faith the walls of Jericho fell down after they were encircled for seven days. 31 By faith the harlot Rahab did not perish with those who did not believe, when she had received the spies with peace.
32 And what more shall I say? For the time would fail me to tell of Gideon and Barak and Samson and Jephthah, also of David and Samuel and the prophets: 33 who through faith subdued kingdoms, worked righteousness, obtained promises, stopped the mouths of lions, 34 quenched the violence of fire, escaped the edge of the sword, out of weakness were made strong, became valiant in battle, turned to flight the armies of the aliens. 35 Women received their dead raised to life again.
Others were tortured, not accepting deliverance, that they might obtain a better resurrection. 36 Still others had trial of mockings and scourgings, yes, and of chains and imprisonment. 37 They were stoned, they were sawn in two, were tempted, were slain with the sword. They wandered about in sheepskins and goatskins, being destitute, afflicted, tormented— 38 of whom the world was not worthy. They wandered in deserts and mountains, in dens and caves of the earth.
39 And all these, having obtained a good testimony through faith, did not receive the promise, 40 God having provided something better for us, that they should not be made perfect apart from us.

The Tale of the Fisherman and His Wife

I remember reading a story in a fairy tale book many times when I was young. For some reason the story fascinated me; it was 'The Tale of the Fisherman and His Wife' from the Brothers Grimm. I have thought about this story sometimes while I have been studying Roman Catholicism and wondered if it was written as a morality tale against the striving for earthly and spiritual power that characterized many of the Roman Catholic popes of the middle ages and onward. I found a web page that retells the story with some interesting commentary on the meaning of it.
Here is the story as excerpted from the webpage. Please click on the link to read the whole page and find out the possible meaning of the twist at the end of the tale.

The Fisherman and His Wife
By Jacob and Wilhelm Grimm

Once upon a time there were a fisherman and his wife who lived together in a filthy shack near the sea. Every day the fisherman went out fishing, and he fished, and he fished. Once he was sitting there fishing and looking into the clear water, and he sat, and he sat. Then his hook went to the bottom, deep down, and when he pulled it out, he had caught a large flounder.

Then the flounder said to him, "Listen, fisherman, I beg you to let me live.

I am not an ordinary flounder, but an enchanted prince. How will it help you to kill me? I would not taste good to you. Put me back into the water, and let me swim."

So he put it back into the clear water, and the flounder disappeared. Then the fisherman got up and went home to his wife in the filthy shack.

"Husband," said the woman, "didn't you catch anything today?"

"I caught a flounder," said the fisherman, "But he told me that he was an enchanted prince, so I let him swim away."

"Didn't you ask for anything first?" said his wife.

"No," said the fisherman. "What should I have asked for?"

"Oh," said the woman. "It is terrible living in this shack. You should have asked for a little cottage. Go back and tell him that we want a little cottage."

The fisherman tried to talk her out of it, but the wife insisted, "Go back and tell the flounder that we want a cottage."

So the fisherman went back to the sea. When he arrived it was no longer clear, but yellow and green. He stood there and said:

"Mandje! Mandje! Timpe Te!

Flounder, flounder, in the sea!

Ilsobell, my willful wife,

Does not want my way of life."

The flounder swam up and said, "What does she want then?"
"She wants a cottage," said the fisherman.

"Go home," said the flounder. "She already has it."

The man went home, and his wife was standing in the door of a cottage. "You have a cottage. Be happy now, wife," he said.

"We shall see," the wife replied.

Everything went well for a week or two, and then the woman said, "Listen, husband. This cottage is too small. Go back to the flounder and tell him to give us a stone palace."

The fisherman tried to talk her out of it, but the wife insisted, "Go back and tell the flounder that we want a stone palace."

The fisherman's heart was heavy, and he did not want to go. Yet he went back to the sea. When he arrived the water was purple and dark blue and gray and dense, and no longer green and yellow. He stood there and said:

"Mandje! Mandje! Timpe Te!

Flounder, flounder, in the sea!

Ilsobell, my willful wife,

Does not want my way of life."

"What does she want then?" said the flounder.

"She wants a stone palace," said the fisherman.

"Go home. She already has it," said the flounder.
The man went home, and his wife was standing in the door of a stone palace. "You have a stone palace. Be happy now, wife," he said.

"We shall see," the wife replied.

Everything went well for a week or two, and then the woman said, "Listen, husband. This palace is not enough. Go back to the flounder and tell him that I want to be king."

The fisherman tried to talk her out of it, but the wife insisted, "Go back and tell the flounder to make me king."

The fisherman's heart was heavy, and he did not want to go. Yet he went back to the sea. When he arrived it was dark gray, and the water heaved up from below and had a foul smell. He stood there and said:

"Mandje! Mandje! Timpe Te!

Flounder, flounder, in the sea!

Ilsobell, my willful wife,

Does not want my way of life."

"What does she want then?" said the flounder.

"She wants to be king," said the fisherman.

"Go home. She already is," said the flounder.

Then the man went home, and when he arrived there, the palace had become much larger, and his wife was indeed the king. "You are king. Be happy now, wife," he said.

"We shall see," the wife replied.

Everything went well for a week or two, and then the woman said, "Listen, husband. Being king is not enough. Go back to the flounder and tell him that I want to be Emperor."

The fisherman tried to talk her out of it, but the wife insisted, "I am king and you are only my husband. Go back and tell the flounder to make me Emperor."

The fisherman's heart was heavy, and he did not want to go. Yet he went back to the sea. When he arrived water was all black and dense and boiling up from within. A strong wind blew over him that curdled the water. He stood there and said:

"Mandje! Mandje! Timpe Te!

Flounder, flounder, in the sea!

Ilsobell, my willful wife,

Does not want my way of life."

"What does she want then?" said the flounder

"She wants to be Emperor," said the fisherman.

"Go home. She already is," said the flounder.

Then the man went home, and when he arrived there, the palace was even larger and more ornate and his wife was indeed Emperor. "You are Emperor. Be happy now, wife," he said.

"We shall see," the wife replied.

Everything went well for a week or two, and then the woman said, "Listen, husband. Being Emperor is not enough. Go back to the flounder and tell him that I want to be Pope."

The fisherman tried to talk her out of it, but the wife insisted, "I am Emperor and you are only my husband. Go back and tell the flounder to make me Pope."

The fisherman's heart was heavy, and he did not want to go. Yet he went back to the sea. When he arrived the wind was blowing over the land, and clouds flew by as the darkness of evening fell. Leaves blew from the trees, and the water roared and boiled as it crashed onto the shore. There was a little blue in the middle of the sky, but on all sides it had turned red, as in a terrible lightning storm. Full of despair he stood there and said.

"Mandje! Mandje! Timpe Te!

Flounder, flounder, in the sea!

Ilsobell, my willful wife,

Does not want my way of life."

"What does she want then?" said the flounder.

"She wants to be Pope," said the fisherman.

"Go home. She already is," said the flounder.

Then the fisherman went home, and when he arrived there, he found a large church surrounded by palaces. He forced his way through the crowd. Inside everything was illuminated with thousands and thousands of lights, and his wife was clothed in pure gold and sitting on a high throne. She was wearing three large golden crowns. She was surrounded with church-like splendor, and at her sides there were two banks of candles. The largest was as thick and as tall as the largest tower, down to the smallest kitchen candle. And all the emperors and kings were kneeling before her kissing her slipper. "You are Pope. Be happy now, wife," he said.

"We shall see," the wife replied.

Everything went well for a week or two, and then the woman said, "Listen, husband. Being Pope is not enough. Go back to the flounder and tell him that I want to be like God.

The fisherman shook with fear and he tried to talk her out of it, but the wife insisted, "I am Pope and you are only my husband. Go back and tell the flounder to make me like God."

The fisherman's heart was heavy, and he did not want to go. Yet he went back to the sea. Such a storm was raging that he could hardly stand on his feet. Houses and trees were blowing over. The mountains were shaking, and boulders were rolling from the cliffs into the sea. The sky was as black as pitch. There was thunder and lightning. In the sea there were great black waves as high as church towers and mountains, all capped with crowns of white foam. He stood there and said:

"Mandje! Mandje! Timpe Te!

Flounder, flounder, in the sea!

Ilsobell, my willful wife,

Does not want my way of life."

"What does she want then?" said the flounder.

"She wants to be like God," said the fisherman.

"Go home. She is sitting in her filthy shack again."

And they are still there even today.

Here is the link to Part Two: http://pilgrimsdaughter.blogspot.com/2009/10/tale-of-fishermans-wife-part-two.htmlbbbb

Who is the Rock?

On Elena's blog, Visits to Candyland, we were having a discussion about Scott Hahn's view, as a Roman Catholic convert, of the papacy, which they claim is founded on Matthew 16:17-19 in which the RCC thinks Jesus is founding His church upon Peter. In the comment thread, I made some comments that I wanted to keep a record of, so I am reposting them here.

I'm not going to have much time to comment this weekend after this, as we've got a conference tonight and tomorrow and church on Sunday, but after so far reading half of Scott Hahn's article on the papacy, a couple of things occur to me.
First, if Jesus is specifically referring to Peter as the rock and giving him the keys, which I don't think is clear, how does this lead to the Bishop of Rome being the only successor of Peter? The Apostles appointed many pastors (bishops) and planted many churches all over the known world. Peter was in Jerusalem for many years and then I believe in Antioch, and then it is controversial whether he was even in Rome, or if he was, for how long. If Peter was in Rome at the end of his life, for some have added up the years and it couldn't have been long, it may have only been like Paul who was brougt there as a prisoner to be tried and then executed. Why is the claim of the Roman bishops any better than any other bishop?
Secondly, Hahn makes the point at the beginning of his article that the church is like a family rather than just a 'people'. If indeed Peter is established as a father (though I think this is debatable) how does this translate to there always being only one successor? Adam was the father of the human race, but there was not just one successor but many fathers came from him and had many children, who in turn became fathers/mothers as well. Peter and the Apostles appointed many bishops and led many to Christ and those in turn led many more until a great and constantly growing family was established. It is a building with a foundation upon which many stones are being added. I don't see anything that supports the idea of one successor or especially that it has to be the Roman bishop.
There is much more that could be said about infallibility, and how for instance one knows which statements of the pope are infallible and which are faulty. I hope someone else has time to address this, because I have to go.

--------------------------

In the Augustine passage in the Webster article I linked to above, Augustine seems to see a parallel between the raising of Lazarus and the Matthew 16 passage about Peter, the rock, and the keys.
Here is the passage from Augustine:
Let those who are bound fear, those who are loosed fear. Let those who are loosed be afraid of being bound; those who are bound pray to be loosed. 'Each one is tied up in the thread of his own sins' (Prv 5:22). And apart from the Church, nothing is loosed. One four days dead is told, 'Lazarus, come forth in the open' (Jn 11:43), and he came forth from the tomb tied hand and foot with bandages. The Lord rouses him, so that the dead man may come forth from the tomb; this means he touches the heart, so that the confession of sin may come out in the open. But that's not enough, he's still bound. So after Lazarus had come out of the tomb, the Lord turned to his disciples, whom he had told, 'Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven,' and said, 'Loose him, and let him go' (Jn 11:44). He roused him by himself, he loosed him through the disciples.

Here are the two Bible passages:
John 11:38 Then Jesus, again groaning in Himself, came to the tomb. It was a cave, and a stone lay against it. 39 Jesus said, “Take away the stone.”
Martha, the sister of him who was dead, said to Him, “Lord, by this time there is a stench, for he has been dead four days.”
40 Jesus said to her, “Did I not say to you that if you would believe you would see the glory of God?” 41 Then they took away the stone from the place where the dead man was lying. And Jesus lifted up His eyes and said, “Father, I thank You that You have heard Me. 42 And I know that You always hear Me, but because of the people who are standing by I said this, that they may believe that You sent Me.” 43 Now when He had said these things, He cried with a loud voice, “Lazarus, come forth!” 44 And he who had died came out bound hand and foot with graveclothes, and his face was wrapped with a cloth. Jesus said to them, “Loose him, and let him go.”

Matthew 16:15 He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?”
16 Simon Peter answered and said, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.”
17 Jesus answered and said to him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in heaven. 18 And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it. 19 And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”

These passages are parallel because they both show Christ, the Head, the Rock, the Cornerstone as the one who stands before the gates of Hades (death) and calls forth the one who is dead, and death cannot withstand Him. He calls the dead forth by His word in the power of the Spirit, and the dead obey His word. He then tells His people, the believers, the church, the disciples, to 'loose him and let him go.' Peter represents all the church, and all the church has the commission to share the gospel (remove the stone and let the dead hear His word) and to take off the graveclothes when the dead is called to life.

Jesus is the Head and the Rock upon which the Church, represented by Peter, is built. Peter himself said this: 1 Peter 2:4 Coming to Him as to a living stone, rejected indeed by men, but chosen by God and precious, 5 you also, as living stones, are being built up a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. 6 Therefore it is also contained in the Scripture,


“ Behold, I lay in Zion
A chief cornerstone, elect, precious,
And he who believes on Him will by no means be put to shame.”

Here are the quotes I used earlier from Augustine:
Remember, in this man Peter, the rock. He's the one, you see, who on being questioned by the Lord about who the disciples said he was, replied, 'You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.' On hearing this, Jesus said to him, 'Blessed are you, Simon Bar Jona, because flesh and blood did not reveal it to you, but my Father who is in heaven. And I tell you'...'You are Peter, Rocky, and on this rock I shall build my Church, and the gates of the underworld will not conquer her. To you shall I give the keys of the kingdom. Whatever you bind on earth shall also be bound in heaven; whatever you loose on earth shall also be loosed in heaven' (Mt 16:15-19). In Peter, Rocky, we see our attention drawn to the rock. Now the apostle Paul says about the former people, 'They drank from the spiritual rock that was following them; but the rock was Christ' (1 Cor 10:4). So this disciple is called Rocky from the rock, like Christian from Christ.
Why have I wanted to make this little introduction? In order to suggest to you that in Peter the Church is to be recognized. Christ, you see, built his Church not on a man but on Peter's confession. What is Peter's confession? 'You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.' There's the rock for you, there's the foundation, there's where the Church has been built, which the gates of the underworld cannot conquer.1

Its clear, you see, from many places in scripture that Peter can stand for, or represent, the Church; above all from that place where it says, To you will I hand over the keys of the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall also be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven (Mt. 16:19). Did Peter receive these keys, and Paul not receive them? Did Peter receive them, and John and James and the other apostles not receive them? Or are the keys not to be found in the Church, where sins are being forgiven every day? But because Peter symbolically stood for the Church, what was given to him alone was given to the whole Church. So Peter represented the Church; the Church is the body of Christ.13

Augustine said in the same passage as above:
None of us lacks Christ. He is complete in all of us, and still there is more of his body waiting for him. Those disciples believed, through them many inhabitants of Jerusalem came to believe, Judea came to believe, Samaria came to believe. Let the members join the body, the building attach itself to the foundation. For no other foundation can anyone lay, says the apostle, except what has been laid, which is Christ Jesus (1 Cor. 3:11).30

That Jerusalem of ours, though, still in exile, is being built in heaven. That's why Christ, its foundation, preceded it into heaven. That, you see, is where our foundation is, and the head of the Church, because a foundation too is also called a head; and indeed that is what it is. Because the head of a building too is its foundation; its head isn't where it is finished, but where it starts growing upward from. The tops of earthly buildings are raised up high; yet they set their head firmly in the solid ground. In the same sort of way the head of the Church has gone ahead into heaven, and is seated at the right hand of the Father. Just as men go about their work, when for laying foundations they bring along suitable material to make a solid base, to ensure the security of the mass that is going to be placed on top of it in construction of the edifice to be; so in the same sort of way, by all those things that took place in Christ, being born, growing up, being arrested, enduring abuse, being scourged, crucified, killed, dying, being buried, it was like material being brought along for the heavenly foundations.

---------------------------

Going back to our original discussion about the papacy, and Peter as the rock, I have been trying to get the ideas in scripture organized in my mind for the last several days and finally I have it clearly in my mind.
I don't want to go into a long discourse, but just summarize the way it all seems to fit together.
First of all, the idea that God (Christ) is the first, unshakeable, foundational Rock is one of the overarching themes of scripture from beginning to end. Because some mere mortals are referred to as rocks as well, such as Abraham and Peter, doesn’t mean that they are the first bedrock stone, the ‘Head of the Corner’ type of stone that Christ is. They are only worth anything as stones because they are built upon Christ who upholds everything by the power of His word. In the New Testament, Christ is always Petra, the cornerstone. One of the rules of interpretation is that obscure passages must be interpreted in light of what is known for sure. We know for sure that Jesus is the One foundational stone upon which all other stones are laid. The Matthew 16 passage has been debated for centuries. Even in the 4th century there was not agreement on it , as we have already seen, though many then saw it as protestants do.
Along with this are many scriptures that support the idea that Christ is the one cornerstone, and the Apostles are together the 12 foundation stones built upon Him, along with the OT prophets. Then the other stones (believers) are built upon these. See 1 Peter 2:4-8 and Revelation 21:14. Revelation shows all the Apostles as the foundations of the New Jerusalem, which is the Bride. The Apostles are part of the moveable stones built upon the immovable Rock of Christ.
Remember also the Rock in Nebuchadnezzar’s dream in Daniel 2, and Elijah in the cleft of the Rock, and Moses and the water from the Rock, and Isaiah 32:2 ‘the shadow of a great rock in a weary land.’
Secondly, if you look at the story of the raising of Lazarus as a parallel passage to Matthew 16, as Augustine did, which I quoted in an earlier comment, you will see that it is Christ who stands before the gates of Death and by His word and Spirit brings the dead to life, showing that the gates of Hades cannot withstand Him who is the Rock, the Head of the Church who is built upon Him. If we are standing upon Him, and His word, death will not stand before us, His church. We speak His word by the Spirit and people will be set free. I believe it is the Rock of Christ first, and THEN the church built upon Him which the gates of death cannot withstand.
Thirdly, as I said at the beginning of this thread, where are the scriptures that show a that a single succession from Peter as the authority for the Church is what was established? Where is the proof that Rome is that succession, and not all the other bishops who descended from the Apostles? There is not agreement on this universally, and it is not in scripture, and not supported by the Fathers.

---------------------------


Also, Augustine brought out in that same passage I quoted earlier from Webster, that Peter represents all the Apostles, and all the church. We are all his successors if we are built upon Christ and His word, as taught by the Apostles, by faith.

----------------------------
Here again is the link to Webster.
----------------------------

Except I don't agree with Augustine and others that it is Peter's confession that is the Rock upon which the church is built, but the One Whom Peter confessed.

-------------------------------

Also,
the story of Lazarus shows that the moveable stones (us) have to be moved out of the way so the immovable Rock can do His work, so the dead can hear His voice. That means Peter and all believers have to bow to Him and move out of the way.

Here are some other helpful links: These first two links were provided by Paul, who also commented on Elena's blog and mine: An article by William Webster on Forgeries and the Papacy and an article from New Advent on Liber Pontificalis, a document that is referred to in Webster's article. In view of Webster's article, which shows the faulty foundation of forgery upon which the modern Roman Catholic view of the papacy is built, I believe much of what today's Roman Catholic apologists say on this subject should be held as suspect.
There is much information on the papacy and the Roman Catholic Church on Webster's website, christiantruth.com. Other good sources are bereanbeacon.org, and aomin.org.