I had a question about the Pope asked in the forum so I thought I'd post it here as well.
Christ made Peter the leader of the apostles and of the church (Matthew 16:18-19), and in giving him the keys of the kingdom,Christ not only made him leader but also made him infallible when he acted or spoke as Christ's representative on earth (speaking from the seat of authority or ex cathedra). This ability to act on behalf of the church in an infallible way when speaking ex cathedra was passed on to Peter's successors, thus giving the Church an infallible guide on earth to lead the Church unerringly.
Peter later became the first Bishop of Rome. As Bishop of Rome, he exercised authority over all other bishops and church leaders. The teaching that the Bishop of Rome is above all other bishops in authority is referred to as the primacy of the Roman Bishop.
Peter passed on his apostolic authority to the next Bishop of Rome, along with the other apostles who passed on their apostolic authority to the bishops that they ordained. These new bishops, in turn, passed on that apostolic authority to those bishops that they later ordained and so on. This passing on of apostolic authority is referred to as apostolic succession.
The New Testament contains five different metaphors for the foundation of the Church (Matt. 16:18, 1 Cor. 3:11, Eph. 2:20, 1 Pet. 2:5-6, Rev. 21:14). "You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it" (Matt. 16:18).
The Catholic Church's teaching on papal infallibility is one which is generally misunderstood by those outside the Church. The infallibility of the pope is not a doctrine that suddenly appeared in Church teaching; rather, it is a doctrine which was implicit in the early Church. It is only our understanding of infallibility which has developed and been more clearly understood over time. In fact, the doctrine of infallibility is implicit in these Petrine texts: John 21:15-17 ("Feed my sheep . . . "), Luke 22:32 ("I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail"), and Matthew 16:18 ("You are Peter . . . ").
Christ instructed the Church to preach everything he taught (Matt. 28:19-20) and promised the protection of the Holy Spirit to "guide you into all the truth" (John 16:13). That mandate and that promise guarantee the Church will never fall away from his teachings (Matt. 16:18, 1 Tim. 3:15), even if individuals might. There is no guarantee that popes won't sin or give bad example.
I have been questioned but on Peter's conduct at Antioch. Paul rebukedinfalliblehe was infalible, how could that happen? the problem was Peter's, not his teaching. Paul acknowledged that Peter very well knew the correct teaching (Gal. 2:12-13). The problem was that he wasn't living up to his own tmaintain
If you maintian that Peter did not have any infalibilty, then you must explain how Peter wrote two infallible epistles of the New Testament.
3 comments:
If you maintian that Peter did not have any infalibilty, then you must explain how Peter wrote two infallible epistles of the New Testament.
The same way Paul, Luke, Matthew, Mark, John, Jude, James, and the author of Hebrews wrote their infallible books, and none of them were "Popes".
And if Peter was infallible, why are Peter's other two books (epistle to Philip and his Apocalypse) considered scripture?
Or rather why AREN'T they considered scripture?
Sorry. ;)
Since you refer to Peter, let's let him speak for himself. I'm going to quote 2 Peter Chapter 1 (in the literal - word for word translation from original - it may seem choppy in the english but it's worth the look and consideration).
2 Peter 1
1Simeon Peter, a servant and an apostle of Jesus Christ, to those who did obtain a like precious faith with us in the righteousness of our God and Saviour Jesus Christ:
2Grace to you, and peace be multiplied in the acknowledgement of God and of Jesus our Lord!
3As all things to us His divine power (the things pertaining unto life and piety) hath given, through the acknowledgement of him who did call us through glory and worthiness,
4through which to us the most great and precious promises have been given, that through these ye may become partakers of a divine nature, having escaped from the corruption in the world in desires.
5And this same also -- all diligence having brought in besides, superadd in your faith the worthiness, and in the worthiness the knowledge,
6and in the knowledge the temperance, and in the temperance the endurance, and in the endurance the piety,
7and in the piety the brotherly kindness, and in the brotherly kindness the love;
8for these things being to you and abounding, do make [you] neither inert nor unfruitful in regard to the acknowledging of our Lord Jesus Christ,
9for he with whom these things are not present is blind, dim-sighted, having become forgetful of the cleansing of his old sins;
10wherefore, the rather, brethren, be diligent to make stedfast your calling and choice, for these things doing, ye may never stumble,
11for so, richly shall be superadded to you the entrance into the age-during reign of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.
12Wherefore, I will not be careless always to remind you concerning these things, though, having known them, and having been established in the present truth,
13and I think right, so long as I am in this tabernacle, to stir you up in reminding [you],
14having known that soon is the laying aside of my tabernacle, even as also our Lord Jesus Christ did shew to me,
15and I will be diligent that also at every time ye have, after my outgoing, power to make to yourselves the remembrance of these things.
16For, skilfully devised fables not having followed out, we did make known to you the power and presence of our Lord Jesus Christ, but eye-witnesses having become of his majesty --
17for having received from God the Father honour and glory, such a voice being borne to him by the excellent glory: `This is My Son -- the beloved, in whom I was well pleased;'
18and this voice we -- we did hear, out of heaven borne, being with him in the holy mount.
19And we have more firm the prophetic word, to which we do well giving heed, as to a lamp shining in a dark place, till day may dawn, and a morning star may arise -- in your hearts;
20this first knowing, that no prophecy of the Writing doth come of private exposition,
21for not by will of man did ever prophecy come, but by the Holy Spirit borne on holy men of God spake.
What could he possibly be referring to with the capitalization of the word 'Writing'?
Peter's reference to the prophecy being a light in a dark place directly comes from the OT ... which he considered Scripture. Paul and the other apostles also made the extension from the OT to what was being written through the 'Holy Spirit borne on holy men of God.' as ALL being Scripture.
And you said: If you maintain that Peter did not have any infalibilty, then you must explain how Peter wrote two infallible epistles of the New Testament.
Peter spoke for himself. Since you believe he had infalliblilty, why would you deny the words from his mouth? This seems a very curious issue.
Post a Comment