I know what you mean. But still, this statement is of a nature that we've not seen before. It needs to be publicized, especially among Reformed circles.
I agree John, it is important to notice these things and this is an important one, I recognize that. It is also important to bring them accountable to what the Roman Church syas, although they say a lot of things all the time.
Sorry if my reaction seemed like I was not valuing it. I just don't think they will draw the conclusionjs they should out of it. So I don't expect any significant change to occur because of this.
How many Popes speaking ex-cathedra contradicted themselves? And the alleged infallibility self- attesting office of the Papacy stands,
even more, all those papal writings are official doctrine of the roman church, no matter if the contradiction by a more recent pope should in fact make proof of plain false prophecy / false teaching of the one former pope refuted.
It's a bloody mess.
And this Petrine void is very likely a Trojan horse to admit an opening of the Roman Church towards other Churches, this without changing a single bit on their hierarchy.
Because without their hierarchy, I give them that, the building would fall down like a castle of cards.
It is the Vatican and the Papacy that keep all their religious confusion glued by some sort of identity – unity.
---------- Post added at 04:25 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:21 PM ----------
And, perhaps, quoted in the context of Catholic apologetics?
Skyler, I agree, one now can / should tell a Roman Catholic : look for centuries you've been telling us you're sure the Pope sits on Peter's Chair, and that's the source of his authority, so now what?
But we have a sure foundation as expressed in Ephesians, the Church, the True Church, that is, rests on the foundation of the prophets and apostles God's given Revelation !
The pope does not sit on Peters chair.Regarding Matthew 16:18 "And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."
Roman Catholics incorrectly use this passage to verify the scriptural basis of Apostolic succession.
The biblically correct and whole meaning of the passage is this: "I will make you the honored instrument of making known my gospel first to Jews and Gentiles, and I will make you a firm and distinguished preacher in building my church."
This is the obvious meaning of the passage; and had it not been that the Church of Rome has abused it, and applied it to what was never intended, no other interpretation would have been sought for. "Thou art a rock. Thou hast shown thyself firm, and suitable for the work of laying the foundation of the church. Upon thee will I build it. Thou shalt be highly honored; thou shalt be first in making known the gospel to both Jews and Gentiles." This was accomplished. See Acts 2:14-36, where he first preached to the Jews, and Acts 10, where he preached the gospel to Cornelius and his neighbors, who were Gentiles. Peter had thus the honor of laying the foundation of the church among the Jews and Gentiles; and this is the plain meaning of this passage. See also Galatians 2:9. But Christ did not mean, as the Roman Catholics say he did, to exalt Peter to supreme authority above all the other apostles, or to say that he was the only one upon whom he would rear his church. See Acts 15, where the advice of James, and not that of Peter, was followed. See also Galatians 2:11, where Paul withstood Peter to his face, because he was to be blamed - a thing which could not have happened if Christ (as the Roman Catholics say) meant that Peter was absolute and infallible. More than all, it is not said here, or anywhere else in the Bible, that Peter would have infallible successors who would be the vicegerents of Christ and the head of the church.
By the doctrine of apostolic succession the Roman Catholic Church asserts its claim of an uninterrupted and continuous line of succession extending from the twelve apostles through the bishops they ordained right up to the bishops of the present day.
Apostolicity is the mark by which the Church of today is recognized as identical with the Church founded by Jesus Christ upon the Apostles. It is of great importance because it is the surest indication of the true Church of Christ, it is most easily examined, and it virtually contains the other three marks, namely, Unity, Sanctity, and Catholicity.
Apostolicity of mission is a guarantee of Apostolicity of doctrine. Much Roman catholic doctrine is not able to be identified as Apostolicity by standards of scripture.
Protestants have reacted strongly against the doctrine of apostolic succession. They have done so in a number of ways, historical and theological. One of these ways is by affirming the apostolicity of the church.
Apostolicity may be defined as receiving and obeying apostolic doctrine as it is set forth in the New Testament. In matters of doctrine and life, Protestants permit no ultimate appeal to traditions that are distinct from canonical Scripture.
For example, the Westminster Confession of Faith 1.10 says this:
The supreme judge by which all controversies of religion are to be determined, and all decrees of councils, opinions of ancient writers, doctrines of men, and private spirits, are to be examined, and in whose sentence we are to rest, can be no other but the Holy Spirit speaking in the Scripture.
Absolutely no provision is made for an authoritative, unwritten tradition. In fact, it is to the touchstone of Scripture that all traditions, including those of Roman Catholicism, must be brought.
Protestants have correctly observed that it is the appeal to Tradition that has made possible many doctrines and practices of Roman Catholicism that have no basis in Scripture. These include (to name only a handful) the papacy, papal infallibility, purgatory, the mass, the immaculate conception, and the assumption of Mary.
---------- Post added at 01:35 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:16 AM ----------
And, perhaps, quoted in the context of Catholic apologetics?
Jonathan....Roman catholic apologetics and rc theologians will use the following from John to argue the authority of the rc church. "We belong to God, and anyone who knows God listens to us, while anyone who does not belong to God refuses to hear us. This is how we know the spirit of truth and the spirit of deceit." 1 John 4:6
Anyone who does not belong to God does not listen to us? That is a very powerful statement. This is how we know the spirit of truth and deceit? What does this say about those who founded the Protestant movement and perpetuates it today? At what point do we realize the problems with the Protestant movement? No man can find salvation on his own through the Bible. There is not a "to do" list for salvation. There is so much more to Faith that what is in the Bible.
I would agree with John in his verse above but as a Protestant I also believe that the problem with roman Catholicism is that the roman church by 1600 had moved so far from the truth that she became a crafty lie of Satan himself. The devil is the master of deceit. He will make the truth look like a lie and the lie look like a truth. Calvin, Knox and Zwingli truly reformed the corrupted roman papist church which had become the bride of Satan and the “Whore of Babylon” . They went beyond Luther who only pruned the branches of its cancer and corruption. They , Calvin Knox and Zwingli restored the true church of Christ and we follow the reformed confessions as our guide to interpreting scripture the only true source of authority. I also left the roman catholic church and faith because I saw the current pope , Joseph RATzinger returning to the corruptions of a Pre Vatican II mentality.
I follow the Westminster Confession as my guide to church life and scripture and doctrine. I am proud to be a Reformed Protestant and I openly renounce Roman Catholicism and her pope as did the reformers.
