Debate: Pope and Papal Infallibility (Walter Martin vs Mitch Pacwa)

this evening John Ankerberg will examine the evidence for some of the doctrines taught by the Roman Catholic Church tonight's topic is their evidence that Jesus Christ established the office of Pope over his church the Catholic Church claims that Jesus conferred on Peter and his successors be supreme power in faith and morals over all the other apostles and over every Christian in the church but is this true this doctrine is supposedly based on Matthew 16 where it states thou art Peter and upon this rock I will build my church and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it and I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven and whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth it shall be bound also in heaven and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth it shall be released also in heaven but many Christians reject Roman Catholic interpretation they point out that in the very passage appeal to before Jesus spoke to Peter he had asked his disciples who men were saying that he was Peter replied thou art the Christ the Son of the Living God Jesus agreed with Peter statement and used it to teach that he himself will be the rock the foundation upon which the church will be built for Jesus says thou art Peter Petra the small stone and upon this Petra great massive rock referring to Peters truthful declaration of Christ deity it is upon this truth that Jesus says he will build his church which of these interpretations best fits the scriptural record what did Peter mean when he stated in his own epistle that Jesus was the chief Cornerstone and all other Christians are living stones other questions surrounding the doctrine of the Pope are why are there no snifter verses that teach how the office of Pope is to be transmitted by Peter to his successors why is it that the Apostle Paul never mentions the office of Pope in any of his epistles when he teaches about the offices in the church when Jesus gave Peter the keys to the kingdom doesn't scripture show that Jesus gave the same keys to the other apostles the scripture teach that the keys are the Clara Tory authority to announce the terms on which God will grant salvation are as Roman Catholic speech and absolute power to admit or exclude someone from heaven both sides admit that in the first chapters of Acts Peter exercises the keys to the kingdom by declaring the gospel to both Jews and Gentiles as Jesus said he would but then the other apostles declare the gospel and Peter drops from sight in the scriptural account when Peter does reappear at the Council of Jerusalem why is it that the Apostle James played the church and not Peter tonight you will hear both sides of this question John guests our Father Mitchell taqwa and our danger omen Catholic priest he has an earned doctorate philosophy degree and is currently professor of Old Testament at Loyola University in Chicago John's second guest is dr. Walter Martin director and founder of the Christian Research Institute in California please join us for this discussion [Applause] good evening tonight we're examining the claims and the authority of the specific doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church what is the evidence for their claims and their teachings my first guest is an ordained Roman Catholic priest Father Mitchell Pacwa who is a member of the Society of Jesus a Jesuit he's earned a Doctor of Philosophy degree and is currently a professor of Old Testament at Loyola University in Chicago my second guest is dr. Walter Martin and dr. Martin is director and founder of the Christian Research Institute in California and Walter is the author of many books especially the classic book known by both Protestants and Catholics the kingdom of the cults gentlemen we're glad that you're here tonight I'm reading from the New York Catechism and I'd like to talk about the authority that the Roman Catholic Church says that they have and has taught in many of their documents I'm reading from the New York Catechism which says the Pope takes the place of Jesus Christ on earth by divine right the Pope has supreme and full power in faith and morals over each and every pastor and his flock he is the true Vicar of Christ the head of the entire church the father and teacher of all Christians he is the infallible ruler the founder of dogmas the author of and the judge of counsels the universal ruler of truth the arbiter of the world the supreme judge of heaven and earth the judge of all being judged by no one God himself on earth and this seems to rest on the basis that was stated by Cardinal Gibbons in his book faith of our fathers the short one here the Catholic Church teaches that our Lord conferred on st. Peter the first place of honor and jurisdiction in the government of his whole church and that the same spiritual supremacy has always resided in the Pope's or bishops of Rome as being the successors of st. Peter consequently to be true followers of Christ all Christians both among the clergy and laity must be in communion with see of Rome where Peter rules in the person of his successors the opposite way of saying this would be if anyone says that the Blessed Apostle Peter was not constituted by Christ our Lord Prince of all the Apostles and visible head of all the church militant or that he Peter directly and immediately received from our Lord Jesus Christ a primacy of favor only and that one of true and proper jurisdiction let him be anathema now I know that most of the writings establishing Jesus establishing Peter go back to Matthew chapter 16 and I'd like to start with that tonight Matthew chapter 16 verses 17 through 19 is supposed to prove this doctrine and I would like for you to tell us why you think that this doctrine is proved from this passage or from other verses let's start with that okay the the sense that the church developed in its understanding of that text over time was twofold and near the church on one hand you know as almost every Protestant in the nose there are two words here that you are Petros and honest Petra I'll build my church in the early church the Greek polish and Western Fathers alike both interpreted it in two ways one they said that the rock Peter is the person on which Jesus is building the church and all the times even the same we follow the church like agustin for instance taught that the Petra is his active faith let me read the verse for the people at home so they know we're talking about verse 18 and I'm reading from the Catholic Bible and I say to thee that thou art Peter and upon this rock I will build my church and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it oh well let's see yeah that's that text there is one about Peter being they're called Rock um on one hand even the in early church when they use that distinction between Petra and Petra's you know it's explained in different ways that you know Petra is a noun is feminine and it was just masculinized when changing translating Peters name and degree okay in Aramaic you would be no difference you know it is beyond pick affairs but alka said the NA abhinaya color t ok just plain America and there'll be no distinction in terminology matter of fact the place if you've been on a people in Israel but the place where this takes place says I mean Philippi is a perfect setting for this the statement because behind the city is this solid rock cliff that goes on for approximately mile in either direction stiff enormous and so this is also visual limits here and so we see that this we believe that this person and his active face or we know both are the basis on which Jesus builds his church and it's a principle that we see throughout the Gospels that what Jesus is he makes his apostles especially and the rest of us too so that Jesus is the rock of our salvation to be sure but he makes Peter's Rock Jesus calls himself the Good Shepherd in John chapter 10 but in another commission to Peter which you know when we scripture scholars all of all all different you know brands and colors consider the be that the jola nine version or the same setting a part of Peter where he is called Shepherd so Jesus the Shepherd makes Peter the shepherd boy because he loves you know wants to know anyway what the Peter loves Jesus more than all the rest okay let me stop you there and dr. Martin why don't you get into this well what we're really talking about our differences that persist since Vatican two between classic Roman Catholic theology and Protestant theology Reformation theology and what he's saying I'm well-acquainted with as any scholar and the area would big the problem that we have is that the statements you read before from Cardinal Gibbons and other statements which have been made indicate that it goes far beyond the concept of Peters fate it goes to the actual individual and I think that you'd be the first to admit that residence in Boniface the 8 mm sanctum which Cardinal Manning says and I quote is beyond all doubt and act ex cathedra close quote that's Manning who's an authority allegedly on papal decrees and he says quoting unum sanctum quote we declare affirm define and pronounce it to be necessary to salvation for every human creature to be subject to the Roman pontiff again prized the night I alone despite my unworthiness and the successor of the Apostles following Gibbons The Vicar of Jesus Christ following the Catechism I alone have the mission to guide and direct the bark of Peter successor the apostles I am the way the truth and the life they who are with me are with the church they who are not with me are out of the church close quote now what disturbed the Protestants at this particular Junction is that we are no longer talking about the faith of Peter Peter is a little stone built up into the tabernacle he says to himself what we're dealing with now is a statement of the usurpation of the role of deity and you mentioned before where what Christ was he called the Apostles well Christ was God the apostles were never called God and yet here in this particular statement that we read before John read from given you have the Pope being called a God on earth no he's not a God on earth he's a man and he's a sinner in need of a savior just like all of us and so the principle idea of carrying on the idea of the faith of Peter in the church is one thing but do I give for the supreme see of the man when the man's predecessor Peter it says one person that should know what Jesus meant in Matthew 16 it's got to be Peter and if you go to first Peter Peter chapter 2 specifically says you are built on the chief Cornerstone Jesus Christ he said we're all little stones built up into a spiritual tabernacle Jesus Christ the chief Cornerstone the church universal the church invisible but we're all part of the building and we're built upon the foundation of the apostles and the prophets Jesus Christ chief Cornerstone you admitted before Christ is the rock the foundation the Savior and so forth great if that's true then why is it necessary to transfer titles that belong to Christ to the papacy such as a holy father now calling you Father or me father or somebody else father as a title we both agree is a title but to say Holy Father which is the title reserved uniquely for God himself and to identify that with a man to call him in the Catechism a God on earth this goes in the Protestant mind far contrary to the scriptures than just the idea of Peters faith one of the things about the eating a child God on earth you know as you know in the so called covenant code in the book of Exodus judges in Israel are called God in Hebrew that called Elohim psalm 82:6 not only not only don't know in exodus itself ya know but there wasn't even same word Elohim mmm-hmm and and these are yes that's right another example and they're you know one of the things that you know and I find that in and he were disturbing you know tax but again it's Scripture and it only would be applied to the Pope in his judge and in his role as a judge you know all various issues now for sure the Catholic Church you know looks upon the Pope you know as a successor all Peter not just as at the faith but all of the person and that he has the authority of Peter that goes on from not just being rocked but as it also says you know here in the text so give to you the key to the kingdom of heaven and whatever you singular shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven and so that this person know who then is awesome John cultures of feed the Lambs and she is here to given an authority to loosen to bind in a singular way now the apostles are given the same authority of loosing ambani later on in Matthew 18 and also in John 20 especially in reference to forgiveness of sins because you made a point a moment ago of the singular usage of I will give to you with the keys of the kingdom in Matthew 18 you have a parallel well it's a plural we recycle the fat power to bind and loose which is the case of the kingdom and one of the important aspects of Catholic teaching all of the papacy is that the papacy cannot be seen apart from the College of the bishops that he the Pope even for instance that there are two in the statements by popes that claim for sure claimed by them not by Cardinal manua claimed by the Pope's to be infallible okay the maps of conception of busted virgin which I'm sure we'll get to later and the assumption into heaven or the Blessed Virgin which also get to later note I think we better real the tape back and get to the first one where he committed the error of begging the question and affirmed himself infallible in 1870 which the universal church never recognized he said I am the successor of Peter I am the infallible teacher and they said why and he said because I suspect though I think we better reel the tape back and get to the first one where he committed the error of begging the question and affirmed himself infallible in 1870 which the universal Church never recognized he said I am the successor repeater I am the infallible teacher and they said why and he said because I think so well that's exactly what happened at the same time that it's not that's not all that happened because Cardinal though there was our the other squadrons more Cardinals and other bishops came there ya know craving you know banning himself being one of them a congressman Protestantism eventually got was ordained it became a first Cardinal of England after the restoration of the bishop Rocksteady the bishops have been not allowed to be in England no up until this early 19th century on epochal can I can I come back here if we're going to talk about the keys of the kingdom which we're talking about is no doubt Jesus said the keys to the kingdom but also in in math you find that the Pharisees and the scribes had the keys to the kingdom the other disciples are given the keys to the kingdom I think what the Protestant side of the church's saying is that the the definition of the keys of the kingdom has been overblown and where do you get this these fantastic claims of authority number one to Peter because then you'd have to justify it biblically as well as historically and Protestants reading their Bible a lot of people including Catholics that I've got quotes here read their Bible they don't find Peter being supreme in the scripture text the one we're reading or the one in John why did Jesus three times say to Peter do you love me because it goes back to the fact denied him three times when he was supposed to stand for him now all the scriptures from the time that Jesus you are the rock okay from that point on right immediately Peter turned around and said something wrong and Jesus accused him of being one that was used by Satan sure okay you go on and Peter's affirms later on in Matthew that he's going to stand for Jesus he will be there all the rest will flee and Jesus says no I'll tell you what you're going to deny me three times and he opposes Jesus and says no and then he goes ahead and he does it anyway so instead of people seeing Peter as being supreme in the head of the church Peter blows it one of the things that that I'm glad you brought that up because as I started say before again that supremacy of Peter among the bishops is only possible in the context of all the bishops okay and you see it in the context of the New Testament apostles well that's one of the things that some that we Catholic disagree on in terms of understanding the New Testament first of all I can't think of any text with the Pharisees it's said to have the keys of the kingdom but we get one to you that Matthew chapter 23 in verse 13 you'll find that the scribes and Pharisees exercised the same kind of power but let me we've only got about a minute left here and what we need to do in this week's program is when I talk about the fact of Peter being supreme among the Apostles I find that Paul opposed them to his faith right absolutely okay was he supreme there was either head there at the same time assuring what was wrong and that's one of the things about the papacy I think that you know Protestants misunderstand in terms of infallibility not everything the Pope says is infallible but it really means okay enemies we got just a few seconds but in matters of faith and morals he is and he was immoral and is dealing with the Gentiles and Paul rebuked him on a matter of faith and morals in there only the three conditions for the Pope's and fallibilities conditions of faith and morals we'll have to talk about those three conditions when we come back okay I appreciate that we're going to look into this was Peter given the supremacy among the other apostles we're going to look at the history as well as the scripture concerning the early church next week and so I hope that you'll join us [Applause] that were examining the claims and the authority the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church my first guest is an ordained Roman Catholic priest Father Mitchell Pacwa who's a member of the Society of Jesus a Jesuit he has an earned doctorate philosophy degree and a current is currently a professor of Old Testament law at Loyola University in Chicago my second guest is dr. Walter Martin who is the director and founder of the Christian Research Institute in California and Walter is the author of many books especially the classic book known by both Protestants and Catholics and called the kingdom of the cults and gentlemen we're glad that you're here tonight I wanna move on in our talking about the claim to the Roman Catholic Church concerned this week the infallibility of the Pope and let's actually take a look at this and reading from Vatican Council which met in Rome in 1870 they said we teach and define that it is a dogma divinely reveal that the Roman pontiff when he speaks ex cathedra that is when in discharge of the office of pastor and doctor of all Christians by virtue of his supreme apostolic authority he defines a doctrine regarding faith and morals to be held by the universal Church by the divine assistance promised him in blessed Peter is possessed of that infallibility with which the divine Redeemer willed that his church should be endowed for defining doctrines regarding faith and morals and that therefore such definitions of the Roman pontiff of themselves and not by virtue of the consent of the church are Erie formable now we need to keep coming back for evidence many in the Roman Catholic Church take it for granted that's true but there are others that do not and father Pacwa I'd like you to comment about the fact of if Jesus gave us supremacy to Peter how do you deal with Paul because let me give you a few facts about Paul in relationship to Peter I like you to comment if you would please Peter has no say in Paul's appointment there are 13 epistles that Paul 200 2023 versus Peter only wrote two epistles and 166 verses Paul mentioned Peter more than once but he never mentioned him with any special title of honor such as the vicar or Pope or above any of the other apostles Paul did not mention the papacy when he referred to the offices of the church in first Corinthians 12 in Ephesians 4 Paul is an apostle claimed authority over the Roman Church itself in Romans chapter 1 5 through 6 and 1617 Paul claimed for himself that he was behind the very chiefest apostles in nothing 2nd Corinthians 12 and that then specifically have Paul rebuking Peter without any mention of Peters supremacy in Galatians 2 now Peter was the chief it would seem that Paul would have acknowledged that in his epistles and would have acknowledged it in the respect he gave when there was a matter of doctrine on the table we see none of that for Peter first of all what you have in Hall and Peter's dispute in Galatians again is not a dispute about some infallible statement by Peter okay what I don't is bought his own practice okay on something that already had been decided by the church now Catholics do not say that we can't tell the Pope to live up to certain things in his own life there's a matter of fact Dante you know when in this inferno mentions that a number of popes are in Hell for various reasons and you know remember eNOS that you said that I didn't that's right why not say it I would know that they're held on so he says and in the thing that no that the Pope's infallibility does not mean is that the Pope is right all the time in no way does the Catholic Church even teach that he's infallible only when he speaks ex cathedra in order to clearly speak infallibly he has to say that explicitly they speaking infallibly secondly it has to be to the whole church not to one part or one individual the church but to everybody in the church and thirdly it has to be on the issue of faith and morals he cannot infallibly say that the stock market okay you you can you continue to tell me about the fact of what he speaks what I'm saying the word supreme seems to also mean more than just what he speaks there ought to be the respect there ought to be the dignity the honor the mention of the fact of his office by all the others apostles and we see none of that there's it's silent dead silence in the New Testament I read God well I don't and again I don't think that it is it is not dead silent okay again even with all anywhere it is Paul does not call him Simon bar Jonah doesn't what is he calling Peter Kepler Peter Peter kept us of people and is that which is a title given him what is his rock not his given name and he has to refer to him as Simon ever but always calls him by killing and even in Corinthians that we're dealing with is a specific problem of people having been divisive on account of Peter and later on in the next generation about thirty five years later you're going to see lies more than that from Corinthians about forty five years later we'll see that it'll be the Bishop of Rome Saint Clement the first who is that the second after Peter and Paul who will be correcting the same church because of division they never learned and so it's a but Rome that takes that authority in 95 AD before the New Testament is finished being written and he's the one that tells them to eat sense legis over there to Corinth and since you Corinthians get United with your priest again and he's orders his leg it's not to come back home until they're united so he takes that authority in the very next generation as the role of Peter to bring unity to the church I want to quote Vatican 2 John okay come back to that I can one I mean come back to that in the flesh but I'd like for you to put the other side of the fence I said that there was a hypotheses that father Pacwa is using namely that in referring to Peter which we all agree a small rock and that there's a differentiation between the other rock there is something different not referring to Peter because of the way it's written all right what would be another option that would seem to fit this evidence better from your point of view would you please explain this we get it on the table and I will take a gut to the physician all right a very great theologian that Peters confession of faith thou art the Christ the Son of the Living God is the fact and that it's not Peter cross referencing at the first Peter chapter 2 Peter didn't understand it to refer to him he put himself in with all the rest of the little stones built up into the spiritual house Jesus Christ being the chief Cornerstone seasons 2:20 says were built upon the foundation of the apostles and the prophets Jesus Christ the chief Cornerstone quote scripture behold I lay in Zion a cornerstone a rock of offense whoever believes on him and I paid it Christ will not be ashamed that Peter was a moving force a chief apostle in the church there's no doubt whatsoever that his writings were authoritative and they were accepted as such that he recommended Paul's writings as Scripture even calling it Scripture equating it with the Old Testament is indicative of the fact that they agreed in their basic theology well since they agreed in their basic theology the facts fit the hypotheses that the whole structure of the New Testament and the first five centuries following that historically did not give any supreme role - the Bishop of Rome okay I gotta want you to go on and let's get into a definition of the keys okay father clock was defined how the Roman Catholic Church sees the keys and would you give another hypothesis for that yes the alternative to that is the parallel passage of Matthew 18 with which he is well acquainted also and mentioned it before namely that Christ was speaking to the disciples not to Peter and the Apostles in general and he said if any two of you shall agree on anything on earth it will have been done in heaven mister bind on earth bound in heaven now the keys of the kingdom were the power to bind and loose Peter had that power but it wasn't Peters power alone Matthew 18 gives that power to you and to me to pray together that we might bind or loose so I take that to be the alternative proposition would you say the line had loosing a tzaddik Latorre power and not one of supremacy yeah I think it's a right to declare something by faith and I think Peter had that right but if he was really the Supreme Pontiff of the church this is a very strong point I think then the disciples of the Apostles the men who went into the second century the great theologians at that time would surely have recognized the primacy role and I didn't it was really the Supreme Pontiff of the church this is a very strong point I think then the disciples of the Apostles the men who went into the second century the great theologians at that time would surely have recognized the primacy of Rome and they didn't say father Frank would you respond to that hypothesis why do you think that the evidence of the New Testament does not fit that hypothesis first of all you know that when Jesus is speaking in Matthew 18 he's not speaking to the crowds but to the apostles and so that you know it's not just we who have that same authority except in a derive sense with the Apostles and their successors of the ships along with the successor Peter have that authority to make decisions that we don't for instance decisions like what goes into the New Testament that was not made by the New Testament it was made by the bishops they chose which books were to be canonical the laypeople didn't do it except in that secondary sense the bishops were the ones who is a trolley Taurus that is the ones who carried on the tradition as to which books derived from Paul Peter James on the others and then finally in counsels and another of the council you know decided which ones would not we now have the 27 and really was not until Pope Damasus the first in you know in giving authority to the councils of cartridge and hippo in the end of the fourth century beginning of the fifth so that that we had the first time 27 books of the New Testament before that we have 22 books so that the authority of the New Testament derives from these bishops and to the Pope to an authority which Protestants knew continue to accept as their own basic support these gray whatsoever in acts there's a severe fallacy in the reasoning mm-hmm in order to establish what you just said you must assume that there is a papacy with the power to do that yes well I deny the assumption yes so so legal is reality only if I accept your some right you cannot not remember right just as it's a fallacy that's right good point Zoe's we're stuck in one important area that I think we can get out of pretty quickly yeah this is it at Vatican one which was the cornerstone of all the power of the contemporary papacy we know that because it was then at Vatican 1 which John just read that the statement was clearly defined for the first time in history sure that this was the position ok now when I was done at Vatican 1 on July 13 1870 an argument was raised on the floor voted on by eighteen bishops supporting it and this is what was stated historically if I may quote well venerable brethren history raises its voice to assure us that popes have heard you may protest against it or deny it as you please I'll prove it Pope Victor and 192 first approved of monism and then condemned it Marcellinus was an idolatry he entered the Temple of Vesta and offered incense to the goddess you will say that it was an act of weakness but I answer a vicar of Jesus Christ dies rather than become an apostate Liberia's consented to the condemnation of Athanasius and made a profession of Arianism that he might be recalled from his exile and reinstated in the holy seat hilarious that adhered to monophyletic monolithic ISM father Gregory has proved that to demonstration Gregory the first called anyone Antichrist who takes the name Universal bishop and Boniface the third made the patricide Emperor focus confer the title upon him Pascal the second and Eugenia is the third authorized dueling julius ii and pius the fourth forbid it you genius the fourth to prove the council of basel and the reinstitution of the chalice of the church of bohemia pious ii revoked the concession kg in the second declared civil marriages to be valid pius the seventh condemned them six is the fifth published an edition of the Bible and by a ball recommended to be read pious the seven condemned the reading of climate xiv abolish the order of the Jesuits that's you he died universal church bye-bye okay you're out permitted by Paul the third in Pius the seventh put you boys back in business hope the Julius purchased the papacy from Belisarius lieutenant to the Emperor of Justinian is unions to third number four in the original imitated virgilius bernard st. bernard the bright star of the reformation says quote can you show me in this great city of rome anyone who would receive you as pope if they had not received gold or silver forked close quote let me finish the statement is important you know the history of foremost is too well for me to add to it but you will tell me these are fables not history fables goldman's and yuri to the Vatican Library and read Platina the historian to the papacy in the annals of burliest these are facts which for the honour of the Holy See we would wish to ignore Cardinal Baroni is speaking of the papal court said what did the Roman Church appear in those days how infamous only in all powerful courtesans governing in Rome it was they who gave exchange into fish' pricks and horrible to relate got their lovers the false popes put on the thrones of st. Peter okay we got a call called an end to it here Walter we need a statement for father Pacwa here what do you have to say concerning these things well this be an archbishop I know I know an indexical we don't deny it at all you know again that's the basis on which Dante said some of these folks are going to be in hell so in it we infallibility does not mean justification no what I hear you saying is that all the statements of the Pope's made that are proven wrong they're not infallible right and also you don't need to be criteria from Yale ability and the fact is that in spite of the fact that Peter is supposed to be supreme not just in the fact of what he said but supposedly recognized as such the head of the church the leader when he speaks they ought to be some respect and listening okay and you would expect that he would be leading in some other areas as well we still have yet established the fact that you find that in Scripture you still have yet to discount the fact that the other hostels were given the same ability you still have yet to discount the fact that Paul in looking at Peter never mentions it never writes to him mentioning the fact that he's the head of the church and well I don't know well let's see there's a problem with your honor on and on is that you know you don't accept you know that the Catholic no understanding of what you know pointing out of all the data where Peter is the head as a matter of fact as dr. Martin himself said that Peter clearly takes the dynamic leadership of the church after the Ascension of Jesus for three chapters and then in King V there is an chapter 10 but in chapter 10 disputing what the people are there they don't show them the honor that you're talking about it no no no no you're the one that keeps on saying that supremacy means that everything you say is going to be on I'm not saying I'm they don't say that I'm saying the respect if the Pope were to walk into the door he should have the final word in an argument why we said that Jesus doesn't say that we want to say the G pray means first that's worth it doesn't mean in terms of you know the way that it's going to be enacted that he's going to have that you're defining it as a straw man and then saying we don't have it we never said that that's what it means just what I need is praying formula when it what it means is that when he speaks to the whole church in the name of Peter and on faith and morals that that is infallible but he's not the head then of the Apostles he's the head of the church as well in terms of you know being the head of the what does that mean how would they recognize it from the examples that are given in Scripture well in terms of the examples in Scripture his choosing of a replacement for Matthias is being the first one to to go and lead John Callahan's on the Samaritans because down by the church to do that sure and he came back and they didn't just accept his word they argued with him so I don't see them being the head again his headship does not come from them and their approval but they think it comes from the fact that Jesus is the one who reveals he has an option he should so what you're saying is that they mad at my church didn't recognize it but he still had it absolutely because it comes from Christ not from the church but that's one why but they are said to be alcoholic the design looks foul and through is that he had it but they didn't recognize it why didn't they recognize it if they were all there I mean Jesus never told anybody else you only told Peter and Peter never mentioned this in terms of recognizing things did they recognize the existence of the New Testament yet no did they recognize the definition of the Trinity you know did they recognize the two nature's of Christ no in terms of later we could talk about today know lots of things they don't recognize ya blanking but over time they recognize that Jesus was God yes did that go into the Caledonian and Nicean councils yes there's a basis there I'm saying I don't see any faces well okay you don't accept you know the evidence that we accept I don't see any evidence as well sorry but you don't see that Christ gives Peter this vision oh my god - Elia I see that he got that and I see Paul got others and the other apostles got that but I'm thrilled huh who got it first okay and who got it by vision first that's why we would say the keys to the kingdom are the decolletage power which Peter exercised and then the other apostles also went and exercised it as well and at all it means and we also know it's not all that means one of the things that also the we see develop in the history of the church just like we see the development of the Christological and Trinitarian doctors is that Peters role among the other Rose nyl appositives we don't deny that the other bishops the successes of the College of apostles have authority to bind and loose we don't deny that at all they do and in in local areas they have authority that the Pope does not have in their diocese they can make rules in the diocese apart from the public space can apart from the federal time dr. mark we know a final word from you here because we're out of time let me summarize what I hear you saying oh you're saying that the church there did not recognize Peter as head Peter had that headship from Jesus right okay and I really amazing again say that well first of all I didn't I didn't say that they didn't recognize a head there's not that full blown you know you know kind of description of supremacy and headship that you would like to have it described and also that don't blame on the carry and he has an authority that comes from Jesus you know in Matthew 16 Luke 22 and x10 it's got to be proved that that's the kind of authority we quickly agree that it's a declaratory we see one example of that and peter fades that's the record he fades in terms of the history actually possible because look whatever he was the head Church you would think that he would actually be the head of he would be focused on all through acts we find three champine turns the Paul house because he's the head of the church the sole key point he's the chief representative according to Rome of Jesus Christ on earth right but what and he neck already mentioned why and is it why is a head of the church Jesus already said it what you have to talk about all the time just do it yeah that's why I keep saying that the appeal of the father's the appeal of the father's is not to the tradition of the church and not to the arguments that were aroused and carried on vigorously amongst themselves all of them when they appeal its script torresola they're appealing to scripture scripture scripture and what John's saying what I'm saying is this if you want to believe that the church made the scripture okay you have a problem because the Caragh mob which was the preaching of the gospel was not inscripturated totally until the close of the first century that's no that's not a problem that's Ranka no opposite yeah well no I don't think it is a strength because the father's reproduce the entire New Testament virtually themselves in the next three centuries except the fathers except for such with the exception of putting six verses about six verses that's the father's if you had no church supervising the through the Magisterium the teaching ministry the gathering together the information putting it together you still have the different fathers and different locations all writing all reproducing the teachings of the Apostles you put it all together and they knew that they had from their own specific references their own teachers they knew that they had the Gospels right mm-hmm they knew they had the book of Acts right mm-hmm so they subjected everything to the Canon of the Gospels and acts to test the epistles that's how they arrived at the information it wasn't somewhere down the line at the Year 400 364

Channel: Veritas Dipolog

Views: 8,491

Rating: 4.8016529 out of 5

Keywords: Papacy, Pope, Head, Santo Papa, Roman Catholic, church, Debate

Id: dthCSnxVlhQ

Length: 42min 51sec (2571 seconds)

Published: Thu Apr 27 2017