The Bible Disproves the Papacy
This is a response to the book, "The Bible Proves the Teaching of the Catholic Church," by Peter Dimond; specifically, the chapter called "The Bible Teaches that Jesus Made St. Peter the First Pope." Peter Dimond is a Sedevacantist monk.This is also a response to Roman Catholicism in general.
In order for Sedevecantism to be true, papalism must be true; in order for papalism to be true, it must be supported by Scripture. The fact of the matter is that the Bible does not teach papalism as it is understood by the First Vatican Council and the Roman Catholic Church. In order for papalism to be true, all of the fathers must have had the same pro-papal understanding and interpretations of the Bible from the very beginning; there would be a consistency. The Bible disproves the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church. Feel free to use this information as part of your arsenal against Roman Catholics, and please share. This is not an exhaustive treatment. Many times I reference Ante-Nicene church fathers and use the phrase "doesn't support." This means that the fathers do not interpret biblical passages the way Peter Dimond did. Dimond interprets Bible verses like a Protestant who believes in Sola Scriptura, which is odd.
EPHESIANS 2:20-22 (Inconsistent with Papalism)
"And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone; In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord: In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.
In the above verse, St. Peter is not singled out as a pope.
1 CORINTHIANS 3:11 (Inconsistent with Papalism)
"For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ."
"Paul gave to the Corinthians this lesson, because among them many attached themselves to the preachers of the Gospel, as though they had been the corner-stone of the Church." (Guettee, The Papacy, p. 33). According to St. Paul, the Apostle Peter was not considered the corner-stone of the Church, as the first vicar of Christ, any more than himself or Apollos.
1 CORINTHIANS 3:4 (Inconsistent with Papalism)
"For while one saith, I am of Paul; and another, I am of Apollos; are ye not carnal?"
If papalism were true, this would have been the perfect place for Paul to mention it by reminding everyone we are all of Peter and his successors.
Novation referenced chapter 3, but makes no pro-papal, or pro-petrine comments. (Treatise Concerning the Trinity, chap. 27).
Origen may have referenced chapter 3, but makes no pro-papal or pro-petrine comments. (Origen De Principiis chap. 1:18).
Tertullian may have referenced chapter 3, but makes no pro-papal or pro-petrine comments. (On Baptism, chap. 14).
1 CORINTHIANS 1:12 (Inconsistent with Papalism)
"Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ."
If papalism were true, this would have been the perfect opportunity for Paul to remind everyone that we are all of Peter and his successors.
Tertullian referenced this passage, but didn't emphasize Peter. (On Baptism, chap. 14).
Origen referenced this passage, but didn't emphasize Peter. (Commentary On Matthew, Book 14, chap. 1).
1 TIMOTHY 3:15 (Inconsistent with Papalism)
"But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth."
The church, not St. Peter or popes, is the pillar and ground of the truth.
1PETER 5:4 (Inconsistent with Papalism)
"And when the chief Shepherd shall appear, ye shall receive a crown of glory that fadeth not away."
St. Peter knew of only one chief shepherd, Jesus Christ.
"He that heareth you heareth me; and he that despiseth you despiseth me; and he that despiseth me despiseth him that sent me."
To them he says "Receive ye the Holy Ghost." (John 20:22).
JOHN 20:22-23 (Inconsistent with Papalism)
"Receive ye the Holy Ghost: Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained."
This power had been previously given to St. Peter, and in the same terms.
Dimond and other Roman Catholics make much about this verse, and claim that St. Peter alone received the keys, and is the rock of the church.
St. Peter was not called the rock of the Church to the exclusion of the other apostles.
Jesus is the stone designated by the prophets (Matt. 21:42; Luke 20:17-18). St. Paul said Jesus was that rock (1Cor. 10:4). St. Peter says the same (1Peter 2:7, 8).
17 Fathers interpreted this text to mean the Church is built on St. Peter. (Denny, Papalism, p. 29).
8 Fathers interpreted it to mean the rock on which the Church is built signifies all the Apostles. (Papalism, p. 30).
16 Fathers said Jesus was the rock of this passage. (Papalism, 32).
A fifth interpretation is that the rock is the faithful themselves. (Papalism, p. 34).
Some Fathers embrace different interpretations in these words. If papalism were true, they would be unanimous.
Augustine's Retractions say Christ is the rock. (P.L. 33: 618).
The first reference to the papalist interpretation is found in a Bishop of Rome, written to Himerius, Bishop of Tarragona in Spain, in 385, by Siricius. (Mansi, 3. 655; Papalism, p. 36).
None of the Greek Fathers of the first 6 centuries connect the position of the Bishop of Rome with the promise to St. Peter. (Bp. Gore, Roman Catholic Claims, p. 91, 4th edit).
Even if papalist interpretation be granted, it does not follow that Peter's successors have the same authority.
44 Fathers interpretation is that the rock is the faith Peter confessed. (Papalism, 30, 31). Including SS. Gregory of Nyssa, Cyril of Alexandria, Chrysostom, Theodoret and Theophylact. Among westerners: Hilary, Ambrose, Augustine, and Gregory the Great. -- this view is adopted by two liturgies, one eastern and one western. The eastern is the liturgy of St. James. (Papalism, 32).,
In the Old Testament rock signifies God. (Deut. 32: 18 2 Sam. 22: 2, 3, 32. Psalm 31: 2, 3.
Pope Pius IV, authorized by Trent (Tridentini Council, session 24. c.12) Stated:
"I also admit Holy Scripture according to that sense which Holy Mother Church has held and does hold, to whom it belongs to judge of the true sense and interpretation of the Holy Scriptures, neither will I ever take and interpret them otherwise than according to (juxta) the unanimous consent of the Fathers." (Papalism, 42).
Roman Catholics have most certainly interpreted the Bible contrary to the Fathers.
The Council of Trent also appealed to the unanimous consent of the Fathers for interpreting Scripture. (Council, Vatican session 3, cap. 2. Dr Revelatione, Collectio Lacensis, 7. p. 251).
Most of the Church Fathers interpret the rock to be Jesus or to faith in his divinity. (St. Hilary of Poitiers, The Trinity, sixth book, St. Gregory of Nyssa, Advent of Our Lord, St. Ambrose, book 6, on chapter 9, og St the 16th chapter of Matthew, St. John Chrysostom, homilies 55 and 88 upon St. Matthew, and 1st chapter Epistle to the Galatians; St. Augustine, Tract 7 and 123 upon St. John, 18th sermon upon the words of the Lord, taken from St. Matthew, 1st Book of Retractions; Acacius, homily pronounced at the Council of Ephesus; St. Cyril of Alexandria, 4th book upon Isaiah, 4th book of the Trinity; St. Leo I., Sermons 2d and 3d, upon his elevation to the episcopate, sermon upon the Transfiguration of our Lord, sermon 2d upon the nativity of the apostles Peter and Paul; St. Gregory the Great, 3d book, 33d epistle; St. John Damascene Upon the Transfiguration This tradition was preserved in the west until the 16th century (Guettee, The Papacy, p. 39). Proof is supplied in Jonas of Orleans, 3d book on the worship of images; Hincmar of Rheims, 33d essay; Pope Nicholas 1, 6th letter to Photius; Odo of Cluny, sermon upon the see of St. Peter; Rupert, 3d book upon St. Matthew and 12th book upon the Apocalypse; Thomas Aquinas, supplement Q. 25, art. 1; Anselm, upon the 16th chapter of St. Matthew; Eckius, 2d book of the primacy of St. Peter; Cardinal de Cusa, Catholic Concordance, 2d book, chapters 18 and 19.
Alphonsus Tostatus: "What is that rock upon which the church is founded? Some say this rock is Peter, but it is not true that the Church us built upon Peter, for that upon which it is built is the foundation. And thus Peter would be called the foundation of the church: but it is false, for Christ alone is the foundation...Peter is a member and not head nor foundation of the church..." (Abulensis, Opera, tom. 21. p. 304. Ed. Venet, 1728).
Dionysius the Carthusian gives 2 interpretations: "And upon this rock, that is, upon the firmness and foundation of his faith (i.e. upon that of Peter), or upon this rock which thou hast confessed, that is, myself, the chief cornerstone, the lofty mountain of which the Apostle says other foundation can no man lay, etc." (Carthus. in Quat. Evangel-Enar., fol. 70. Ed. 1533.
St. Jerome: "The Rock is Christ, who granted to His Apostles that they may be called rocks." (P.L. 10. 1065.).
Pacian viewed the words of Jesus in Matthew 16 as addressed in common to all the Apostles, and not to Peter and his successors in the Roman Episcopate alone. Peter was addressed as their representative. His view is the same as St. Cyprian. (Vide infra, n-571.
Pacian: [The Bishops] "sit in the chair of the Apostles." P.L. 13. 1057. (The chair is singular).
St. Cyril does not connect the words of Matthew with the bishops of Rome. The Rock is the immovable and stable faith. (P.G. 85. 865). The Rock is the unshaken faith of Apostle. (P.G. 70. 940).
Cyril also said Christ was the Rock. (P.G. 70. 722). He gave three different interpretations.
St. Irenaeus said Christ was the rock. (Fragments from the Lost Sayings of Irenaeus, 52).
Cyril said the Apostles are the foundations after Christ of the universal church. (P.G. 70. 1209). Notice, the Apostolate, not Peter is the foundation.
Cyril said Peter and John were of equal rank. (P.G. 77. 1120). Totally inconsistent with papalism.
Origen: "If you think that the whole church is built by God upon Peter alone, what would you say about John the son of thunder or each one of the Apostles"...Are the keys of the kingdom of heaven given by the Lord to Peter alone, and shall none other of the blessed men receive them?" (P.G. 13. 1000, 1001 <-- See).
Origen: "If we say it as Peter, not by flesh and blood revealing it unto us, but by the light of the Father in heaven shining in our heart, we to become as Peter, being pronounced blessed as he was...the grounds on which he was blessed apply to us...we become a Peter...for a rock is every disciple of Christ of whom those drank who drank of the spiritual rock which followed them and upon every such rock is built every word of the church..." (Commentary On Matthew, Book 12:10). I recommend his whole Commentary on Matthew.
The Clementine Homilies mentioned, but didn't support Dimond's interpretation. (chap. 17).
The First Epistle of Zephyrinus (A.D. 201) is a forgery and part of the False Decretals of the ninth century. (Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 8, p. 609--footnote).
St. Augustine: "For the keys not one man but the unity of the church received." Keys were given to all. (P.L. 38., 1349). And Peter represented the whole church (ibid).
Augustine: The whole church binds and looses. (P.L. 35. 1974. 1977 <-- See).
Augustine: "Peter appears in many places of Scripture because he personates the church, especially in the place where it is said, "I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven." Whether, then, did Peter receive the keys and Paul not? Did Peter receive them, and did not John and James receive them?...Peter represented the person of the church, that which was given to him alone was given to the church. Peter therefore represented the church, the church is the Body of Christ." (P.L. 38. 802).
The symbolical character was also held by St. Cyprian. (Denny, Papalism, p. 60).
St. Jerome: "All receive the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and the solidity of the church is established equally upon all." (P.L. 23. 247). This statement totally contradicts Peter Dimond and other Roman Catholics who claims the keys were given to Peter alone.
St. Ambrose: "What was said to Peter is said to the Apostles. (P.L. 14. 1037).
St. Theophylact: "They who have obtained the grace of the Episcopate as Peter had have authority to remit and bind, for though, "I will give thee" was spoken to Peter alone, yet the gift has been given to all the Apostles..." (P.L. 123. 320).
St. Gaudentius of Brescia: "All the Apostles when Christ rises receive the keys as Peter, nay rather, they receive the keys of the kingdom of heaven with Peter when He saith Receive the Holy Ghost, whosoever sins ye remit they are remitted." (P.L. 20. 959).
Venerable Bede: "And I will give to thee the keys. This power without doubt is given to all the Apostles to whom by him after the Resurrection is said generally, Receive the Holy Ghost; to the Bishops also and the Presbyters, and to the whole church, the same office is committed." (P.L. 92. 79).
St. John Chrysostom: "He handed him the keys" ((Hom. 54). He interprets the Rock, not of Peter, but of "the faith of his confession."
Alphonsus Tostatus: "The keys were given to the whole church..." (Denny, Papalism, p. 64).
Council of Basle: "...Peter, who received the keys, according to Augustine, signified the church..." (Denny, Papalism, p. 64).
St. Ambrose: "All we Bishops have in Peter received the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven." (P.L. 17 569).
Council of Compiegne: [The Bishops are] "the key-bearers of the Kingdom of Heaven." (Mansi 1, 14. 647).
Augustine: "What was commended to Peter, what was enjoined to Peter, not Peter alone, but also all the other Apostles heard and held preserved..." (P.L. 38. 1354).
St. Jerome: "Christ was the Rock, and He bestowed it upon the Apostles that they should be called Rocks." (P.L. 10. 1065).
St. Basil:..."And conferring on all pastors and teachers thence forward the same equal authority, it is a sign that all in like manner bind and loose." (P.G. 31. 1410).
St. Jerome: The Apostolic college are called rocks. (See: P.L. 10. 1065).
St. John Chrysostom: "For He that has built His Church upon Peter's confession." (P.G. 58, 711).
St. John Chrysostom: (John) is "the pillar of the churches throughout the world, who hath the keys of the kingdom of heaven." (P.G. 59. 25).
MATTHEW 28:20 (Inconsistent with Papalism)
"And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age."
Jesus is with all the apostles collectively until the end of the world. Papalists reject the abiding of the Apostolate.
JOHN 20:21-23 (Inconsistent with Papalism)
"Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you. And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost: Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained."
Jesus gave to the apostles collectively the prerogatives he had given to St. Peter. Jesus spoke to Peter as representing his colleagues, as being a type of the apostolic body. (The view of Origen, upon St. Matthew; St. Cyprian, Of the Unity of the Church; St. Augustine, Tracts 50 and 118 upon St. John, sermon 205 upon the Nativity of the Apostles Peter and Paul; St. Ambrose upon 88th Psalm; St. Pacian, 3d letter to Sempronius).
GALATIANS 2:7, 8, 9 (Inconsistent with Papalism)
St. Paul ascribed to himself among the gentiles the same power St. Peter had among the Jews, and he did not regard Peter as superior to James and John, whom he calls, like Peter, pillars of the Church. He even withstood Peter to his face.
Tertullian mentions Cornelius, but doesn't support Dimond's view, (On Fasting, chap 8). The same with St. Cyprian. (Treatises 4:30).
ACTS 15 (The Council of Jerusalem)
Roman Catholics like to claim that Peter held the chief place in the Jerusalem Council, St. John Chrysostom disagrees.
St. John Chrysostom: "There was no arrogance in the church. After Peter, Paul speaks and none silences him; James waits patiently and does not start up. Great is the orderliness. No word speaks John here; no word the other Apostles, but held their peace, for he was invested with the chief rule and they think it no hardship...Peter indeed spoke more strongly, but James here more mildly, for thus it behooves the one high in authority to leave what is unpleasant for others to say while he himself appears in the milder part...wherefore said he, my sentence is not to trouble them which from the Gentiles do turn unto God...and he says well with authority, My sentence is." (Hom. 33., in Act. App. e. 2. On the text used by Bishop Gore, who's translation is here given (Roman Catholic Claims. Preface to third edition, p. 15), see note 8.
James acted as the veritable president of the assembly. James gave the sentence. (verse 19). Peter spoke, but in his term as a simple member.
Hesychius, presbyter of Jerusalem: (of James): "How shall I praise the servant and brother of Christ, the chief captain of the New Jerusalem, the chief of the priests, the exarch of the Apostles, the corypheus amongst the heads, the one who surpasses in splendor the lights, who is superior amongst the stars." P.G. 93. 179).
Hesychius: " Peter harangues, but James legislates, a few words settled the greatness of the inquiry,"I decide that we trouble not those who are of the Gentiles." (P.G. 93. 1480).
J.B. Lightfoot: "...James, not Peter, is the chief agent (Acts 22i. 17, 15. 12, 21. 18; Gal. 2. 9-12), Peter retains the first place as missionary evangelist to the Hebrew Christians, but nothing more. (The Apostolic Fathers, pt. 1).
Treatises of Cyprian (Third Book, section 119).) references Acts 15, but doesn't support Dimond's interpretation.
Also, his "A Treatise on Re-Baptism may reference Acts 15, but doesn't support.
The same is true with Anonymous writer (sections 2, 5 and 12).
Tertullian may have referenced, but doesn't support the papalist contention. (On Modesty, chap. 21).
Tertullian may have referenced verse 10, but says: "sentence of the Apostles." (On Monogamy, chap. 7). Peter is not singled out. See also "On Modesty", chap. 11.
Origen said: "it seemed good to the apostles of Jesus and the elders..." (Against Celsus, chap. 29, Book 8). He didn't single out Peter,
St. Irenaeus mentioned Acts 15, but doesn't support the papalist contention. (Against Heresies, chap. 12, sections 14-15).
Constitutions of the Holy Apostles mentions but doesn't support the papalist contention. James said: "Wherefore my sentence is," "Then it seemed good to the apostles, and to James the bishop, and to the elders, with the whole church, to send men chosen, etc." (Section 3:12). James is singled out, and the elders and "whole church" are referenced.
The Instructor may reference, but doesn't support papalist contention. (Books 2, chap. 7). --by Athenagorus.
The Stromata mentions, but doesn't support papalist contention. (chap. 15).
Tertullian's "On Idolatry" chap. 24 mentions the apostles; as does "Against Marcian" (it says "apostles"). Book 5, chap. 2.
St. John Chrysostom: " They leave the decision to them...They might indeed themselves have made the election as moved by the Saints...It is the people that draw them, not the Apostles that lead them.: (P.G. 9. 115).
Origen mentioned but doesn't support papalist contention. (Commentary on John).
Hippolytus mentioned but doesn't support papalist contention. (Against the Heresy of Noetus).
Polycrates, Bishop of Ephesus (2nd century) said: " For those [plural] who are greater than I have said..." (Epistle to Victor and the Roman Church). Peter is not singled out.
St. Cyprian mentions, but doesn't support papalist contention. (Epistle 67).
Tertullian alludes to passage, but doesn't even mention Peter. (On Prescription).
St. Irenaeus mentions, but doesn't support papalist contention. (See "Against Heresies,' chapters 12 and 20),
Constitutions of the Holy Apostles mentions verse 18, but doesn't support papalist contention. (Book 7:2). Book 6:12 mentions but doesn't support papalist contention. It says: "we the twelve assembled together at Jerusalem...We deliberated, together with James the Lord's brother, what was to be done' and it seemed good to him and the elders to speak to the people words of doctrine..." Peter is not emphasized.
No Ante-Nicene comments.
St. Irenaeus refers to Acts 2, but doesn't support papalist contention. (Against Heresies, chap. 12). He may reference verse 41, but doesn't support papalist contention. (chap. 23).
St. Cyprian mentions, but doesn't support. (Epistle 72:17).
ACTS 4:6-10, 12
A Treatise on Rebaptism (Anonymous author) refers to verse 12, but doesn't support. (Section 6).
St. Irenaeus references but doesn't support. (Against Heresies, chap. 12).
The Pastor of Hermas may reference verse 12, but doesn't support. (chap. 2).
The Acts of Philip may reference verse 12, but doesn't support.
Constitutions of the Holy Apostles may reference, but doesn't support. (Book 5. section 2).
ACTS 5:29 (Peter is singled out)
Against the Heresy of Noetus references, but makes no fuss that Peter was singled out. (Section 6).
Constitutions of the Holy Apostles references Acts 5, but makes no fuss that Peter was singled out. (Section 2).
"Remains of the Second and Third Centuries" references, but doesn't support. It says: "For those who are greater than I have said, "We ought to obey God rather than men." (From Polycrates, Bishop of Ephesus, 2nd century, from his Epistle to Victor and the Roman Church). In Acts 5, it was Peter who said those words, but this author makes no fuss about it.
Origen's Commentary on John references, but doesn't support papalist contention. (Section 19).
ACTS 5:3-11 (Dimond says Peter pronounced the judgment).
The Epistle of Pope Urban mentions, but doesn't support Dimond's view. (Section 2).
Constitutions of the Holy Apostles references,, but doesn't support. (chap. 5, section 2).
Tertullian references, but doesn't support. (On Modesty, chap. 21).
St. Cyprian references, but doesn't support. He quotes Peter, but doesn't even mention his name. (The Treatises of Cyprian, 30, Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 5, p. 543).
ACTS 10:9-11 (Peter's vision)
Tertullian mentions, but doesn't support Dimond's interpretation. (On Fasting, chap. 10).
Origen mentions, but doesn't support. (Against Celsus, chap. 1, Book 2).
Constitutions of the Holy Apostles references, but doesn't support. (Book 6, section 12).
Clement of Alexandria mentions, but doesn't support. (Book 2, chap. 1).
Tertullian mentions, but doesn't support. (On Prayer, chap. 25).
ACTS 10:4-6 (Jesus told Cornelius to go to St. Peter)
The Gospel of the Nativity of Mary may have referenced verse 4, but doesn't support Dimond's interpretation. (chap. 3).
Constitutions of the Holy Apostles references, but doesn't support. (Book 6, section 12).
St. Irenaeus mentions, but doesn't support. (Against Heresies 12:7).
"And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat:"
It was not until the ninth century that any father or ecclesiastical writer admitted the Ultramontane interpretation of this passage (Guettee, The Papacy, p. 43).
The first six centuries did not interpret Luke 22:32 in a papalist way.
The earliest reference to Luke 22:32 being the bishops of Rome is from Pope Agatho in the seventh century. (See: Mansi, 12 242).
(On Luke 22:32). Tertullan (DE FUGA INPERSECUTIONE, 208) mentions, but does not support Dimond's claim.
St. Cyprian mentions verse, but doesn't support Dimond's claim. (Epistle 7).
Constitutions of the Apostles mentions, but doesn't support papalist interpretation. (Book 6).
Clement of Alexandria mentions but doesn't support. (Stromata Book 4).
St. Ignatius says he prayed that the faith of the apostles may not fail. (Epistle to the Smyrnaens, chap. 7).
LUKE 22:25-26 (Inconsistent with Papalism)
"And he said unto them, The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and they that exercise authority upon them are called benefactors.But ye shall not be so: but he that is greatest among you, let him be as the younger; and he that is chief, as he that doth serve."
This passage is inconsistent with papalism.
"And he said unto her, What wilt thou? She saith unto him, Grant that these my two sons may sit, the one on thy right hand, and the other on the left, in thy kingdom."
Jesus didn't tell him that this position had been given to Peter.
"So when they had dined, Jesus saith to Simon Peter, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me more than these? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my lambs."
St. Peter himself states that all the pastors of the Church have received the ministry of feeding the flock of Christ. "Feed the flock of God which is among you." (1 Peter 5:2).
If Peter thought he received superior powers, he would have rejoiced, not grieved. (verse 17).
There is nothing in Catholic tradition showing that the lambs are the faithful and the sheep the pastors, as Roman Catholics like to claim. (See, Guettee, The Papacy. p. 46).
In the Bible sheep and lambs describe the same object. (See: Luke 10:3.). In the Bible the word sheep signifies the faithful. (See: Ezek. 34:6. 1 Pet. 2:25).
St. John Chrysostom: "...But this is said not only to Priests, but also to each of us who is entrusted with even a little flock." (P.G. 1 8 709).
St. Paul: "Feed the flock." (Acts 20:28).
St. Cyprian mentioned, but doesn't support papalist interpretation. (Epistle 2).
Dimond emphasized that Peter entered Jesus' tomb first.
There were no Ante-Nicene comments.
Dimond mentioned that Peter is first and called first (protos).
Recognitions of Clement may reference Matthew 10, but doesn't support. (chap. 11).
Acts of the Holy Apostle Thomas may reference, but doesn't support. (First paragraph).
Constitutions of the Holy Apostles may mention, but doesn't support. (Book 6: 14).
Dimond mentions how Peter's name is singled out. There is nothing in the Ante-Nicene Fathers to emphasize this.
Dimond mentions how Peter's name is singled out.
Lactantius speaks on Luke 8, but doesn't support Dimond's point. (The Divine Institutes, Book 4).
Tertullian mentioned this passage, but said: "disciples." He didn't single out Peter. (Against Marcian, chap. 20).
Origen's Commentary on Matthew mentioned, but also doesn't support. (Book 10).
Dimond mentioned that Peter is singled out.
Origen mentioned but doesn't emphasize that Peter is singled out. (Commentary on Matthew, Book 12).
Tertullian mentioned but doesn't emphasize that Peter is singled out. (Against Marcian, chap. 22).
Lactantius mentioned chapter and "disciples" but doesn't emphasize that Peter is singled out. (The Divine Institutes, chap. 15).
Tertullian mentioned Luke 9:28-36, but doesn't support. (On Monogomy, chap. 8).
Origen mentioned verse 31, but says: "disciples." (Against Celsus, chap. 76). Peter was not singled out.
ORDER OF NAMES
Peter Dimond makes much over the fact that in the biblical lists of the apostles, Peter is mentioned first. See, for example, Matthew 10:2. I would ask: Which church father taught that this proves Roman Catholic papalism?
James and Andrew are before Peter in John 1:44. See also Gal. 2:9; and 1Cor. 9:5.
Augustine: "Peter then was only the first among the apostles as Stephen was the first among deacons." (Augustine, Sermon 316. Origen (upn St. John), Cyprian (71st letter to Quint) have the same idea.
Constitutions of the Holy Apostles mentions Matt. 10:2, but doesn't support. (See Section 14).
Acts of the Holy Apostle Thomas mentions, but doesn't support.
Ante-Nicene Fathers did not follow the motif of mentioning Peter first. Examples from the first three volumes of the Ante-Nicene Fathers:
St. Irenaeus mentions Paul before Peter in Against Heresies 13: 6).
Clement of Alexandria states: ...'such as were James, Peter, John, Paul, and the rest of the apostles." (Stromata, chap. 8). He names James first.
Eusebius states: "To James the Just, and John and Peter, the Lord after His resurrection imparted knowledge." (Ecclesiastical History, Book 7. 2). Notice that Peter is mentioned last.
MARK 3:14-19. Peter is first.
Origen mentioned but doesn't emphasize that Peter is first. (Commentary On Matthew, Book 12:32; Against Celsus, chap. 62).
LUKE 6:14-16. Peter is first.
St. Justin referenced Matt. 23 and/or Luke 6, but doesn't emphasize that Peter is first. (Dialogus with Trypho, chap. 17).
Tertullian mentions the choosing of apostles, but doesn't emphasize that Peter is first. (Against Marcian, chap. 13).
Clement of Alexandria may have referenced Luke 6, but doesn't emphasize that Peter is first. (The Stromata Book, 2, chap. 18).
REVELATION 21:14 (Inconsistent with Papalism)
We see 12 apostolic thrones without distinction. Peter is not singled out or emphasized.
JOHN 10:11 (Inconsistent with Papalism)
Jesus is the good shepherd.
JOHN 1:42. Jesus changed Simon's name to Kepha.
Origen mentions, but makes no fuss about this. (Commentary on John). The Ante-Nicene Fathers made no fuss about this.
ACTS 8:14 (Inconsistent with Papalism)
They sent unto Peter and John. Peter received from the apostles a mission. He was subordinate.
ACTS 11:2-3 (Inconsistent with Papalism)
Peter was reproached.
GALATIANS 2:7 (Inconsistent with Papalism)
This text refutes the papacy. Paul is his equal.
Peter's motives were wrong according to Tertullian (P.L. 2. 35); St. Cyprian (Ep. ad Quint; Ep. 1 21); St. Cyril of Alexandria (P.G. 76. 1001; Augustine (P.L. 14?. 128 and he sinned in dissembling).
1 CORINTHIANS 3:4, 5, 22 (Inconsistent with Papalism)
Peter is a simple minister like himself, and like Apollos.
1 PETER 1:1
He found the church as their colleague.
2 COR. 11. 28 (Inconsistent with Papalism)
Paul had the care of all the churches. He acted like a vicar (2Cor. 2:10).
Peter Dimond claims there is a parallel between Peter receiving the keys in Matthew 16 and Eliachim receiving the key in Isaiah 22. The key in Isaiah 22 is singular, but plural in Matthew 16. Moreover, Matthew did not reference Isaiah 22 in his gospel. Dimond made the connection, but Matthew didn't. I would ask which church father made the connection and gave a papalist interpretation of this passage?
(On Isaiah 22:22): Origen says Jesus opens and shuts. (Comemntary on John). That's all there is in the Ante-Nicene Fathers.
Note: I do not have volume 6 of the Ante-Nicene Fathers, so I was unable to check with it. However, I am sure the results would have been the same.
St. Augustine and St. John Chrysostom were ignorant of the existence in the Church of any office of superior to that which he held himself. (See, Augustine, Contra duas Epistl. Pelag., lib. 2, c. 5; P.Pl. 44. 589; Chrysostom, Hom. 4. in Act. Apost. ; P.G. 9 (possibly 60). 383.
Chrysostom: 'The Apostles were designated rulers, rulers who received not nations and particular cities, but all being entrusted with the world in common (P.G. 51. 93. "every one of them being made by Christ a bishop of the whole world." (Soso in Senten. 4. p. 548),
In Acts there is no reference, explicit or implicit to any visible Head of the Church.
In the New Testament the highest visible authority is the Apostolate.
When St. Paul listed the offices of the church in 1 Corinthians 12 and Ephesians 4, he did not say a word about a papal office. The New Testament and Ante-Nicene Father know nothing about a papal office.
Peter had no say in Paul's appointment.
Paul wrote 13 epistles (2023 verses), Peter only 2 epistles (166 verses).
Paul mentioned Peter more than once, but never with any special titles of honor.
Paul, as an apostle claimed authority over the Roman Church itself in Romans 1:5-6 and 16:17.
Paul claimed for himself that "he was behind the chiefest apostles in nothing." (2 Corinthians 12).
Paul rebuked Peter with no mention of Peter's supremacy on a matter of faith and morals (Galatians 2).
In his writings (1Peter 1:1; 2 Peter 1:2) St. Peter identifies himself as an apostle. If he alone had authority over the church, he should have asserted this in a general epistle.
St. Irenaeus wrote of those who the Apostles delegated their Apostolical powers as "bishops of whom the Apostles delivered the Churches." (Against Heresies; P.G. 7. 1177), 'committing to them their own place of magisterium.' (P.G. 7 845).
Many scholars consider the Epistles of Pseudo-Barnabas (c 70-130) to be the earliest work of all post-New Testament extrabiblical sources. There is no reference to a bishop (or pope) over a church or group of churches.
Clement of Rome (c first centtury A.D) wrote his first epistle to the Corinthians. Christians are admonished to "oppose leaders exalting themselves over others" (13; cf. 23).
The Catholic theologian, Ludwig Ott admits: "The letter contains neither a formal statement of the Primacy, that is, an express invocation of the pre-eminence of the Roman Church, nor juridical measures." (Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, 283).
St. Polycarp (second century): His Epistle to the Philippians referred to "Paul himself and the rest of the Apostles," but made no reference to Peter by name.
There is no reference to papal primacy in The Didache (c 120-150).
The so called "Second Epistle of Clement (c 120-140) never mentions a pope or any bishop over a church.
St. Irenaeus speaks of "the blessed apostles" (plural) who "founded and built the Church" (3.3.3), "the doctrine of the apostles" (3.12.4), and "the tradition from the apostles" (3.5.1).
St. John Chrysostom (On Paul): "Who then was better than all men, who else but the tent maker, the teacher of the world, the planter of the church, the wise architect...If therefore he receives a greater crown than the Apostles, and be greater than they, it is manifest that he shall enjoy the highest honour and pre-eminences," (P.G. 1. 5) and that he excelled all men who have been since men first were." (ibid).
St. John Chrysostom (On Paul): "The tongue of the world, the light of the church, the foundation of the faith, the pillar and ground of the truth." (P.G. 51. 191). [Paul] "the Apostle of the world." (P.G. 61. 171). [Paul had] "the care of the whole world." (P.G. 61 571).
St. John Chrysostom (On John and Peter): "but since they were about to receive the charge of the whole world, it was necessary that they should no longer be closely associated, for assuredly this would have been a great loss to the world." (P.G. 59. 479).
St. John Chrysostom (On Sheep): "But this is said not only to Priests, but also to each of us who are entrusted with even a little flock." (P.G. 58 709).
St. John Chrysostom: ..."But observe how Peter does everything with the common consent; nothing imperiously...He defers the decision to the whole body." (Hom. 3 in Acts. Apostol; Trans. Oxf. Library of the Fathers, pp. 36, 37, 43).
SS. Paul and Barnabas confirmed the disciples of Lystra, Iconium, and Antioch. (See: Acts 14. 32 and 41).
Paul sought to establish the Roman Christians (See: Romans 1:10-11).
18 of the 20 citations of Melchoir Cano are from the Pseudo-Isidorian Decretals. (Papalism, p. 78).
St. Jerome calls the apostles princes. (P.L. 23. 216).
Sr. Cyril of Jerusalem calls Peter and Paul "The presidents of the churches." (P.G. 33).
St. John Chrysostom calls St. Paul "a chief and leader of the choir of the saints." (P.G. 9 (or 60). 678). And the whole world had him for its Apostle." (P.G. 59. 25) and had care of peoples of the whole world. (ibid).
St. Cyril of Jerusalem said Peter and John were of equal rank. (See: P.G. 78. 112).
St. Hesychius, Presbyter of Jerusalem said of St. James: "...the chief captain of the new Jerusalem, the chief of the priests, the exarch of the Apostles, the corypheus amongst the heads, the one who surpasses in splendor the lights, who is superior amongst the starts." (P.G. 93, 1479).
St. Hesychius also called Andrew "the firstborn of the Apostolic choir, the first made pillar of the church, the Peter before Peter, the foundation of the foundation, the beginning of the beginning." ( P.G. 93 1479).
The words of St. John Chrysostom, "Was it not lawful for Peter himself to elect..." are not in the old and genuine text (Denny, Papalism p. 88) but from the corrupt Benedictine text.
Peter is called "the master" only of those who had come from Jerusalem.
St. John Chrysostom held that the Apostolate held the chief place in the church."...The Apostolate, not only as governing the ruling excels all other gifts, but also retains, comprehended in itself, the roots of all." (P.G. 51 92).
For St. John Chrysostom, it is the Apostles who were designated "rulers who received not nations and particularities, but all being entrusted with the whole world." (P.G. 51. 93).
St. Leo was the first to formulate the "Petrine ideas." (Papalism, p. 94).
St. Gregory the Great: (On Paul) "he was made the head of the nations because he obtained the principatum of the whole church." (P.L. 79. 303).
St. Gregory the Great: "Surely Peter, the first of the Apostles, is a member of the universal church; Paul, Andrew,John, what else are they but the heads of particular communities, and yet all are members under one Head." (P.L. 77. 740).
We can see from the above study that when it comes to the Bible and the Ante-Nicene Fathers, papalism fails miserably. Whenever papalists appeal to the Bible to support their view, look to the patristic interpretations of those passages. There is no doubt that St. Peter was a chief apostle and a moving force in the early Church, but none of the biblical passages cited by Roman Catholics prove he was a pope with supreme universal jurisdiction over the entire church, or that his successors had the same authority. There is nothing in the Bible or the Ante-Nicene Fathers supporting the lies and errors of the First Vatican Council. This study only involved the fathers of the first four centuries.
The Papacy, by Guettee
Papalism, by Denny
Two Paths, By Whelton
Popes and Patriarchs: An Orthodox Perspective on Roman Catholic Claims, By Whelton;
Against False Union, by Dr. Alexander Kalomiros
Orthodoxy and Heterodoxy, by Fr. Victor Potapov
The History of the Council of Florence, by Ivan N. Ostroumov
Papal Infallibility and Supremacy Tried by Ecclesiastical History, Scripture and Reason, by Gayer Catholic Orthodoxy and Anglo-Catholicism, by Overbeck
Origins of Papal Infallibility, 1150-1350: A Study on the Concepts of Infallibility, Sovereignty and Tradition in the Middle Ages (Studies in the History of Christian Thought), By Tierney
A Man Is His Faith. by Ivan Kireyevsky;
The Great Divide, by Father Ambrose Young;
Orthodox Faith and Life in Christ, by Saint Justin Popovich;
CONCERNING THE FILIOQUE
The Mystagogy of the Holy Spirit, by Saint Photios
The Filioque: A History of a Doctrinal Controversy, by Siencienski