The Church and the Bible

Ratzinger strikes again at the "filth" in the Church

http://vaticaninsider.lastampa.it/en/homepage/world-news/detail/articolo/papa-pedofilia-scandali-abusi-revoca-decreto-legionari-di-cristo-477/

The Pope has not vacillated in the face of all kinds of old and new scandals that have surfaced

andrea tornielli
Vatican City

The earthshaking decision to remove the monks from the Basilica of the Santa Croce in Gerusalemme (Basilica of the Holy Cross in Jerusalem), where they had been for five centuries, is another sign of how the “gentle rule” of Benedict XVI can also be decisive and drastic when it comes to eliminating that “filth” in the Church, the existence of which was denounced by Cardinal Ratzinger six years ago during the Way of the Cross. The decree of the Congregation for Religious which suppressed the abbey come two years after the removal of the abbot, who was much talked about for the less than transparent management of his community and his friendships.

The Pope has not vacillated in the face of all kinds of old and new scandals that have surfaced. For example, he has established standards that are even more severe than the ones he suggested to John Paul II 10 years ago. The victims take priority, as he first showed with his personal stance and now with the new guidelines on abuse aimed at the bishops’ conferences and published last Monday. He has charged the bishops with the responsibility of serving as “fathers and brothers” to their clergy. But most importantly, he has acted, far from the spotlight, with determination during the first six years of his papacy.

One month after he was elected in May 2005, Ratzinger banned Father Gino Burresi, founder of the Congregation of the Servants of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, from any public ministry for sexually abusing his young followers. The priest had been the object of huge coverage for years and the offences he had committed had expired under the statue of limitations. Shortly thereafter came the famous decision on Father Macial Maciel, the former founder of the Legion of Christ, who was found guilty of serious abuse.

In September 2008, Benedict XVI laicized don Lelio Cantini, the charismatic priest from Florence and leader of an active community that saw a number of clergymen emerge from its ranks. He too was guilty of repeatedly abusing minors. In July of the following year, he cracked down on a German clergyman belonging to the Missionaries of the Holy Family of Munich, while in February 2010, with a decree that cannot be appealed, Ratzinger defrocked don Marco Dessi, a missionary in Nicaragua, before the end of his civil trial for sexually abusing minors. The following month, don Andrea Agostini, a priest in the diocese of Bologna who supervised a catholic nursery school in Ferrara, was dismissed from the clerical state for pedophilia. In October 2010, don Nello Giraudo from the diocese of Savona met the same fate, while at the beginning of this year Fernando Karadima, the powerful and influential priest from Chile, was forced to retire despite the fact that the offences had expired under the statute of limitations. A quick decision is also expected regarding don Riccardo Seppia, the priest from Genoa who is a cocaine addict and predator of young boys.

A year ago, at the height of the scandals that occurred mainly in the United States, Ireland and Germany, Benedict XVI made a dramatic pronouncement that «the greatest persecution of the Church does not come from enemies on the outside» but «is born from the sins within the church». He linked these events to the message of the apparitions of the Virgin Mary in Portugal during the last century, claiming that «We delude ourselves if we think that the prophetic mission of Fatima has come to an end».

In the interview book “Light of the World”, the Pope also supported the media and their role in the affair «The media would not have been able to provide those reports if the sin had not existed in the Church...as long as it is a matter of bringing the truth to light, we should be grateful». A lesson of great humility, which seen from the outside could be even better understood inside the Church.

THE CHURCH

THE BEGINNING OF THE "CHURCH"...

Mark 3:16; John 1:42 – Jesus renames Simon "Kepha" in Aramaic which literally means "rock." This was an extraordinary thing for Jesus to do, because "rock" was not even a name in Jesus' time. Jesus did this, not to give Simon a strange name, but to identify his new status among the apostles. When God changes a person's name, He changes their status.

Gen. 17:5; 32:28; 2 Kings 23:34; Acts 9:4; 13:9 - for example, in these verses, we see that God changes the following people's names and, as a result, they become special agents of God: Abram to Abraham; Jacob to Israel, Eliakim to Jehoiakim, Saul to Paul.

2 Sam. 22:2-3, 32, 47; 23:3; Psalm 18:2,31,46; 19:4; 28:1; 42:9; 62:2,6,7; 89:26; 94:22; 144:1-2 - in these verses, God is also called "rock." Hence, from these verses, non-Catholics often argue that God, and not Peter, is the rock that Jesus is referring to in Matt. 16:18. This argument not only ignores the plain meaning of the applicable texts, but also assumes words used in Scripture can only have one meaning. This, of course, is not true. For example:

1 Cor. 3:11 - Jesus is called the only foundation of the Church, and yet in Eph. 2:20, the apostles are called the foundation of the Church. Similarly, in 1 Peter 2:25, Jesus is called the Shepherd of the flock, but in Acts 20:28, the apostles are called the shepherds of the flock. These verses show that there are multiple metaphors for the Church, and that words used by the inspired writers of Scripture can have various meanings. Catholics agree that God is the rock of the Church, but this does not mean He cannot confer this distinction upon Peter as well, to facilitate the unity He desires for the Church.

Matt. 16:18 - Jesus said in Aramaic, you are "Kepha" and on this "Kepha" I will build my Church. In Aramaic, "kepha" means a massive stone, and "evna" means little pebble. Some non-Catholics argue that, because the Greek word for rock is "petra", that "Petros" actually means "a small rock", and therefore Jesus was attempting to diminish Peter right after blessing him by calling him a small rock. Not only is this nonsensical in the context of Jesus' blessing of Peter, Jesus was speaking Aramaic and used "Kepha," not "evna." Using Petros to translate Kepha was done simply to reflect the masculine noun of Peter.

Moreover, if the translator wanted to identify Peter as the "small rock," he would have used "lithos" which means a little pebble in Greek. Also, Petros and petra were synonyms at the time the Gospel was written, so any attempt to distinguish the two words is inconsequential. Thus, Jesus called Peter the massive rock, not the little pebble, on which He would build the Church. (You don’t even need Matt. 16:18 to prove Peter is the rock because Jesus renamed Simon “rock” in Mark 3:16 and John 1:42!).

Matt. 16:17 - to further demonstrate that Jesus was speaking Aramaic, Jesus says Simon "Bar-Jona." The use of "Bar-Jona" proves that Jesus was speaking Aramaic. In Aramaic, "Bar" means son, and "Jonah" means John or dove (Holy Spirit). See Matt. 27:46 and Mark 15:34 which give another example of Jesus speaking Aramaic as He utters in rabbinical fashion the first verse of Psalm 22 declaring that He is the Christ, the Messiah. This shows that Jesus was indeed speaking Aramaic, as the Jewish people did at that time.

Matt. 16:18 - also, in quoting "on this rock," the Scriptures use the Greek construction "tautee tee" which means on "this" rock; on "this same" rock; or on "this very" rock. "Tautee tee" is a demonstrative construction in Greek, pointing to Peter, the subject of the sentence (and not his confession of faith as some non-Catholics argue) as the very rock on which Jesus builds His Church. The demonstrative (“tautee”) generally refers to its closest antecedent (“Petros”). Also, there is no place in Scripture where “faith” is equated with “rock.”

Matt. 16:18-19 - in addition, to argue that Jesus first blesses Peter for having received divine revelation from the Father, then diminishes him by calling him a small pebble, and then builds him up again by giving him the keys to the kingdom of heaven is entirely illogical, and a gross manipulation of the text to avoid the truth of Peter's leadership in the Church. This is a three-fold blessing of Peter - you are blessed, you are the rock on which I will build my Church, and you will receive the keys to the kingdom of heaven (not you are blessed for receiving Revelation, but you are still an insignificant little pebble, and yet I am going to give you the keys to the kingdom).

Matt. 16:18-19 – to further rebut the Protestant argument that Jesus was speaking about Peter’s confession of faith (not Peter himself) based on the revelation he received, the verses are clear that Jesus, after acknowledging Peter’s receipt of divine revelation, turns the whole discourse to the person of Peter: Blessed are “you” Simon, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to “you,” and I tell “you,” “you” are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church. I will give “you” the keys to the kingdom, and whatever “you” bind and loose on earth will be bound and loosed in heaven. Jesus’ whole discourse relates to the person of Peter, not his confession of faith.

Matt. 16:13 - also, from a geographical perspective, Jesus renames Simon to rock in Caesarea Philippi near a massive rock formation on which Herod built a temple to Caesar. Jesus chose this setting to further emphasize that Peter was indeed the rock on which the Church would be built.

Matt. 7:24 - Jesus, like the wise man, builds His house on the rock (Peter), not on grain of sand (Simon) so the house will not fall.

Luke 6:48 - the house (the Church) built upon the rock (Peter) cannot be shaken by floods (which represent the heresies, schisms, and scandals that the Church has faced over the last 2,000 years). Floods have occurred, but the Church still remains on its solid rock foundation.

Matt. 16:21 - it is also important to note that it was only after Jesus established Peter as leader of the Church that He began to speak of His death and departure. This is because Jesus had now appointed His representative on earth.

John 21:15 - Jesus asks Peter if he loves Jesus "more than these," referring to the other apostles. Jesus singles Peter out as the leader of the apostolic college.

John 21:15-17 - Jesus selects Peter to be the chief shepherd of the apostles when He says to Peter, "feed my lambs," "tend my sheep," "feed my sheep." Peter will shepherd the Church as Jesus’ representative.

Luke 22:31-32 - Jesus also prays that Peter's faith may not fail and charges Peter to be the one to strengthen the other apostles - "Simon, satan demanded to have you (plural, referring to all the apostles) to sift you (plural) like wheat, but I prayed for you (singular) that your (singular) faith may not fail, and when you (singular) have turned again, strengthen your brethren.

Acts 1,2,3,4,5,8,15 - no one questions Peter's authority to speak for the Church, declare anathemas, and resolve doctrinal debates. Peter is the rock on which the Church is built who feeds Jesus’ sheep and whose faith will not fail.

( SOURCE: http://www.scripturecatholic.com/the_church.html)

COMMENTARY:

Based from the verses cited above, there is no like the Catholic Church. When I first read those verses above, I realize how should I study my faith more. I now love the Bible ever more. I wish to invite you to read more about the Church, the REAL CHURCH...

I am no longer affected by Protestants who keep claiming the victor on this one.

Divine Revelation "By Letter" (2 Thess 2:15): The Bible

For Catholic Christians, the Bible--the Old and New Testaments--is more than a document of mere historical interest. The Bible calls itself "the Word of God." In many ways God spoke to us--He revealed Himself. Yet, Jesus, the Son of God, is the perfect revelation of the Father.

The community of believers, the Church, sought to know what God authoritatively revealed to humankind.

The Bible itself does not define what it includes; nor does it claim to contain all that God revealed. Paul affirms that some of what is handed on--the way Jews passed on revelation--was "by letter," in writing.

What is the standard--the canon--of the written Word of God? The Church recorded the history of the development of the canon of the Bible under the authority of the Holy Spirit.

A primary criterion of canonicity is inspiration, the divine influence on human writers such that God is said to be the author. And God's revelation, faithfully written, aptly expressed, was expressed with infallible truth.

We discover the meaning of the Bible--hermeneutics--by the literal sense of the words first, then the fuller sense, and then the typical sense of the words of Sacred Scripture.

The Bible: Written Revelation

The Word of God revealing Himself to His People through the sacred authors was first of all oral. Periods of oral transmission varied. The revelation of Genesis, from prehistory to the time of Moses is an example of oral transmission; the period from the resurrection and ascension of Jesus (about 30 AD) until some of Paul's letters (about 51 AD) or the writing of the first Gospel, Mark's (about 65 AD), is another example of oral transmission of revelation. The Word of God as eventually written down is contained in the Bible. The Bible is the collection of sacred books, written through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit and recognized by the Church as such.

The title of this collection of sacred books comes from the Latin biblia, which in turn comes from the Greek, ta biblia. The Greek word means "The Books." Hence, the Bible is a library of books rather than a single book.

The two divisions of the Bible are called Testaments, the Old Testament (or the Hebrew Scriptures) written before the coming of Jesus Christ, and the New Testament, written after the life, death and resurrection of Jesus.

The canon of the Bible refers to the definitive list of the books which are considered to be divine revelation and included in the Bible. ("Canon" (Gk. kanon) means a reed; a straight rod or bar; a measuring stick; something serving to determine, rule, or measure.) Over the centuries, the different faith communities which use the Bible (e.g. Jews, Catholics, Protestants) have developed different canons, i.e. different lists of which books belong in the Bible "library."

The original language of the Old Testament was predominantly Hebrew, with some later books having been written in Greek and Aramaic. The entire Old Testament was translated into Greek well before the time of Christ. The New Testament was entirely written in Greek. Not a single original manuscript (i.e. autograph) for either Testament exists today.

This library contains among its books, many kinds and types of literature. There are law books or literature (e.g. Leviticus), there are books of history (e.g. the books of Kings and Chronicles), poetry (e.g. Song of Songs) and hymn books (e.g. Psalms), parables or stories (e.g. Job), biography (e.g. Gospels), prophetical (e.g. Revelation), collections of sayings (e.g. Proverbs), etc.

Much printed currently within this library is not a part of the revelation of the Word of God. The writers of the books of the Bible did not title the books (with the possible exception of Mark's Gospel). Hence the titles of the books are not the Word of God. The sacred authors did not write in paragraphs or use punctuation or label sections or outline their books. Cardinal Stephen Langton created the chapters of both the Old and New Testaments in the Latin version of the Bible in 1228. Verses within chapters in the Latin version of the Old Testament were the work of the Dominican friar Santes Pagnini in 1528. The verses for the Greek New Testament were created by the Protestant Robert Estienne in 1555. Some brief books have no chapters but only verses (e.g. Philemon).

The Church has always believed that the Word of God is not wholly contained in the library of the Bible. As the opening of the Gospel of John proclaims, the Word of God existed eternally and became flesh in Jesus to dwell among us (John 1:1-14). The Church, birthed by the Holy Spirit on Pentecost, existed, grew before, during and after the New Testament was written and the books of the Bible determined. The Church recognizes that the books of the Bible are but one source of information about God's revelation, although a very important source. The Word of God and the Spirit of Truth are too dynamic to be limited to the written Word only.

Because the Bible is an important source for God's revelation, we should know:

• where the Bible comes from;
• what books are included in the Bible;
• how God uses the Bible to reveal Himself; and
• how do we interpret the information in the Bible

By Paul Flanagan and Robert Schihl.
Catholic Biblical Apologetics, © Copyright 1985-2004, Paul Flanagan and Robert Schihl

Authority of the Church

Imagine if there is no authority. Imagine, if a sacred book was given to man, and no other person could interpret it?

Imagine a game without a referee. What would happen to your favorite game?

If a person love basketball, or football, and players are starting to mess around, would you still enjoy the game?


SOURCE: http://scripturecatholic.com/the_church.html#the_church-II

The Holy Roman Catholic Church had authority over morals and faith. It is no wonder the Holy Church still speak of its anti-abortion banners. It is the Church who defined moral to immoral, it is the Church that stands against crime against humanity.


Let us examine the Authority and its Biblical foundation:

2 Sam. 7:16; Psalm 89:3-4; 1 Chron.17:12,14 - God promises to establish the Davidic kingdom forever on earth.

Matt. 1:1 - Matthew clearly establishes this tie of David to Jesus. Jesus is the new King of the new House of David, and the King will assign a chief steward to rule over the house while the King is in heaven.

Luke 1:32 - the archangel Gabriel announces to Mary that her Son would be given "the throne of His father David."

Matt. 16:19 - Jesus gives Peter the "keys of the kingdom of heaven." While most Protestants argue that the kingdom of heaven Jesus was talking about is the eternal state of glory (as if Peter is up in heaven letting people in), the kingdom of heaven Jesus is speaking of actually refers to the Church on earth. In using the term "keys," Jesus was referencing Isaiah 22 (which is the only place in the Bible where keys are used in the context of a kingdom).

Isaiah 22:22 - in the old Davidic kingdom, there were royal ministers who conducted the liturgical worship and bound the people in teaching and doctrine. But there was also a Prime Minister or chief steward of the kingdom who held the keys. Jesus gives Peter these keys to His earthly kingdom, the Church. This representative has decision-making authority over the people - when he shuts, no one opens. See also Job 12:14.

Rev. 1:18; 3:7; 9:1; 20:1 - Jesus' "keys" undeniably represent authority. By using the word "keys," Jesus gives Peter authority on earth over the new Davidic kingdom, and this was not seriously questioned by anyone until the Protestant reformation 1,500 years later after Peter’s investiture.

Matt. 16:19 - whatever Peter binds or looses on earth is bound or loosed in heaven / when the Prime Minister to the King opens, no one shuts. This "binding and loosing" authority allows the keeper of the keys to establish "halakah," or rules of conduct for the members of the kingdom he serves. Peter's "keys" fit into the "gates" of Hades which also represent Peter’s pastoral authority over souls.

Matt. 23:2-4 - the "binding and loosing" terminology used by Jesus was understood by the Jewish people. For example, Jesus said that the Pharisees "bind" heavy burdens but won't move ("loose") them with their fingers. Peter and the apostles have the new binding and loosing authority over the Church of the New Covenant.

Matt. 13:24-52 -Jesus comparing the kingdom of heaven to a field, a mustard seed, leaven, and a net demonstrate that the kingdom Jesus is talking about is the universal Church on earth, not the eternal state of glory. Therefore, the keys to the "kingdom of heaven" refers to the authority over the earthly Church.

Matt. 25:1-2 - Jesus comparing the kingdom of heaven to ten maidens, five of whom were foolish, further shows that the kingdom is the Church on earth. This kingdom cannot refer to the heavenly kingdom because there are no fools in heaven!

Mark 4:26-32 - again, the "kingdom of God" is like the seed which grows and develops. The heavenly kingdom is eternal, so the kingdom to which Peter holds the keys of authority is the earthly Church.

Luke 9:27 - Jesus says that there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the "kingdom of God." This kingdom refers to the earthly kingdom of Christ, which Jesus established by His death and resurrection on earth.

Luke 13:19-20 - again, Jesus says the kingdom of God is like a mustard seed which grew into a tree. This refers to the earthly Church which develops over time, from an acorn to an oak tree (not the heavenly state of glory which is boundless and infinite).

Matt 12:28; Mark 1:15; Luke 11:20; 17:21 - these verses provide more examples of the " kingdom of God" as the kingdom on earth which is in our midst.

1 Chron. 28:5 - Solomon sits on the throne of the kingdom of the Lord. This shows that the "kingdom of God" usually means an earthly kingdom.

1 Chron. 29:23 - Solomon sits on the throne of the Lord as king in place of King David. The throne of God refers to the earthly kingdom.

Matt. 16:19 - Peter holds keys to this new Davidic kingdom and rules while the real King of David (Jesus) is in heaven.

Luke 12:41-42 - when Peter asks Jesus if the parable of the master and the kingdom was meant just for the apostles or for all people, Jesus rhetorically confirms to Peter that Peter is the chief steward over the Master's household of God. "Who then, (Peter) is that faithful and wise steward whom his master will make ruler over His household..?"

Ezek. 37:24-25 - David shall be king over them forever and they will have one shepherd. Jesus is our King, and Peter is our earthly shepherd.

THE BIBLICAL CHURCH

Nowadays, new Christian churches just pop up. New congregations were establish with a big bang of applause. New forms of Church revival movement was seen.

Such a big difference! How is it that happen? Are those new churches are the same churches founded by Jesus Christ 2,000 years ago?

Is Peter the Rock in which the Church build? Let us all visit the Holy Scripture and find out.

Mark 3:16; John 1:42 – Jesus renames Simon "Kepha" in Aramaic which literally means "rock." This was an extraordinary thing for Jesus to do, because "rock" was not even a name in Jesus' time. Jesus did this, not to give Simon a strange name, but to identify his new status among the apostles. When God changes a person's name, He changes their status.

Gen. 17:5; 32:28; 2 Kings 23:34; Acts 9:4; 13:9 - for example, in these verses, we see that God changes the following people's names and, as a result, they become special agents of God: Abram to Abraham; Jacob to Israel, Eliakim to Jehoiakim, Saul to Paul.

2 Sam. 22:2-3, 32, 47; 23:3; Psalm 18:2,31,46; 19:4; 28:1; 42:9; 62:2,6,7; 89:26; 94:22; 144:1-2 - in these verses, God is also called "rock." Hence, from these verses, non-Catholics often argue that God, and not Peter, is the rock that Jesus is referring to in Matt. 16:18. This argument not only ignores the plain meaning of the applicable texts, but also assumes words used in Scripture can only have one meaning. This, of course, is not true. For example:

1 Cor. 3:11 - Jesus is called the only foundation of the Church, and yet in Eph. 2:20, the apostles are called the foundation of the Church. Similarly, in 1 Peter 2:25, Jesus is called the Shepherd of the flock, but in Acts 20:28, the apostles are called the shepherds of the flock. These verses show that there are multiple metaphors for the Church, and that words used by the inspired writers of Scripture can have various meanings. Catholics agree that God is the rock of the Church, but this does not mean He cannot confer this distinction upon Peter as well, to facilitate the unity He desires for the Church.

Matt. 16:18 - Jesus said in Aramaic, you are "Kepha" and on this "Kepha" I will build my Church. In Aramaic, "kepha" means a massive stone, and "evna" means little pebble. Some non-Catholics argue that, because the Greek word for rock is "petra", that "Petros" actually means "a small rock", and therefore Jesus was attempting to diminish Peter right after blessing him by calling him a small rock. Not only is this nonsensical in the context of Jesus' blessing of Peter, Jesus was speaking Aramaic and used "Kepha," not "evna." Using Petros to translate Kepha was done simply to reflect the masculine noun of Peter.

Moreover, if the translator wanted to identify Peter as the "small rock," he would have used "lithos" which means a little pebble in Greek. Also, Petros and petra were synonyms at the time the Gospel was written, so any attempt to distinguish the two words is inconsequential. Thus, Jesus called Peter the massive rock, not the little pebble, on which He would build the Church. (You don’t even need Matt. 16:18 to prove Peter is the rock because Jesus renamed Simon “rock” in Mark 3:16 and John 1:42!).

Matt. 16:17 - to further demonstrate that Jesus was speaking Aramaic, Jesus says Simon "Bar-Jona." The use of "Bar-Jona" proves that Jesus was speaking Aramaic. In Aramaic, "Bar" means son, and "Jonah" means John or dove (Holy Spirit). See Matt. 27:46 and Mark 15:34 which give another example of Jesus speaking Aramaic as He utters in rabbinical fashion the first verse of Psalm 22 declaring that He is the Christ, the Messiah. This shows that Jesus was indeed speaking Aramaic, as the Jewish people did at that time.

Matt. 16:18 - also, in quoting "on this rock," the Scriptures use the Greek construction "tautee tee" which means on "this" rock; on "this same" rock; or on "this very" rock. "Tautee tee" is a demonstrative construction in Greek, pointing to Peter, the subject of the sentence (and not his confession of faith as some non-Catholics argue) as the very rock on which Jesus builds His Church. The demonstrative (“tautee”) generally refers to its closest antecedent (“Petros”). Also, there is no place in Scripture where “faith” is equated with “rock.”

Matt. 16:18-19 - in addition, to argue that Jesus first blesses Peter for having received divine revelation from the Father, then diminishes him by calling him a small pebble, and then builds him up again by giving him the keys to the kingdom of heaven is entirely illogical, and a gross manipulation of the text to avoid the truth of Peter's leadership in the Church. This is a three-fold blessing of Peter - you are blessed, you are the rock on which I will build my Church, and you will receive the keys to the kingdom of heaven (not you are blessed for receiving Revelation, but you are still an insignificant little pebble, and yet I am going to give you the keys to the kingdom).

Matt. 16:18-19 – to further rebut the Protestant argument that Jesus was speaking about Peter’s confession of faith (not Peter himself) based on the revelation he received, the verses are clear that Jesus, after acknowledging Peter’s receipt of divine revelation, turns the whole discourse to the person of Peter: Blessed are “you” Simon, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to “you,” and I tell “you,” “you” are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church. I will give “you” the keys to the kingdom, and whatever “you” bind and loose on earth will be bound and loosed in heaven. Jesus’ whole discourse relates to the person of Peter, not his confession of faith.

Matt. 16:13 - also, from a geographical perspective, Jesus renames Simon to rock in Caesarea Philippi near a massive rock formation on which Herod built a temple to Caesar. Jesus chose this setting to further emphasize that Peter was indeed the rock on which the Church would be built.

Matt. 7:24 - Jesus, like the wise man, builds His house on the rock (Peter), not on grain of sand (Simon) so the house will not fall.

Luke 6:48 - the house (the Church) built upon the rock (Peter) cannot be shaken by floods (which represent the heresies, schisms, and scandals that the Church has faced over the last 2,000 years). Floods have occurred, but the Church still remains on its solid rock foundation.

Matt. 16:21 - it is also important to note that it was only after Jesus established Peter as leader of the Church that He began to speak of His death and departure. This is because Jesus had now appointed His representative on earth.

John 21:15 - Jesus asks Peter if he loves Jesus "more than these," referring to the other apostles. Jesus singles Peter out as the leader of the apostolic college.

John 21:15-17 - Jesus selects Peter to be the chief shepherd of the apostles when He says to Peter, "feed my lambs," "tend my sheep," "feed my sheep." Peter will shepherd the Church as Jesus’ representative.

Luke 22:31-32 - Jesus also prays that Peter's faith may not fail and charges Peter to be the one to strengthen the other apostles - "Simon, satan demanded to have you (plural, referring to all the apostles) to sift you (plural) like wheat, but I prayed for you (singular) that your (singular) faith may not fail, and when you (singular) have turned again, strengthen your brethren.

Acts 1,2,3,4,5,8,15 - no one questions Peter's authority to speak for the Church, declare anathemas, and resolve doctrinal debates. Peter is the rock on which the Church is built who feeds Jesus’ sheep and whose faith will not fail.