In Response to MhFM’s Claim that:
“The Bible Proves the Papacy”
MhFM's Bob (a.k.a. Brother Peter) Dimond goes to great lengths in his 2014 video, “The Bible Proves the Papacy”, to defend the Roman Catholic position that Simon Peter was singled out / selected by Christ, above all the other apostles, as the one to rule over His Church as its first Pope and/or “prime minister".
Being a Roman Catholic, I know that it is required that I blindly accept , by faith, the Church's dogmatic proclamation that the Bishop of Rome holds "Papal Supremacy" (jurisdiction) over the original 23 Latin and Eastern Catholic Churches.
Yet, try as I may, "Papalism" proves itself to be a bitter pill to swallow.
As a Roman Catholic ... acquiring the knowledge that Leo IX, Bishop of Rome, unilaterally declared his episcopal preeminence over all other bishops as well as complete governing jurisdiction over the 23 Catholic (Latin / Eastern) Churches of the 11th century (which triggered the “Great Western Schism” of 1054), I found ample reason to give pause, reflect upon and question the episcopal validity of Leo IX's edict.
Does the Bible prove the papacy?
So, in response to Bob “Petros” (the Rock) Dimond's self-serving Biblical claims, I would like to start out by stating:
“Don’t piss down my back and tell me it’s raining”
In order for Sedevacantism 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 Leo IX, the Bishop of Rome, interpreted and established it to be in 1054 (Papal Supremacy), and as was later inflated into full blown “Papal Infallibility” by Pius IX, at the First Vatican Council, in 1870.
In order for Papalism to be true, does it not seem relevant and only logical that all of the Apostles and early Church Fathers would have been openly united in their evangelical promulgation of the Papist position; providing scriptural support within their writings and ministries so as to show theological consistency throughout Christ's new Advent?
What I find to be the most significant of all proofs against “Papalism” is found in the words and action of Christ during the “Last Supper”. I believe that it was in that "upper room", on that night, that Christ clarified and established the “order” of rank amongst His apostles (His Bishops). Let me explain.
Walking in sandals on the filthy roads of 1st century Israel made it imperative that feet be washed before a communal meal, especially as people sat / reclined at low tables where one’s feet were very much in evidence.
When Jesus rose from the table (St John 13:4) and began to wash the feet of His disciples, He was doing the work attributed to “lowliest” of servants.
The disciples were visibly stunned / shocked by His act of humility and condescension; that their Lord and master should stoop to wash their feet, when “tradition” dictated that it was their proper position / responsibility to have washed His.
The apostles found it hard to grasp the fact that Jesus had not come as a King, but as that suffering “Servant” described in Isaiah 53.
Christ made it clear when He revealed in St Matthew 20:28 that:
"Even as the Son of man is not come to be ministered unto, but to minister [serve], and to give his life a redemption for many."
The humility expressed by Christ’s act with a towel and basin foreshadowed His ultimate act of humility and love on the cross.
Christ's attitude of "servanthood" was in direct contrast to that of the disciples, who had recently been arguing among themselves as to which of them was the greatest!
"And they began to inquire among themselves, which of them it was that should do this thing. And there was also a strife amongst them, which of them should seem to be the greater. And he said to them: The kings of the Gentiles lord it over them; and they that have power over them, are called beneficent. But you not so: but he that is the greater among you, let him become as the younger; and he that is the leader, as he that serveth. For which is greater, he that sitteth at table, or he that serveth? Is it not he that sitteth at table? But I am in the midst of you, as he that serveth:" - Luke 22:23-27
Since there was no servant present at the “Last Supper” to wash their feet, it would never have occurred to the disciples to wash one another’s feet.
When our Lord and Savior Himself stooped to perform this lowly task, His apostles (bishops) were stunned into silence.
Further, when Jesus washed the feet of His apostles (bishops), He told them (and us):
“... Amen, amen I say to you: The servant is not greater than his lord; neither is the apostle greater than he that sent him. If you know these things, you shall be blessed if you do them.” - St John 13:13-17
Thus, Christ instructed His apostles (bishops) to emulate Him, serving one another in lowliness of heart and mind, seeking to support and to build one another up in humility and love … as a group of equals.
Let’s now look at Bob Dimond's purported Biblical supporting proof that Simon Peter is the papal "rock", the corner stone of Catholicism and see if it stands up to scrutiny.
"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. 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 upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven." - St Matthew 16:18-19
Bob chose St Matthew 16:18-19 as the primary supporting evidence of his papal "rock" supposition, but conveniently excludes a couple of significant preceding verses that places things in proper perspective:
"Jesus saith to them: But whom do you say that I am? Simon Peter answered and said: Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God. And Jesus answering, said to him: Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona: because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in heaven." - St Matthew 16:15-16
Concerning St Matthew 16:15-19, we need to first determine: Was Christ referring to Simon Peter (a man) as being the papal “rock” or to Simon Peter’s “faith” in recognizing Him as the "rock", the Messiah, the son of God, and as such the corner stone of the Church?
In chapter 2 of his First Epistle, St Peter clearly states who the "rock" is when he counseled us to follow Christ, who is “the living stone” [the rock], and walk uprightly before Him. St Peter goes on to say:
"Wherefore it is said in the scripture: Behold, I lay in Sion a chief corner stone [rock], elect, precious. And he that shall believe in Him [the rock], shall not be confounded. To you therefore that believe, He is honor: but to them that believe not ... a stone of stumbling, and a rock of scandal ..." - Peter 2:6-8 (Douay-Rheims)
St Paul declares in 1 Corinthian 10:4 who the “rock” is:
"And all drank the same spiritual drink; (and they drank of the spiritual rock that followed them, and the rock was Christ.)"
It's also indicated in St Luke 20:17 that Christ is the “rock”:
"But he looking on them, said: What is this then that is written, The stone [rock - Christ], which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner?"
Brother Petros obviously "Cherry Picked" his way through the Bible selecting verses that he believes supports the supposition that Simon Peter is the corner stone, the papal "rock", of Catholicism (Papalism).
To the unlettered ... Dimond's argument is palpable / appealing, holding "scriptural water" (so to speak), and therefore, taken on its face value, assumed to be correct.
The Bible also proves that Christ entrusted the “keys” and “authority” of His Church to each and every one within that group of equals (disciples / bishops) present on that day described in Matthew 16:18-19, and not just to one man (Simon Peter)?
But under careful examination, by studying (not merely reading) the Bible, and by including rather than excluding / suppressing biblical evidence ... Dimond's papal "rock" hypothesis on "Papal Supremacy" falters.
The Bible proves that Christ is the “rock” and not Simon Peter.
The Bible also proves that Christ entrusted the “keys” and “authority” of His Church to each and every one of his apostles (Bishops) within that group of equals, present on that day described in St Matthew 16:18-19, and not just to one man (Simon Peter)?
Brother Petros's claim that "the Bible Proves the Papacy" actually proves, once again, what is written in Romans 1:22 where it states:
"For, professing themselves to be wise, they became fools."
- Pax Tecum