Did St. Paul withstand St. Peter to his Face?

There is ample evidence to suggest that he did not - that the person he rebuked in this Biblical incident was not Simon Peter, but another “Cephas.”

   

     It is an almost universal assumption in today's Catholic world that St. Paul did in fact rebuke the first Pope to his face. As is written in Galatians 2:11: “But when Cephas was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed.” This assumption is used to justify the concept that it is acceptable in extreme circumstances to publicly confront a Pope with what one believes to be his errors, and it is also an argument used to justify “resisting” the ordinances of a Pope. 
     

    However, while reading a short but well-documented biography of St. Peter, which I came across in an 1892 collection of Catholic writings, the following paragraph immediately struck me: 

 

"That the Cephas who was reprehended by St. Paul for the inconsistency of his conduct with respect to the Mosaic rites, was not St. Peter, is the opinion of the best writers.  Eusebius quotes Clement Alexandrinus as maintaining that this Cephas was one of the seventy disciples.  This opinion is followed by the most learned writers of antiquity, by St. Jerome, by St. Gregory the Great, by St. Anselm, and by many others."

  

    This surprising statement has caused me to investigate this issue further. 

 

    James Likoudis wrote a two-part article in the late 1990's entitled “Were the Apostle Peter and Cephas of Antioch the same person?” He admits that some of the greatest Fathers and Doctors of the Church, and contemporary exegetes contend that the person confronted by Paul was Simon Peter. However, he then presents arguments published by Jesuit Fr. D. Pujol over a century ago “. . . effectively demonstrating that the Apostle Peter and the Cephas of Antioch and Corinth could not have been the same person.” Fr. Pujol asserted that “Whether the dispute at Antioch between Paul and Cephas occurred before or after the Council of Jerusalem, it was chronologically impossible that Peter could have been there at either time.”

    Likoudis also mentions a vision by the stigmatist Theresa Neuman (d. 1962) in which she revealed:

 

"Cephas of the Epistle to the Galatians, whom Paul withstood to his face was not Peter, the prince of the Apostles. That there is no mention of this important personage in antiquity is based on the fact that Cephas was drowned in the sea while on a mission tour and thereupon the opinion arose that he did nothing in his new field of endeavor or even fell away from the faith." 

  

    Likoudis summarizes the work of other scholars on this issue, and concludes “That Peter and the Cephas (of Antioch and Corinth) are two different personages needs to be seriously re-examined and not be testily dismissed as a 'cockeyed theory'." He further states: ”The upshot of all the above is that in Gal. 2:7-14 where Petros is mentioned and then followed by a shift to Cephas, two distinct personages are differentiated.” 

       A quite intriguing article by James M. Scott delves into a 1708 work in Latin by French Jesuit Fr. Jean Hardouin called Dissertatio: In Qua Cepham a Paulo Reprehensum Petrum Non Esse Ostenditur (An Examination in Which It Is Demonstrated that Cephas Rebuked by Paul Is not Peter).
   

  The following quotes are representative of the views of Fr. Hardouin: 

      

“ Hardouin opens in AD 49, the year of the Jerusalem Council of Acts 15. The general line of this argument is that the Cephas in Antioch in Gal 2 cannot be Peter, since for chronological and motivational reasons Peter could not have returned to Jerusalem for the Council. “

      

“ Hardouin maintains that it is all but impossible that Peter, who never had seen Antioch within the 14 year period from Paul’s conversion, would in the fifteenth year “have raced in unbelievable speed” (“incredibili celeritate advolasse”) from Jerusalem to Antioch, been rebuked there by Paul, and within a month have hastened back to Jerusalem to be consulted by Paul about the very controversy back in Antioch.” 

 

“Hardouin says that Peter must be “clean from any blemish of heresy” (“immunem haereos labe…Petrum”) and that it is unthinkable that any “Summus Pontifex” would withdraw himself from baptized Christians solely because they were not circumcised. “

    For a thorough scriptural analysis of this controversy, I recommend this article by Bryan Davis. Although it is in the interest of Protestants to contend that Peter/Cephas are one and the same, since it implies fallibility, weakness and even sin to Peter, Mr. Davis, who is not Catholic, concludes with:

The evidence, both biblical and historical, is overwhelming that the man Paul confronted in Galatians is not the apostle Peter. That man was named Cephas, likely a Jew who sympathized with the Judaizers.

Because of Peter’s faithful defense of the Gentiles and their reception of the true gospel at every turn, it is important to make sure we do not denigrate Peter’s legacy with the false charge that he dissembled in Galatians chapter two. After the Holy Spirit indwelt him at Pentecost, he was sure and steadfast. Let us honor the truth about Peter and clear his name in the church, especially among those who have so greatly benefited from his faithful stand for our inclusion in the faith.

    Personally I am convinced that St. Paul did not rebuke St. Peter. Of course this blog post is certainly not going to resolve the problem, and scholars, pundits and bloggers will continue to debate the issue. However, it is clear that there is sufficient room to doubt the conventional scenario that St. Paul withstood St. Peter to his face. Catholics who take comfort in this incident in order to contemplate a public reproof of their pope or resist his teaching should take heed.

View all of my books.

Theology of the Community of Believers

Progressivist rationale for altering Catholic Doctrine.

From the time of the Council and even before, numerous progressivist authors have been demeaning the importance of Scripture and Tradition as the only sources of Revelation, in order to promote the inner experiences of the ecclesial community as a valid font of the Truth. This of course is in keeping with the Modernist concept of immanence, whereby each person primarily hears and senses the word of God spoken from within and only secondarily may hear it from a preacher of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Thus, all people of any religion whatsoever have something to offer. Hence the call for an ecumenical dialog with these omnipresent elements of sanctity, and the need to consider the religious feelings of the believing community as indicators of God's ongoing revelation for the Church.

This progressivist rationale for modifying dogmatic Catholic doctrine has been brought to light in the well-researched and thoroughly documented study by prolific Catholic author Atila Sinke Guimarães. He asserts that along with Scripture and Catholic Tradition, and the dogmatic teaching of the Magisterium, progressivists consider that Faith as an object of belief will also encompass an ensemble of the 'divine experiences' of the community. In his book Will He Find Faith? (Inveniet Fidem?), Guimarães uses direct quotations from these thinkers to convincingly document their belief that salvation history as it unfolds in the religious experiences of the ecclesial community, is an additional criterion for determining doctrine.

As far back as 1970, Fr. Walter Kasper wrote:

“. . . the charism of truth does not fall to the competence of a single individual, but to the unanimous testimony of the whole community of the faithful.” Kasper cites Lumen Gentium chapter 12, wherein we read:

“The entire body of the faithful, anointed as they are by the Holy One, cannot err in matters of belief. They manifest this special property by means of the whole peoples' supernatural discernment in matters of faith when 'from the Bishops down to the last of the lay faithful' they show universal agreement in matters of faith and morals.”

It's a matter of dialog!

Kasper continues: “From this, a new, less static and more dynamic and dialogical conception of orthodoxy is born. The correct understanding of the Faith today must be periodically established through an open and public dialogue among all charisms, services and orientations existing in the Church, and by means of a communitarian listening to the Gospel”. [p. 339; Will He Find Faith?]

 

The Magisterium of the Diocesan Survey

According to Fr. Karl Rahner: [p. 321] “Catholic exegesis and biblical theology are seriously questioning themselves today regarding the words of Jesus, asking what can be literally considered an original word by the historic Jesus himself, and what …. is already a formulation of the 'theology of the community'.” “For not every word of the historic Jesus can be identified with the concept of an original revelation.”

Fr. M .D. Chenu: [p. 334] “As a consequence of the Council, theology is now conceived as 'salvation history'. Tradition is substantially qualified as living tradition.”

The Jesuit Fr. Alberto Franzini: [pp. 323-4] “Then one understands why the transmission of revelation is not confided only to preaching and teaching, but also to the witness of faith of all the believers.” “Finally, one understands how in the Church the Scripture is 'insufficient' to disseminate the revelation of Christ without the reality of the ecclesial community's living Tradition.” Franzini states that there must be a socially visible presence of salvation, “a presence that can be adequately assured by an ecclesial-communitarian form of believers. “

Thus it should not be a surprise that the Catholic understanding of marriage, the family, and reception of Holy Communion is now subject to the Magisterium of the Diocesan Survey, in the Pope Francis era. If this tactic succeeds in actually altering any traditional doctrine in the upcoming Synod or thereafter, then in this blogger's opinion, Modernism will have triumphed in the Vatican. The true Church, however, will persist like live coals under the ashes, even without the support of the hierarchy.

Guimarães' book, Will He Find Faith? (Inveniet Fidem?), from which the above quotes are taken, traces the history of the progressivists' influence on the Church and on the fruits of the Council. He demonstrates that to them, the Faith is subjective rather than objective, and is relative rather than absolute. After presenting an overview of Scholasticism, he turns to a consideration of modern thought from the Cartesian revolution and the French Enlightenment, through liberalism, modernism and existentialism. He quotes profusely from conciliar theologians such as Karl Rahner, Hans Von Balthasar, Yves Congar, Edward Schillebeeckx, and lesser known “lights.” The book is Volume VI of his indispensable eleven volume study of Vatican II.

Atila Sinke Guimarães' books on the Council are available Here.

Effeminate Priests

Our Lord laments to Luisa Piccarreta about effeminate Priests, sacrilegious Masses, and the laity touching the Blessed Sacrament with their hands. 

From the Church-approved Volume Seven of the spiritual "Diary" Book of Heaven, of the Servant of God Luisa Piccarreta.  Imprimatur of Archbishop Joseph Leo and Nihil Obstat of (now Saint) Fr. Annibale Di Francia. 

The Lord, in a very afflicted state, lamented to Luisa: “My daughter, so much bitterness is given to Me by creatures that I cannot contain it all. For this reason, I wanted you to participate in it [as a victim soul]. In these times, all is effeminate. Even the clergy have lost the masculine character, and have acquired feminine manners. It has become more difficult to find masculine Priests, since there is an abundance of effeminate ones around. Oh, in what a deplorable state humanity is found in.” Luisa then wrote that she did not understand the meaning if what He had told her, but she still writes it down because she is under obedience to do so. (Oct. 23, 1906.)

My note: Since Luisa did not understand about effeminate priests, this appears to have been a prophetic utterance on the part of the Lord, who was talking about a future time, as He frequently does with Luisa. Seminarian Francesco Forgione, now known as St. Padre Pio, in that same year of 1906, was undergoing his formation in southern Italy, where Luisa lived. His training for the priesthood was very rigorous and demanding. Padre Pio himself in later life admitted that his seminary regimen could have been less severe and strict. It is not likely that there was a problem with effeminate priests in that era.

Three days prior to the above experience, Luisa had a vision which also appears to have been prophetic. Here it is revealed that Jesus considers that the laity, by putting their hands on the Holy Sacrament, entering the Sanctuary, and touching the Priests, are guilty of profanations deserving of severe chastisements.

In this vision Luisa found herself in a church where many people were taking part in the sacred ceremonies. Then, it seemed that with the approval of those in authority, other persons entered who began to profane the Sanctuary. Scurrying here and there, they sacrilegiously put their hands on the Holy Sacrament and also upon the Priests. Luisa, upon seeing this, cried out to the Lord to stop them from profaning His Sacred Temples, and she feared for the severe chastisements that He would pour out upon men for such horrible sins.

But the Lord replied that these enormous crimes are caused by the sins of the Priests. First, they profaned in a hidden manner His Holy Church with sacrilegious Masses, by mixing impure acts in the administration of the Sacraments. Committing these acts under the guise of holiness, they have arrived at not only profaning His churches of stone, but also at violating His living temples which are the souls, and profaning His very Body.

All of this eventually filtered down to the laity. Not seeing in the Priests the necessary light for their own progress, finding instead only shadows, they have become so darkened as to lose the beautiful light of the Faith; and without this light it is no wonder that they have come to such grave excesses. Prayer is needed so that the Priests may become a light for the people, permitting the seculars to reacquire the light to see the errors they are committing. Seeing them, the they will be reluctant to continue these grave excesses, which will be the cause of equally grave chastisements.

I have freely translated the above from the original Italian found Here. 

To learn more about the mystic Luisa Piccarreta, click Here.

 

Is Our Lord pleased with Laudato Si? - Updated

Jesus explains that human and scientific interests are not a Priest's concern.

 

This morning, finding myself outside myself, I could see some Priests.  They were dedicated to human and scientific interests which were unnecessary to their state of life, and which were done with the mixture of a rebellious spirit to their superior authorities. 

 

Then Our Lord, who was very distressed, said to me: 

 

"My daughter, the human and scientific interests are not the Priests' concern. A muddy and putrid second nature is formed, and the works that come out of those interests - even holy ones - stink so greatly, nauseating Me so much as to be intolerable.  Pray and repair for these offenses, for I am weary."  (08/25/1906.)

 

From the approved Volume Seven of the spiritual "Diary" Book of Heaven, of the Servant of God Luisa Piccarreta.  Imprimatur of Archbishop Joseph Leo and Nihil Obstat of (now Saint) Fr. Annibale Di Francia. 

Update - from a vision of Luisa's (08/12/1910 volume 9): 

 

". . .  I saw many priests running away from the Church and turning against the Church to wage war against Her.  I looked at those priests with great sorrow, and I felt a light that made me comprehend that the origin of this and all the evil of priests is in dealing with souls about human things, things all of a material nature, without a strict necessity.  These human things form a net for the priest which blinds his mind, hardens his heart to divine things, and prevents his step on the path that befits him in the office of his ministry.  Not only this, but it is a net for souls, because they bring what is human, and receive what is human, and grace remains as though excluded from them.  Oh! how much evil is committed by these - how many slaughters of souls they make!"

 

To learn more about the mystic Luisa Piccarreta, click Here.

The Counter-Encyclical

Against the Errors of Environmentalism

Brother Alexis Bugnolo, one of the world's foremost experts on St. Francis of Assisi and Franciscanism, and editor of the Franciscan Archive, presents a counter-encyclical to the Laudato Si' of Pope Francis.

Ostensibly written by a future Pope, its full title is “On the Honor and Glory Due to the Divine Majesty of the Most Holy Trinity – Against the Errors of Environmentalism. It “affirms and declares” that the totality of Laudato Si' and all its parts are to be considered merely as the personal doctrine of Jorge Mario Bergoglio, and not of the Apostolic See of St. Peter.

Some highlights of the counter-encyclical

“We consider it necessary to remove a grave scandal which has shaken the whole world: namely, that which emanated from the once unsullied throne of this Apostolic See. I speak of the encyclical letter, Laudato Si' of my predecessor, Francis, of infelicitous memory . . . promoting in an official papal document, into which he mixed many half-truths, the falsehood of environmentalism unto the deception of the entire Catholic world.”

The counter-encyclical enumerates many reasons to attest that “it is not man who is the lord and master of creation, but God; that it is not man who is first and foremost responsible for the heavens and the earth and all these contain, but God. . . For this reason it is theologically an effrontery to God to say or concede that the environment of this planet earth depends upon mankind.”

“To say or imply, therefore, that man's activities in general make this world ugly or pollute it is false, erroneous and implicitly heretical, inasmuch as it impugns the Divine Goodness, Providence and Wisdom of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.”

“This sinful obsession with earthly things is, as the glorious Doctor of the Church, the Seraphic Saint Bonaventure frequently notes, the necessary consequent of a human spirit bent down to face earthly things by the weight of his own sins and vices and concupiscences.”

“We recognize and declare, that since God at the beginning had both made all things and declared them together with man, 'very good' (Genesis 1:30 and throughout), that it is a mortal sin of blasphemy to call them or their use evil, and thus, likewise a grave error and sin, to say that their non-use or discarding, is of itself, or according to its genus a sin.”

Brother Alexis Bugnolo links to this work Here and Here. A printable version of the text is made available by this blog, Here

Posted 06/19/2015 by Frank Rega, www.frankrega.com

Our Lord's Words to Luisa Piccarreta

From the Church-approved volume six of her spiritual "Diary," the Book of Heaven.
Imprimatur of Archbishop Joseph Leo and Nihil Obstat of (now Saint) Fr. Annibale Di Francia. 
____________________________________________________________________________________

"My daughter, when the soul does all of her actions for the sole purpose of loving Me, and wants no other recompense for her work but my love alone, she walks always in daylight - it is never nighttime for her."

"My daughter, true love forgets himself, and lives of the interests, of the pains, and of everything that belongs to the beloved."

"Indeed, there is no beauty that equals suffering for the love of God alone."

"My daughter, in the Creation I gave my image to the soul; in the Incarnation I gave my Divinity, divinizing humanity."

"Therefore,  hold peace as your greatest treasure if you cherish being united with Me."

"Oh, how difficult it is to enjoy pleasures, to dress luxuriously on the outside, and to despise those things internally!  On the contrary, the opposite occurs - that is, one loves in his interior, and enjoys, what surrounds him externally."

"My daughter, my Life manifests Itself in the creatures through words, through works, and through sufferings, but what manifests It more clearly are the sufferings."

"The Life of God in the soul is Hope, and the more you hope, the more Divine Life you contain within yourself.  Therefore, hope -- hope always."

"In fact, if the soul lets herself be dominated by the cross, the cross destroys three evil kingdoms in her, which are the world, the devil and the flesh, and it constitutes in her three more good Kingdoms: the Spiritual, the Divine and the Eternal Kingdom."

"Not only this, but since the other things had been created for man, and man for God alone and for His Delight, as a consequence he was not only to encompass all creation within himself, but he was to surpass it to the point of receiving the image of the Supreme Majesty within himself." 

"How much attention it takes so as not to let material things enter inside, if by necessity she has to deal with them!  You, my daughter, be attentive; otherwise, if I see anything which is not divine in you, I will not make Myself seen anymore."

"Stability alone is what reveals the progress of Divine Life within the soul, because, since God is immutable, one who possesses Him shares in His immutability in good."

"Daughter, let everything in you be sealed by love.  If you think, you must only think of love; if you speak, if your work, if you palpitate, if you desire . . .  If even just one desire which is not love comes out of you, restrict it within yourself, convert it into love, and then give it the freedom to go out."

"Everything, everything should be enclosed in one single word: 'Love.'  If the soul does not enclose everything in this, it can be said that she does not know a thing about loving Me, and according to how much the soul loves Me, so do I expand the gift of suffering."

"In fact, the mind nourishes itself with what it thinks, and by looking at God alone, of the things down here, she looks only at those that God wants, not bothering about anything else, and so she remains always in God."

"The weight of any action, be it even an indifferent one, increases according to the dose of love it contains, because I do not look at the work, but at the intensity of love that the working contains."

"Indeed that of the soul which pleases me most is perseverance, because perseverance is seal of eternal life and development of divine life."

"This is the order of my Providence, of my Justice and of my Love - that in each era I must have at least one with whom I might share all goods, and that the creature must give Me everything she owes Me as creature. . .  This is precisely why I choose victim souls. .  . During the time of My Passion I had my dearest Mother who, while I shared all my pains and all my goods with her, was most attentive as creature, on gathering within herself everything that creatures were to do for Me. Therefore in her I found all my satisfaction and all the gratitude, the thanksgiving, the praise, the reparation, the correspondence which I was to find in everyone else."

To learn more about the mystic Luisa Piccarreta, click Here.


Posted 06/18/2015 by Frank Rega, www.frankrega.com

Notes on Two American Icons, Yogi and Elvis

As the great catcher turns 90, an online petition to the White House seeks the Presidential Medal of Freedom for Yogi Berra.

On the day that Elvis Presley died, an astonishing and mysterious phenomenon occurred shortly after his passing. 
 

Part One: Yogi.

Yogi Berra Celebrates 90th Birthday. Here's a news article from the big day itself:

LITTLE FALLS, N.J. (AP) — As Yogi Berra might say, when you turn 90 you should celebrate it right the first time. Please click Here. 

"As Yogi Berra turns 90, baseball tips its cap." For an entertaining collection of reminiscences and birthday greetings from his teammates and friends. Click Here. 

And finally.... 

We petition the White House to award Yogi Berra the Presidential Medal of Freedom for his military service and civil rights and educational activism. This is important: click Here to sign the online White House petition seeking Presidential Medal of Freedom for Yogi Berra.

Part Two: Elvis.

Dick Grob, who was in charge of the security detail that protected Presley, received an urgent phone call on the hot summer afternoon of August 16, 1977. The brief call to his home alerted Grob to the frightening news that Elvis was being taken to the hospital by ambulance in serious condition. Grob continues:

“Thoughts continued to race through my mind as I tried to assess the situation, Elvis was not at Graceland but en route to the hospital, so he must be “damaged.” It was becoming clear, I at least needed to go there first. That way I could assess the situation. If Elvis was going to be admitted, things would be handled as they were when he had entered the hospital before.

“As I raced at speeds up to 100 mph toward Baptist Hospital, only slowing for red lights and then speeding through them, I was mentally running through the thousands of different possible scenarios. I was still trying to fathom what might have happened. Not once did it occur to me that Elvis would be dead, that he had died at Graceland sometime before. Not once did this worst of all possible disasters pass before my eyes.

“Even with the air conditioning pouring out full blast I was already dripping wet with perspiration. Suddenly I felt a sudden and very different cold come over me. It wasn't like the cold one receives from an over-productive air conditioning system. This was an eerie unexplainable frostiness . . .

“Beside the chill, something else happened. I saw no visions, heard no words booming out loud to me from above, nothing like that, but I had a feeling, a mental thought. Through my mind passed a very clear meaningful message. It was more than my own thought, for I had been thinking any number of things but not anything close to this. It was as if someone were talking to me, telling me something, communicating with me. There was no sound. Whatever it was, was inside my head, in my mind. The clear, mental voice that I sensed, said: “Dick, slow down, it's over, there is nothing you can do now, don't kill yourself or anyone else because it is too late and there will be plenty of work to do.”

“Little did I realize then, how true that voice and its meaning was to be in the days ahead. I immediately slowed to the speed limit, below the limit. It's funny, as I look back on that drive now, I can recall the instant when I mentally felt and heard that voice. I still get shivers from it. This was a voice without a body, a voice without a tone, a voice without a face, yet there is no doubt in my mind who was conversing with me mentally. An immediate calm came over me and all the negative thoughts stopped passing through my mind at once. My mind was no longer cluttered with different disasters . . . My mission had dramatically changed. Deep in my mind I knew Elvis would perform no more for mortal man. His next performance would be backed by a band of heavenly angels. Somehow, I knew exactly what I would find when I reached the hospital, and that my entire reason for being would dramatically change in the next few minutes.” 

Excerpted, condensed and edited from pp. 195-200. The Elvis Conspiracy? by Richard H. Grob, Fox Reflections Publishing, 1979. Info on this book Here.

Posted 05/17/2015  www.frankrega.com