As I think about this, I recall that of all the apostles in the gospels, Peter was the one who usually got it wrong. Time after time, Jesus rebuked him for his lack of faith, his overprotectiveness, and his lack of followthrough. But on such was the church founded.
Peter, having seen Jesus with a bowl and pitcher and a towel around his waist in a borrowed room, would likely be astounded at the opulence of a standard suburban church, much less a basilica. He would be mystified by the concept of a "pope" and "cardinals", not to mention "priests", mandatory celibacy and the minutiae of Canon Law.
In his day, churches were communities of believers who belonged at the risk of their livelihood if not their lives. Members looked out for each other's welfare in a hostile world and the Bishop looked out for them all. Bishops made decisions with the help of the elders in the community, not arbitrarily. Their connection to the wider church consisted of helping communities that were worse off then they were, not coordinating the rules of liturgical celebrations or parsing points of dogma. Jesus, the son of God, died and rose to show us the way to God. What's so ambiguous about that? How can people possibly disagree so much, to the point of fighting wars?
I imagine the classism between rich and poor congregations would by most disturbing. Where is the community? Why is the potluck separate from the prayer, aside from these strange, round matzoh disks? And why do you call it a "host", as if it had some sort of disease?
How would Peter envision the church? If he could wield any authority, he would probably dismantle the Vatican bureaucracy, sell the buildings and furnishings to help the poor, and decentralize the power of the Church to local control, including the election of bishops. He would invite all Christian churches to acknowledge each other. He would admonish their leaders to act as servants, not masters, and their members to act with love and kindness toward each other.
2006-12-18 12:45:16
·
answer #1
·
answered by skepsis 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Well -you could get a awful long answer, so I shall be brief.
He walked with Jesus, Denied jesus, and was redeemed. He saw and performed many miracles. In the gospel of john, at the very end, John said If everything Jesus did was written down, it would fill 100's of books. So this is what Peter saw as one of the first, and dearest disciples. Peter would want to see the church now, as it was back then. People really willing to die for their faith. my favorite quote from acts is from Peter - They left the sanhedran rejoicing that they could be persecuted because of the name Jesus
2006-12-18 19:38:10
·
answer #2
·
answered by Slave to JC 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
I don't think Peter would be happy with the church today, he would want it to get back to the doctrines that he and the other apostles taught, that is the teachings of Christ.
Today much is what people think and what feels good to them.
And he sure would not like it that some man claimed to be the vicar of Christ on earth, and that he (Peter) was the first pope.
2006-12-18 19:41:12
·
answer #3
·
answered by G3 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
I think he would be shocked that the Roman Catholics think he was the first Pope.
Jesus had asked Peter who he thought he was and Peter responded, "You are the Christ" and Jesus replied, "you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church" NOT on Peter this is ridiculous. Can Peter save us? NO. Jesus said, "I am the corner stone"
Peter was also married, bible says this.
Also Peter would never let anyone bow down to him, they tried and he said he was just a man. What would he say to see others kiss the Popes ring and call him 'holy father?" He would be appalled!-Pun intended!
†
2006-12-18 19:41:30
·
answer #4
·
answered by Jeanmarie 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
Jesus gave Peter the keys to the kingdom of heaven, and Peter said to Repent and be Baptized in the name of Jesus and to recieve the Holy Ghost, so he probably would want the church to be this way...but now we have so many "religions" that he would be shocked at how scattered we are in our beliefs.
2006-12-18 19:37:02
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
Envision ???
It occurs to me that there may be something structurally invalid about the question as worded. Consider, for example the question of the same form:
How would your mother want the shopping mall two thousand years ago?
:Presumably, Peter died. - Existentialism.
To assume that the leadership has failed to produce and maintain the institution their lives are given to counters the definition of the Papacy.
2006-12-18 19:52:05
·
answer #6
·
answered by Happy Camper 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think he would be sadden by how closed minded The Church and some of the people are today.
2006-12-18 19:33:14
·
answer #7
·
answered by daljack -a girl 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
Not to be violent or not to pressure and force people into religion.
2006-12-18 19:32:24
·
answer #8
·
answered by Cold Fart 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
I'm thinking less baroque and more post-modern minimalist.
2006-12-18 19:39:09
·
answer #9
·
answered by lcraesharbor 7
·
0⤊
1⤋