Peter was not the rock, but Christ Himself (and Peter’s faith in Him). 1 Cor. 10.4 even says, “And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.”
Thank you, sir. I do look forward to interacting with you on this issue, for as an Anglican, I find it immensely difficult to accept the Western (post 8th Ecumenical Council) positions which differ from those of the East. Photias’ work on the Filioque (being a Triadological error) seem convincing, and it does make one wonder how the first 8th Council is deemed to be the true one by the Roman Catholic Church, whereas the second 8th (which was the last one and attended by Roman legates) is deemed to be the true one.
These issues are the main issues which make me attracted to the East, rather than the West. So, I would be grateful for your thoughts on these issues, for I’ve never heard a satisfactory response before. Usually it goes along the lines of, “Holy Mother Church–Rome–says so, so therefore I believe it,” which of course is fine for those in communion with Rome, but the question they should be answering is why should those of us not in communion with Rome be so, especially in light of these (at least perceived by the East) errors.
The East, cut of from the Pope, has no right to decide what is, and what isn’t. My next post will hopefully show that the Fathers in the East did indeed acknowledge the Primacy of Peter in determining the fine points of Catholic doctrine. I find it strange that Anglicans always try to “leap-frog” over Rome to gp to the Greeks.