Very early on, the new pope distinguished himself from his predecessor. With his liberal views on economics, abortion and other topics, it was clear he was something different from the previous pope. This progressive worldview seemed to strike a chord with liberal Americans and the world, as in 2014 his popularity and approval seemed to be universal among the left. Now, these circumstances seem to be changing.
Perhaps the pope got too comfortable with his popularity, because now it seems to be on the decline.
GO TO THE NEXT PAGE TO SEE WHAT HAPPENED TO THE POPE’S APPROVAL:
Acts 6:1-8 – Now during those days, when the disciples were increasing in number, the Hellenists complained against the Hebrews because their widows were being neglected in the daily distribution of food. And the twelve called together the whole community of the disciples and said, ‘It is not right that we should neglect the word of God in order to wait at tables. Therefore, friends, select from among yourselves seven men of good standing, full of the Spirit and of wisdom, whom we may appoint to this task, 4while we, for our part, will devote ourselves to prayer and to serving the word.’ What they said pleased the whole community, and they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and the Holy Spirit, together with Philip, Prochorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas, and Nicolaus, a proselyte of Antioch. They had these men stand before the apostles, who prayed and laid their hands on them. The word of God continued to spread; the number of the disciples increased greatly in Jerusalem, and a great many of the priests became obedient to the faith. Stephen, full of grace and power, did great wonders and signs among the people. (NRSV)
APOLOGETIC:
Traditionally this p$#%&!@*age has been identified with the appointment of the first seven deacons of the Church. It is also important to see how one of these men called Philip – even though he was able to preach and baptize – he was not able to confirm the new christians. That’s why the apostles Peter and John were sent to Samaria to confirm them (Acts 8:12-17), here we can see this is not the apostle Philip.
St Stephen is often portrayed with the diaconal vestment: the dalmatic. This clearly shows not only the order of Deacon as part of the Sacrament of Holy Orders, but also confirms in context the order of Priesthood and Bishop. Below a quote from New Advent
Origin and early history of the diaconate
According to the constant tradition of the Catholic Church, the narrative of Acts 6:1-6, which serves to introduce the account of the martyrdom of St. Stephen, describes the first ins$#%&!@*ution of the office of deacon. The Apostles, in order to meet the complaints of the Hellenistic Jews that, “their widows were neglected in the daily ministrations” (diakonia), called together
the mul$#%&!@*ude of the disciples and said: It is not reason that we should leave the word of God and serve (diakonein) tables. Wherefore, brethren, look ye out seven men of good reputation, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business. But we will give ourselves continuously to prayer, and to the ministry of the word (te diakonia tou logou). And the saying was liked by all the mul$#%&!@*ude. And they chose Stephen, a man full of faith, and of the Holy Ghost
(with six others who are named). These they placed “before the Apostles; and they, praying, imposed hands upon them.”
Now, on the ground that the Seven are not expressly called deacons and that some of them (e.g. St. Stephen, and later Phillip (Acts 21:8) preached and ranked next to the Apostles, Protestant commentators have constantly raised objections against the identification of this choice of the Seven with the ins$#%&!@*ution of the diaconate. But apart from the fact that the tradition among the Fathers is both unanimous and early — e.g. St. Irenaeus (Adv. Haer., III, xii, 10 and IV, xv, 1) speaks of St. Stephen as the first deacon — the similarity between the functions of the Seven who served the tables and those of the early deacons is most striking. Compare, for example, both with the p$#%&!@*age from the Acts with 1 Timothy 3:8 sq., quoted above…
Mark 16:7 – But go, tell his disciples and Peter that he is going ahead of you to Galilee; there you will see him, just as he told you.’ (NRSV)
APOLOGETIC: Angel sent to announce Resurrection – tells Peter first.
ROCK – PETROS – KEPHA
Karl Keeting – Catholic Answers – 2004
Full Article – http://www.catholic.com/library/Peter_the_Rock.asp
“We know that Jesus spoke Aramaic because some of his words are preserved for us in the Gospels. Look at Matthew 27:46, where he says from the cross, ‘Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani?’ That isn’t Greek; it’s Aramaic, and it means, ‘My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?’
“What’s more,” I said, “in Paul’s epistles—four times in Galatians and four times in 1 Corinthians—we have the Aramaic form of Simon’s new name preserved for us. In our English Bibles it comes out as Cephas. That isn’t Greek. That’s a transliteration of the Aramaic word Kepha (rendered as Kephas in its Hellenistic form).
“And what does Kepha mean? It means a rock, the same as petra. (It doesn’t mean a little stone or a pebble. What Jesus said to Simon in Matthew 16:18 was this: ‘You are Kepha, and on this kepha I will build my Church.’
“When you understand what the Aramaic says, you see that Jesus was equating Simon and the rock; he wasn’t contrasting them. We see this vividly in some modern English translations, which render the verse this way: ‘You are Rock, and upon this rock I will build my church.’ In French one word, pierre, has always been used both for Simon’s new name and for the rock.”
“If kepha means the same as petra, why don’t we read in the Greek, ‘You are Petra, and on this petra I will build my Church’? Why, for Simon’s new name, does Matthew use a Greek word, Petros, which means something quite different from petra?”
“Greek and Aramaic have different grammatical structures. In Aramaic you can use kepha in both places in Matthew 16:18. In Greek you encounter a problem arising from the fact that nouns take differing gender endings.
“You have masculine, feminine, and neuter nouns. The Greek word petra is feminine. You can use it in the second half of Matthew 16:18 without any trouble. But you can’t use it as Simon’s new name, because you can’t give a man a feminine name—at least back then you couldn’t. You have to change the ending of the noun to make it masculine. When you do that, you get Petros, which was an already-existing word meaning rock.
“I admit that’s an imperfect rendering of the Aramaic; you lose part of the play on words. In English, where we have ‘Peter’ and ‘rock,’ you lose all of it. But that’s the best you can do in Greek.”
Beyond the grammatical evidence, the structure of the narrative does not allow for a downplaying of Peter’s role in the Church. Look at the way Matthew 16:15-19 is structured. After Peter gives a confession about the iden$#%&!@*y of Jesus, the Lord does the same in return for Peter. Jesus does not say, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. And I tell you, you are an insignificant pebble and on this rock I will build my Church. . . . I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven.” Jesus is giving Peter a three-fold blessing, including the gift of the keys to the kingdom, not undermining his authority. To say that Jesus is downplaying Peter flies in the face of the context. Jesus is installing Peter as a form of chief steward or prime minister under the King of Kings by giving him the keys to the kingdom.
As can be seen in Isaiah 22:22, kings in the Old Testament appointed a chief steward to serve under them in a position of great authority to rule over the inhabitants of the kingdom. Jesus quotes almost verbatum from this p$#%&!@*age in Isaiah, and so it is clear what he has in mind. He is raising Peter up as a father figure to the household of faith (Is. 22:21), to lead them and guide the flock (John 21:15-17). This authority of the prime minister under the king was p$#%&!@*ed on from one man to another down through the ages by the giving of the keys, which were worn on the shoulder as a sign of authority. Likewise, the authority of Peter has been p$#%&!@*ed down for 2000 years by means of the papacy.
Acts 15:19 – Therefore I have reached the decision that we should not trouble those Gentiles who are turning to God, (NRSV)
APOLOGETIC: Peter pronounces the first dogmatic decision.
Acts 15:7 – After there had been much debate, Peter stood up and said to them, ‘My brothers, you know that in the early days God made a choice among you, that I should be the one through whom the Gentiles would hear the message of the good news and become believers. (NRSV)
APOLOGETIC: Peter leads the first council of Jerusalem.
Acts 8:21 – You have no share or lot in this matter, for your heart is not upright before God. (NAB)
APOLOGETIC: Peter excommunicates first heretic – Simon Magnus.
Acts 5:1-11 – But a man named Ananias, with the consent of his wife Sapphira, sold a piece of property; with his wife’s knowledge, he kept back some of the proceeds, and brought only a part and laid it at the apostles’ feet. ‘Ananias,’ Peter asked, ‘why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit and to keep back part of the proceeds of the land? While it remained unsold, did it not remain your own? And after it was sold, were not the proceeds at your disposal? How is it that you have contrived this deed in your heart? You did not lie to us but to God!’ Now when Ananias heard these words, he fell down and died. And great fear seized all who heard of it. The young men came and wrapped up his body, then carried him out and buried him. After an interval of about three hours his wife came in, not knowing what had happened. Peter said to her, ‘Tell me whether you and your husband sold the land for such and such a price.’ And she said, ‘Yes, that was the price.’ Then Peter said to her, ‘How is it that you have agreed together to put the Spirit of the Lord to the test? Look, the feet of those who have buried your husband are at the door, and they will carry you out.’ Immediately she fell down at his feet and died. When the young men came in they found her dead, so they carried her out and buried her beside her husband. And great fear seized the whole church and all who heard of these things. (NRSV)
APOLOGETIC: Peter performs first punishment
Acts 3:6-7 – But Peter said, ‘I have no silver or gold, but what I have I give you; in the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, stand up and walk.’ And he took him by the right hand and raised him up; and immediately his feet and ankles were made strong. (NRSV)
APOLOGETIC: Peter performs first miracle through the power of the Holy Spirit.
What is going on in his head?
Acts 1:20 – ‘For it is written in the book of Psalms, “Let his homestead become desolate, and let there be no one to live in it”; and “Let another take his position of overseer.” (NRSV)
APOLOGETIC: Apostolic succession – let another take his office.