The One Passage that Proves the Papacy (to Protestants)

Joe Heschmeyer explains that the Catholic doctrine of the papacy isn’t solely based on Matthew 16:18 offering insights from his book, Pope Peter.

Get more Shameless Popery on Patreon!

[vtaylor]

I like Luke's passage where Jesus told Peter to strengthen his brothers.

All the apostles turned away from Jesus. The Apostle John was the only one who came back while Jesus was on the cross. Yet, Jesus didn't tell John to strengthen his brothers. He only told Peter.

[SuperTommox]

If Peter is not the rock, Our Lord changed his name for no reason.

[timrichardson]

The papacy was the final hurdle blocking me from becoming a Catholic. Your book, Pope Peter, settles that for me. I entered the Church on Easter Vigil 2023 and have never looked back.

[CatholicaVeritas]

I’m Indonesian and Pope Francis just went to my country!

[faithbasedliving]

Through out my 7 years of being a devout non denominational Christian, Matthew 16 always tugged at my heart strings. It bothered me Christian’s would say it didn’t mean the papacy but they also never had another interpretation of it.
I start RCIA this week 🙏💕

[jaycefields]

If only my mom was actually a Protestant and I could convince her with the usual arguments. But no, she’s not one. She’s barely even a Christian. She believes in Jesus and God (her words) but doesn’t trust the Bible bc it was written by men. She thinks that organized religion is a scam to steal people’s money. Instead she thinks that God leads people to Him in their own unique way through what she calls “a heart compass.” Basically God draws all people to Him (which is true) but it stops there in her mind. He’s never revealed Himself through any writings or churches. She hates that I am Catholic and we argue constantly. Please pray for us.

[christiandavedurado]

Everytime you post a video, I'm making sure to watch it and it really help me understand our faith better. Warm regards from the Philippines

[shamelesspopery]

In this video, I explore why I think starting with Matthew 16 is typically not the best approach for explaining the papacy to non-Catholics, and gave the passage I find more straightforward. Yet every Protestant objection (so far) has assumed this video was about Matthew 16, and not addressed the passage I mentioned *at all.* I love a spirited debate, and I'm incredibly grateful for my Protestant listeners (including those who are critical!), but it really does help to watch the episode before you try to rebut it!

[thejerichoconnection]

To me the cleanest case is by connecting John 10 with John 21. If there’s only one flock (John 10) and Jesus gave Peter his flock to tend (John 21), either you are in the flock Peter tends or you are in the wrong flock. End of the papacy debate.

[rappmasterdugg]

The protestant argument against Matthew 16 goes like this: God changed the name of four people in the bible. Abram became Abraham, "Father of a Nation, " the founder of Israel from which Christianity came. Sarai, his wife, became Sarah, the Princess, and mother of the nation. Jacob became Israel, "Contends with God." He received all of the blessings of Abraham, and the nation of Israel took his name. In the case of Simon, Jesus changed his name to Peter so Jesus could make a pun at Caesarea Philippi.

[Mr.Peck]

The irony is that when John MacArthur etc. misinterpret Luke 22, they are in fact playing the role of Satan to undermine the Church.

[holdintheaces]

My favorite defense is the name change. Every person that God chose to be the start of a new chosen "group" throughout the bible had God give them a new name. Abram > Abraham (and Sarai > Sarah) when God chooses him to be the father of all nations. Jacob > Israel when God chooses him to be the father of his Chosen Peoples, the Israelites. Hoshea > Joshua as the successor to Moses. Solomon > Jedediah by the prophet Nathan, becomes the great King who builds the First Temple. And Simon > Peter, as a symbol of his designation as the Rock upon which he will build his church, the shepherd of God's flock (John 10, 21), holder of the keys (Mathew 16), and as you point out the one to use his faith to strengthen the other 12 (Luke 22).

As usual, the connections to the Old Testament are lost on many modern Christians, but are very purposeful. Name changes signify a designation of a purpose from God. The change of his name to Peter carries the weight of all other name changes before it.

[vtaylor]

If Peter’s confession of faith is the rock, then Peter is the rock.

You can't separate the profession of faith from the person who confessed the faith.

[someonesomewhere]

Joe, Joe, Joe! You're a blessing, may you be blessed in return 🙏

[thejerichoconnection]

Is the rock Christ, Peter, or Peter’s confession?
Catholics: “Yes”

[MaranglikPeterTo-Rot]

Thank you very much, Brother Joe H, and your team for yet another great piece of content.

"Peter, you are Kefa! And on this Kefa, I will build my Church, and the powers of Hades shall not prevail against it."

God bless you and your ministry.




Greetings from Papua New Guinea 🇵🇬. I was privileged to see the Holy Father, Papa Francisco, during his four-day Apostolic journey to my country.

[ozoz]

Also what does history tell us? Did the THE church see The Roman bishop as successor of Peter? The answer is yes! Both east and west. History defeats the Protestant view! This view is not seen until the great deformation.

[perochialjoe]

For all this talk of the pope this channel is oddly quiet on him declaring all religions are valid paths to God.

[TheThreatenedSwan]

Mike Winger makes one of dumbest cases for sola scriptura I've ever seen, but it's probably not far off from the average evangelical who hasn't thought through things for a few seconds. There was an authoritative Church preaching the gospel by approved men under the authority of the apostles from Jesus. Winger acts like they were always sola scriptura which makes no sense when there was no new testament scripture. He just pretends that Catholics have no case in principle and there was never a situation where the early did not look like how he wants it to

[DarrylCross]

John MacArthur's arguments at the end there reminds me of childhood, where some of the disagreements and debates in the schoolyard were settled with a "nah-uh" or alternatively, sticking ones fingers in their own ears and yelling "LaLaLa I can't hear you." A time-honored classic.