Donatus or Catholic

After the Donatist controversy there were leaders on both sides that claimed the other party left the true church.

One writer was a Catholic named Bishop Optatus who made an argument that Catholics possessed the Cathedra or Chair of Peter. It was based upon the idea that Peter passed the keys to the kingdom of heaven to the Bishops of Rome.

Of course the promise to Peter had nothing about Rome in it, there is nothing that promoted Rome over other cities.

Mat 16:19  And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven. Mat 16:19  And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.

Peter and the apostles loosed on earth, so that their decrees covered Rome as well, Rome never had an individual power of binding and loosing.

Optatus provided no proof that Peter passed keys to anyone, it was simply hearsay without a definitive statement from Peter or other apostles. Peter had visited many cities and there was no reason Rome should receive power over others.

One interesting remark was that the chair of Peter was a shrine. It seems followers built a chair as a shrine that Peter was there. There was also a seat/chair built as a shrine to Paul.

But you allege that you too have some sort of a party in the City of Rome. It is a branch of your error growing out of a lie, not from the root of truth. In a word, were Macrobius to be asked where he sits in the City, will he be able to say on Peter’s Cathedra? I doubt whether he has even set eyes upon it, and schismatic that he is, he has not drawn nigh to Peter’s Shrine…. Behold, in Rome are the Shrines of the two Apostles [i.e. Sts. Peter and Paul]. Will you tell me whether he [i.e. Macrobius] has been able to approach them, or has offered Sacrifice in those places, where as is certain are these Shrines of the Saints.21

The argument by Optatus was that the Catholics possessed the shrines, therefore they were the true church. Also, a shrine would no longer be in practical use by a current Bishop, it would be set apart from current use.

I would argue that those building shrines to men and then offering sacrifices would be apostate. They would be a cult in Peter or Paul's honor.

This was likely not commanded by Christ or the Father who renounced building shrines to men. It was likely not Peter's idea either.

Mat 17:1  And after six days Jesus taketh unto him Peter and James, and John his brother, and bringeth them up into a high mountain apart:

Mat 17:2  And he was transfigured before them. And his face did shine as the sun: and his garments became white as snow.

Mat 17:3  And behold there appeared to them Moses and Elias talking with him.

Mat 17:4  And Peter answering, said to Jesus: Lord, it is good for us to be here: if thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles, one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elias.

Mat 17:5  And as he was yet speaking, behold a bright cloud overshadowed them. And lo a voice out of the cloud, saying: This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased: hear ye him.

Mat 17:6  And the disciples hearing fell upon their face, and were very much afraid.

It would seem odd that Peter would command a shrine in his name after being scared by the voice from heaven.

It was likely built by Peter and Paul cults. We know that Men such as Marcion arose in Rome who completely rejected Paul and honored Peter.

Thus Optatus actually disproves the Catholic church.

Those in the Roman empire who were accustomed to shrines to different people or Gods understood that the city that held the shrines was the key city for that particular God. Of course God never taught that but the people were already accustomed to the idea.

Act_19:27  So that not only this our craft is in danger to be set at nought, but also the temple of great Diana shall be reputed for nothing! Yea, and her majesty shall begin to be destroyed, whom all Asia and the world worshippeth.

It has to be remembered that the church, the people, are the temple of God. There is no commandment or teaching that the building of Shrines would make a city superior.

2Co 6:16  What agreement has the temple of God with idols? For we are the temple of the living God; as God said, "I will make my dwelling among them and walk among them, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.

It should also be pointed out that the chair built with the shrine came to have powers in the eyes of the people, that when the Bishop of Rome spoke from the chair he would be infallible. Thus they believed in the magical properties of the shrine.