The Paul Card, Part 2

[TheUbiquitous]

In Acts, St. Paul rebukes St. Peter. Protestants cite this as a defense of protesting against the Church "of Rome." The argument goes something like this:

[indent=1]Paul rebuked Peter's error. Just so, Protestants rebuke the errors of the Catholic Church.
[/indent]
How can a Catholic answer this charge from scripture? From reason?

[cappie]

Here is the footnote from the Aquinas Study Bible on that verse, since it has caused people trouble that Paul confronts Peter

[b]2:11 I withstood him to his face:[/b] Paul must be admired because he believed that truth must be honored before everything, and for it he did not hesitate to oppose the most excellent and distinguished of the Apostles to his face. But Peter must be admired because, granted that he appeared to be convicted, nevertheless he remained quiet, bearing it all with silence. Though he was capable of asserting his primacy on the basis of many considerations, he treated his own affairs as of no importance and thought that people should honor truth above all. But their agreement in the time that followed has demonstrated that their dispute did not cause any division.
(Theodore of Mopsuestia) [b]Because he was to be blamed.[/b] It may be asked whether Peter was really blameworthy and was actually blamed by Paul. For many years there was a sharp dispute on this point between St. Jerome and St. Augustine, as may be seen in their epistles. Jerome, Chrysostom, Theophylact, Baronius answer in the negative, and hold that the rebuke was only theatrical. They argue that Peter, who had lawfully followed the Jewish customs at Jerusalem among Jews, lived as a Gentile among Gentiles at Antioch; when, however, the Jews arrived who had been sent to Antioch from Jerusalem by James, he withdrew from the Gentiles in favor of the Jews, lest he should offend those who had been the earliest to receive the faith (see ver. 9), and also that he might at the same time give Paul, the Apostle of the Gentiles, an opportunity of rebuking him, that by yielding he might teach the Jews that the time for Judaising was past. On the other side St. Augustine maintains that Peter was really blameworthy, and was blamed by Paul, as the record distinctly declares. (Cornelius a Lapide) thus confessed that he was in fact reprehensible, not only would Jews think faith was useless without the Law but Gentiles would as well. (St. Bruno)
__________________
Check out the Aquinas Study Bible in progress [url="https://sites.google.com/site/aquinasstudybible/home"]https://sites.google.com/site/aquinasstudybible/home[/url]