OrthodoxChristianity.net
November 26, 2014, 05:52:01 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 »   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Supremacy of Peter  (Read 45649 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #225 on: May 13, 2008, 03:40:30 PM »

Good People,
Please keep this thread on topic.
George
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,365


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #226 on: May 13, 2008, 03:41:12 PM »

According to Shaff, yes.
In fact, in the quotation I gave you, Schaff is speaking specifically about the text you are using (in Latin).
Thank you for sharing. I wouldn't want to use an interpolated text for apologetic purposes.
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
Mickey
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Holy Orthodoxy
Posts: 1,309



« Reply #227 on: May 13, 2008, 03:45:14 PM »

Mickey,

There are two separate (although related) questions here:
1. If the Pope makes an ex cathedra statement (I'll omit elaborating on what is meant by ex cathedra -- of course, you could look at my blog Grin), is that statement necessarily infallible?
2. Is it possible for a Pope to fall into heresy?

On the first question, the official Catholic answer is yes.

On the second question, I don't think there's an official Catholic position, but the general understanding is that, yes, it is possible for a Pope to fall into heresy. (This was, incidentally, the subject of a recent thread started by our friend holdencaulfield on another website.)
Greetings my friend. I understand the doctrine as defined by Rome. But I do not accept it. Oftentimes, this odd dogma is retroactively forced onto the early Church by Roman Catholic apologists.
Logged
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,170



« Reply #228 on: May 13, 2008, 03:49:01 PM »

You mistakenly said that infallibility was defined by Blessed Pius IX. It was actually defined in council
Wrong. Pius IX rendered the council meaningless with the odd doctrine--and any council after VI.

3. That is because I only recognize the first seven. Understand?

So is it your contention that a council should not even be called "a council" unless it's ecumenical?
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,170



« Reply #229 on: May 13, 2008, 03:53:43 PM »

Oftentimes, this odd dogma is retroactively forced onto the early Church by Roman Catholic apologists.

I agree, many Catholics do that. (And that's only part of the trouble.)
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Mickey
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Holy Orthodoxy
Posts: 1,309



« Reply #230 on: May 13, 2008, 04:01:16 PM »

So is it your contention that a council should not even be called "a council" unless it's ecumenical?
It is my contention that there are Seven Ecumenical Councils.
Logged
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,365


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #231 on: May 13, 2008, 04:23:47 PM »

What about this one?

Tertullian
"[T]he Lord said to Peter, ‘On this rock I will build my Church, I have given you the keys of the kingdom of heaven [and] whatever you shall have bound or loosed on earth will be bound or loosed in heaven’ [Matt. 16:18–19]. . . . Upon you, he says, I will build my Church; and I will give to you the keys, not to the Church" (Modesty 21:9–10 [A.D. 220]).

Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #232 on: May 13, 2008, 04:36:15 PM »

What about this one?

Tertullian
"[T]he Lord said to Peter, ‘On this rock I will build my Church, I have given you the keys of the kingdom of heaven [and] whatever you shall have bound or loosed on earth will be bound or loosed in heaven’ [Matt. 16:18–19]. . . . Upon you, he says, I will build my Church; and I will give to you the keys, not to the Church" (Modesty 21:9–10 [A.D. 220]).



This was written after Tertullian became a Montanist, and the full text makes it clear that he heretically believes that the keys were given to St. Peter, but explicitly denies that they are conferred to his successors in the Church. Ironically, this quote, often used by online Latin apologists, is actually the now Montanist Tertullian denying that any Bishop has inherited the Keys or the power to bind and loose! Here is the full text of the quote from Terullian:

Quote from: Tertullian
"But," you say, "the Church has the power of forgiving sins." This I acknowledge and adjudge more (than you; I) who have the Paraclete Himself in the persons of the new prophets, saying, "The Church has the power to forgive sins; but I will not do it, lest they commit others withal."
"What if a pseudo-prophetic spirit has made that declaration?" Nay, but it would have been more the part of a subverter on the one hand to commend himself on the score of clemency, and on the other to influence all others to sin. Or if, again, (the pseudo-prophetic spirit) has been eager to affect this (sentiment) in accordance with "the Spirit of truth," it follows that "the Spirit of truth" has indeed the power of indulgently granting pardon to fornicators, but wills not to do it if it involve evil to the majority.

I now inquire into your opinion, (to see) from what source you usurp this right to "the Church."

If, because the Lord has said to Peter, "Upon this rock will I build My Church, to thee have I given the keys of the heavenly kingdom; " or, "Whatsoever thou shall have bound or loosed in earth, shall be bound or loosed in the heavens," you therefore presume that the power of binding and loosing has derived to you, that is, to every Church akin to Peter, what sort of man are you, subverting and wholly changing the manifest intention of the Lord, conferring (as that intention did) this (gift) personally upon Peter? "On thee," He says, "will I build My Church; "and," I will give to thee the keys," not to the Church; and, "Whatsoever thou shall have loosed or bound," not what they shall have loosed or bound. For so withal the result teaches. In (Peter) himself the Church was reared; that is, through (Peter) himself; (Peter) himself essayed the key; you see what (key): "Men of Israel, let what I say sink into your ears: Jesus the Nazarene, a man destined by God for you," and so forth.281 (Peter) himself, therefore, was the first to unbar, in Christ's baptism, the entrance to the heavenly kingdom, in which (kingdom) are "loosed" the sins that were beforetime "bound; "and those which have not been "loosed" are "bound," in accordance with true salvation; and Ananias he "bound" with the bond of death, and the weak in his feet he "absolved" from his defect of health.  Moreover, in that dispute about the observance or non-observance of the Law, Peter was the first of all to be endued with the Spirit, and, after making preface touching the calling of the nations, to say, "And now why are ye tempting the Lord, concerning the imposition upon the brethren of a yoke which neither we nor our fathers were able to support? But however, through the grace of Jesus we believe that we shall be saved in the same way as they." This sentence both "loosed" those parts of the law which were abandoned, and "bound" those which were reserved. Hence the power of loosing and of binding committed to Peter had nothing to do with the capital sins of believers; and if the Lord had given him a precept that he must grant pardon to a brother sinning against him even "seventy times sevenfold," of course He would have commanded him to "bind"----that is, to "retain" ----nothing subsequently, unless perchance such (sins) as one may have committed against the Lord, not against a brother. For the forgiveness of (sins) committed in the case of a man is a prejudgment against the remission of sins against God.
Source: http://www.tertullian.org/anf/anf04/anf04-19.htm#P1630_481652

Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Euthymios
Member
***
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: UNCHURCHED
Posts: 95



« Reply #233 on: May 13, 2008, 08:05:41 PM »


Cleaveland, again, this was not a papal primacy discussion. It was a Petrine primacy [primacy of Peter]. NONE OF THE DATA I SUPPLIED HAS BEEN DEALT WITH OR REFUTED. Instead the people have engaged in red herrings [the obsession with totally irrelevant topics] and ad hominems attacks.

If you want to debate PAPAL primacy within the first 900 years of the Church, I would be happy to do that on another thread. PM me and we can open a new thread. The popes exercised primacy over all churchs. Appeals were sent to Rome from all over the Christian world. The primacy of Rome was no based on the fact it was the emperial city, but because Peter founded that See. The primacy comes from the Gospels. The primacy of Peter transfered to his successors in Rome [based on the gospels and the promise of Christ] was the understanding of all the fathers.
Logged

CLICK HERE to see why this poster is being moderated.

Love one another earnestly from the heart --1Peter.1:22
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,487


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #234 on: May 13, 2008, 09:28:19 PM »

Appeals were also made to other patriarchs and archbishops. And it certainly was because it was the imperial city. Read Byzantium and the Roman Primacy by Francis Dvornik.
Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching. Also, I served as an Orthodox priest from 2008-2013, before resigning.
Euthymios
Member
***
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: UNCHURCHED
Posts: 95



« Reply #235 on: May 15, 2008, 05:42:53 PM »


Evlogeite and Christos Anesti!

I want to clarify that I am not a Catholic [in the apostate Roman sense]. I am Greek Orthodox. The material I have supplied on this site, comes from my friends yet to be published book called "Keys Over the Christian World," by John Collorafi. He is a Roman Catholic. I have recently sent the manuscript copy of his book to a very scholarly Greek monastery. They will have their hands full with this book, but I am confident they will be able to produce a valuable response and review [critique] of its contents.

If anyone knows any Orthodox patristic scholar who would be willing to review this book [the book is encylopedic in information and extremlely detailed], let me know and I will send him a free copy. I have to print and bind myself. I have the book on disc. I have my own answers / refutations of the book; but I would like to hear a review from the Orthodox scholarly community. Some consider Collorafi the greatest expert on the first 900 years of papal history, alive in the world today.


I apologize for my sins and the confusion I have caused.

Alithos anesti!
Logged

CLICK HERE to see why this poster is being moderated.

Love one another earnestly from the heart --1Peter.1:22
skippy
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 94


« Reply #236 on: May 20, 2008, 06:01:52 PM »

Peter declares in his epistle, by his own hand, and under divine inspiration no less, that he was only one among the bishops (sumpresbuteros). See 1 Peter 5:1
This is analogous to the President saying "My fellow Americans" It does not deny his presidency but only emphasizes that we are all Americans.

Peter did not deny his primacy but emphasized his collegiality.
Logged
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,170



« Reply #237 on: May 20, 2008, 07:38:28 PM »

I have to print and bind myself.

You do?

I want to clarify that I am not a Catholic [in the apostate Roman sense].

Well as I said before, I can't imagine why you wouldn't want to be in full communion with Rome if you believe Rome can't be wrong.

-Peter.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
skippy
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 94


« Reply #238 on: May 22, 2008, 01:46:29 PM »

But never have we Orthodox given supremacy to any bishop. All are equal and all are under Christ.
This is a myth and an illusion in an attempt to deny the divine primacy of Peter and his successors.
Where did the idea of patriarch develop? Certainly, they are bishops who are more than equal.
Certainly, there is certainly no biblical basis for their powers and authority. 
But there is a basis in the bible and tradition  for the primacy of Peter.
your appeal to Christ as the head is cute but who is denying it? Peter is/was the visible head of the church. If you recall, Jesus physically left us.

Logged
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 13,314


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #239 on: May 22, 2008, 02:21:48 PM »

This is a myth and an illusion in an attempt to deny the divine primacy of Peter and his successors.
Where did the idea of patriarch develop? Certainly, they are bishops who are more than equal.
Certainly, there is certainly no biblical basis for their powers and authority. 
But there is a basis in the bible and tradition for the primacy of Peter.
your appeal to Christ as the head is cute but who is denying it? Peter is/was the visible head of the church. If you recall, Jesus physically left us.

An examination of the historical record shows the Orthodox position is accurate. The Pope had a position of honor not authority. When thye Bishops met in council they were co-equal. The biblical interpretation Roman Catholics use was actdually a minority opinion among the Earrly Church Fathers, that Peter himself was what the Church was built upon ( many more saw Peter's faith to be basis for the Church). That isn't even to mention how that personal authority extended and expanded to later Popes with  Monarchical powers. The Roman position simply doesn't hold up under scrutiny.
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
ytterbiumanalyst
Professor Emeritus, CSA
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA Diocese of the Midwest
Posts: 8,790



« Reply #240 on: May 22, 2008, 02:33:33 PM »

If you recall, Jesus physically left us.
How can I recall something that never happened? For Christ to have left us would have violated his promise, and as we Orthodox understand it, God cannot lie nor fail to keep a promise. See Deuteronomy 31:6-8, Joshua 1:5, and Matthew 28:20. God promised to be with us always; why then would he leave for many centuries?

No, God has always been with us. He has never ceased to be Immanuel. The Incarnation is present for us in the Eucharist, and thus God's Incarnation is atemporal. Christ has ascended, yes; but he cannot cease to be God-With-Us, for he promised he would not.

Face it; your opinion is based on an anachronistic imposition of current Vatican law onto the early Church.
Logged

"It is remarkable that what we call the world...in what professes to be true...will allow in one man no blemishes, and in another no virtue."--Charles Dickens
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,110


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #241 on: May 22, 2008, 03:20:09 PM »

Stop intermixing language people!

This is a myth and an illusion in an attempt to deny the divine primacy of Peter and his successors.
Where did the idea of patriarch develop? Certainly, they are bishops who are more than equal.
Certainly, there is certainly no biblical basis for their powers and authority. 
But there is a basis in the bible and tradition  for the primacy of Peter.
your appeal to Christ as the head is cute but who is denying it? Peter is/was the visible head of the church.

Nobody has denied primacy to anyone.  Supremacy - deal with that.  The nature of true episcopal primacy - deal with that.    There are a number of questions posed in this thread that still need to be answered by those who support the modern idea of Petrine & Papal Supremacy (although you call it Primacy, it's not the same as primacy in the first 3 centuries).
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
skippy
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 94


« Reply #242 on: May 23, 2008, 11:24:11 AM »

An examination of the historical record shows the Orthodox position is accurate. The Pope had a position of honor not authority. When thye Bishops met in council they were co-equal. The biblical interpretation Roman Catholics use was actdually a minority opinion among the Earrly Church Fathers, that Peter himself was what the Church was built upon ( many more saw Peter's faith to be basis for the Church). That isn't even to mention how that personal authority extended and expanded to later Popes with  Monarchical powers. The Roman position simply doesn't hold up under scrutiny.
Nonsense.
The popes and bishops were co equal in one sense as bishops but as bishop of Rome the popes held primacy (or supremacy  as you wish) Supremacy is a loaded word and implies more power. The proper word is primacy which to mean anything has to have power/authority associated with it.
Try reading history not EO mythology. Many early Eastern bishops refer to the primacy, authority and the unifying function of the papacy. Eastern liturgies even today refer to the popes as the leader of the bishops.
Whether the primacy  is based on Peter's faith or Peter's person is irrelevant you can't separate the faith from the person.
The Catholic church doesn't claim monarchical powers for the pope. The pope is limited by tradition and the bible.
He can't today deny what was promoted yesterday as infallible.
There have been many bad popes who sinned but never was there a pope who was in heresy whereas the other patriarchs have all been in heresy at the same time! And not just once! Most if not all of the early heresies originated in the East not the West. Rome had to depose patriarchs and bishops.

You must be reading the comic book or condensed version of the history of the church.


Logged
skippy
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 94


« Reply #243 on: May 23, 2008, 11:33:15 AM »

How can I recall something that never happened? For Christ to have left us would have violated his promise, and as we Orthodox understand it,
Wonderful! You deny the Ascension?
Just what did Jesus wear yesterday and what did he have for breakfast?
Did he shave or let it grow?
Does he drive? Get the point?!!
You bring the argument to absurdity (reductio ad absurdum) when you claim that the Eucharist is a substitute for a live person.
I certainly am not about to deny the real presence in the Eucharist but it is not quite the same as having a live person with whom you can talk, joke etc.
The pope is the living presence of Jesus for the Church. He is his vicar. Just as Peter was given the role to strengthen his brothers, feed his lambs and feed his sheep then pope continues. Only Peter was given the keys to hold -the others share in the keys but only when  united with the holder.




Logged
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #244 on: May 23, 2008, 03:16:21 PM »

^ Well, there we have it, fellow schismatics, skippy has convinced us with his/her Frankish propaganda. Schism is healed and I'm ready to kiss papal boot...  Roll Eyes
Perhaps, while skippy is 'pontificating', he/she could provide some shining examples of the early popes exercising this 'supreme jurisdiction' that actually:
1) Happened
and
2) Meant something

And, of course, confine examples to the Orthodox Latin popes, not the Frankish usurpers.
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
buzuxi
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: GREEK ORTHODOX
Jurisdiction: WORLD ORTHODOXY AGAINST ECUMENISM
Posts: 265


« Reply #245 on: May 23, 2008, 08:46:37 PM »

Wonderful! You deny the Ascension?
Just what did Jesus wear yesterday and what did he have for breakfast?
Did he shave or let it grow?
Does he drive? Get the point?!!
You bring the argument to absurdity (reductio ad absurdum) when you claim that the Eucharist is a substitute for a live person.
I certainly am not about to deny the real presence in the Eucharist but it is not quite the same as having a live person with whom you can talk, joke etc.
The pope is the living presence of Jesus for the Church. He is his vicar. Just as Peter was given the role to strengthen his brothers, feed his lambs and feed his sheep then pope continues. Only Peter was given the keys to hold -the others share in the keys but only when  united with the holder.


Yes and Peter is a type for the episcopacy. All bishops who profess the faith of Peter and have apostlic succession are the successors of Peter.  And yes, primacy was granted to the bishops of 5 cities, the canons of the councils established this primacy, they did not exist before and those same canons took away primacy when it re-ordered the rankings. Future canons can abolish this primacy altogether..
« Last Edit: May 23, 2008, 08:53:50 PM by buzuxi » Logged
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,170



« Reply #246 on: May 23, 2008, 10:37:41 PM »

Neither cast thee thy bread before trolls, lest they trample it under the feet, and turn again and rend thee. (cf. Matthew 7:6)
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
LBK
No Reporting Allowed
Moderated
Toumarches
************
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 11,444


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #247 on: May 23, 2008, 11:39:25 PM »

Quote
Eastern liturgies even today refer to the popes as the leader of the bishops.

Skippy, could you please provide examples of this? As in actual liturgical texts used by the Orthodox Church.
Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,929


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #248 on: May 24, 2008, 02:09:40 AM »

Nonsense.

...

Try reading history not EO mythology.

...

You must be reading the comic book or condensed version of the history of the church.
Ya know what, Skippy, it's usually considered rather bad form to come to an Orthodox Christian discussion forum and call their understanding of history "EO mythology" or a comic book version of Church history.  Such base ad hominems will not win you any debate points.

Quote
The pope is limited by tradition and the bible.
Then what of Pope Pius IX (pope during Vatican I) who is reputed to have bellowed, "I AM TRADITION!"?
« Last Edit: May 26, 2008, 01:54:31 AM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
Cyril of New York
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GO Archdiocese
Posts: 35



« Reply #249 on: May 24, 2008, 11:48:02 AM »

 Huh
I guess we also have to believe that St. John the Beloved Apostle, who outlived St. Peter, submitted himself to the authority of St. Linus, calling him "Holy Father" and requesting his permission to pen the Book of Revelation.

 Yeah, right.
Logged
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #250 on: May 24, 2008, 03:03:23 PM »

I certainly am not about to deny the real presence in the Eucharist but it is not quite the same as having a live person with whom you can talk, joke etc.
The pope is the living presence of Jesus for the Church.
Is this guy for real?
Even our most devout Catholic posters have never said anything as flagrantly inane as this.
This is either a joke, or a poor attempt to troll.
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #251 on: May 24, 2008, 07:05:43 PM »

Skippy, could you please provide examples of this? As in actual liturgical texts used by the Orthodox Church.

Probably only seen "Eastern Catholic" liturgies.
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
sohma_hatori
Earthbending Novice
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic
Jurisdiction: Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church
Posts: 526


The Blind Bandit


« Reply #252 on: May 25, 2008, 04:07:50 AM »

Is this guy for real?
Even our most devout Catholic posters have never said anything as flagrantly inane as this.
This is either a joke, or a poor attempt to troll.

I agree... Ive never encountered this in our high school's cathecism classes...   Undecided
Logged

""Pride is not the opposite of shame, but it's source. True humility is the only antidote to shame.""
— Iroh- Avatar:The Last Airbender
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #253 on: May 25, 2008, 05:31:06 AM »

21-May-2008  -- Catholic World News Brief
 
Moscow Patriarchate Rejects Catholic-Orthodox Statement on Papal
Primacy
 

Moscow, May. 20, 2008 (CWNews.com) - The Russian Orthodox Church has officially rejected a doctrinal statement approved by a joint Catholic-Orthodox theological commission at a meeting in Ravenna, Italy last October.
 
The Ravenna meeting reached agreement that the Bishop of Rome traditionally enjoyed primacy among all the world's bishops, of both the Eastern and Western churches. While Vatican officials hailed the agreement as an important ecumenical landmark, they cautioned that the Catholic and Orthodox churches have a different understanding of primacy. Indeed the Ravenna document noted "differences of
understanding with regard to the manner in which it is to be exercised, and also with regard to its scriptural and theological foundations."
 
The Russian Orthodox rejection of the Ravenna statement is not a surprise, since representatives of the Moscow patriarchate were critical of the document when it first appeared. Russian prelates said that the Ravenna agreement implied that the Patriarch of Constantinople was the leader of the Orthodox world, just as the Pope is the leader of the Catholic Church. The Moscow patriarchate, which has often contested Constantinople's leadership, rejected that idea.
 
In January, Patriarch Alexei of Moscow charged that the Ravenna meeting had been "deliberately orchestrated to exclude the Moscow patriarchate." In fact, Russian Orthodox representatives walked out of the meeting before discussions began, protesting the seating of a delegation from the Estonian Orthodox Church, which Moscow does not recognize.
 
Logged
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #254 on: May 25, 2008, 06:54:08 AM »

The third paragraph above is the real story- the Ravenna document is secondary.
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
skippy
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 94


« Reply #255 on: May 25, 2008, 01:01:13 PM »

Probably only seen "Eastern Catholic" liturgies.
I have probably been to more Eastern Liturgies than the most here who attend weekly. I attended Divine Liturgy daily for years in Arabic, Greek, Ukrainian and English.
Quote
from LBK
could you please provide examples of this? As in actual liturgical texts used by the Orthodox Church.

Euthymios has supplied quite a list of the Divine Liturgies which honor Peter as the head of the choir, prince of the apostles, bishop of bishops etc.

Quote
from PeterTheAleut
Such base ad hominems will not win you any debate points.
and the responses haven't been ad hominems? BTW Does the one with the most points win something?
Unfortunately debates are about winning points -scoring against an opponent. I do not see EO as opponents but fellow Christians who have been misled by their own propaganda.
BTW, contrary to what you think, ad hominems do win points in debates. The object in a debate is to muzzle the opponent or confuse the issue so that people think you have said something important.



Quote
from PeterTheAleut
Then what of Pope Pius IX (pope during Vatican I) who is reputed to have bellowed, "I AM TRADITION!"?
Few catholics would argue that every thing that a pope says is perfect.  You confuse impeccability with infallibility.

Quote
from Cyril of New York
I guess we also have to believe that St. John the Beloved Apostle, who outlived St. Peter, submitted himself to the authority of St. Linus, calling him "Holy Father" and requesting his permission to pen the Book of Revelation. Yeah, right.
This just shows your ignorance and prejudice and is as Euthymios would call it a red herring.
I am sure if Pope Linus had said something to St John he would have listened and obeyed. But that is not how the papacy was run then. It is highly unlikely that john and Linus ever met.
It is curious that even while John was alive various churches appealed to Rome (ie the bishop of Rome) and not to John who was much closer in the East.
Explain to me why all the Eastern Patriarchs were in heresy several times and Rome never was in the first thousand years. And the Bishop of Rome resolved the problems. 
Even iconoclasm was an Eastern problem which the West resolved.
Quote
from Αριστοκλής

And, of course, confine examples to the Orthodox Latin popes, not the Frankish usurpers.

What does that mean?  What are Orthodox Latin popes? and what are Frankish usurpers?  These are all loaded terms with a prejudice. Either a person was pope or not.
Quote
from Αριστοκλής
Perhaps, while skippy is 'pontificating', he/she could provide some shining examples of the early popes exercising this 'supreme jurisdiction' that actually:
1) Happened
and
2) Meant something
Pope Leo and  Pope Gregory come to mind as two popes who used supreme jurisdiction. And as Euthymios has mentioned there were many others. At that time,no one ever argued that the popes didn't have the authority nor did they ever argue that the pope was overstepping his role as bishop of Rome when they made universal calls. Others may not have liked what the pope did but even Nestorius never claimed that the pope didn't have the authority.
There is something called development of dogma which most Orthodox reject which comes into play here.
As situations arose solutions were found based on tradition and the scriptures.
Plus the very early church didn't need everything spelled out as to who was in charge. Everyone knew. Imperial Roman certainly knew. Most of the early popes were martyred for the faith. Why? Imperial Rome wanted to quash the upstart religion by attacking its leaders.


For a good analysis  of the popes and the early church, check out James Likoudis and his trilogy on the papacy.
There is not much point in repeating what he said since you have completely ignored what Euthymios has said.

Quote
from me
Try reading history not EO mythology.
By history, I mean the sources- the early Fathers and records of the councils, correspondence with the pope and eastern bishops.
BY EO mythology. I mean the  writing which purports to be an analysis of history but ignores the facts and original sources.
Logged
Heracleides
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Patriarch of Jerusalem
Posts: 390


Kona-Kai


« Reply #256 on: May 25, 2008, 01:14:53 PM »

I have probably been to more Eastern Liturgies than the most here who attend weekly. I attended Divine Liturgy daily for years in Arabic, Greek, Ukrainian and English.

Ah yes... but that still does not clairify if these liturgies you've attended were Orthodox or Eastern Catholic.  Wink
.
Logged

"And having found Heracleides there again, we instructed him to proclaim the Gospel of God..."  ~Acts of Barnabas
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,170



« Reply #257 on: May 25, 2008, 02:28:36 PM »

Skippy,

It seems obvious that you have a very shallow notion of what the [Roman] Catholic Church teaches.

I'm not going to respond to specific statements you've made here because I fear that would only encourage you.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #258 on: May 25, 2008, 02:37:23 PM »

I have probably been to more Eastern Liturgies than the most here who attend weekly. I attended Divine Liturgy daily for years in Arabic, Greek, Ukrainian and English.
Euthymios has supplied quite a list of the Divine Liturgies which honor Peter as the head of the choir, prince of the apostles, bishop of bishops etc.
1. Peter, not the pope of Rome.
2. Nothing that validates VI infallibility, nor supremacy.

In fact, show us some evidence that the pope of Rome was commemorated (outside the normal diptychs, which mention all the patriarchs) in the DL, as is required by those in the East who submit to Rome now.

Quote
and the responses haven't been ad hominems? BTW Does the one with the most points win something?
Unfortunately debates are about winning points -scoring against an opponent. I do not see EO as opponents but fellow Christians who have been misled by their own propaganda.

I presume you mean the Church's teaching.


Quote
Few catholics would argue that every thing that a pope says is perfect.  You confuse impeccability with infallibility.

No, just pointing out that the Vatican demands submission even to the pope's pronouncements that are not ex cathedra (a la Lumen Gentium).

Quote
This just shows your ignorance and prejudice and is as Euthymios would call it a red herring.

I am sure if Pope Linus had said something to St John he would have listened and obeyed. But that is not how the papacy was run then. It is highly unlikely that john and Linus ever met.

Yet you are so sure of what he would have hypothetically done if they had.  Read Galatians on what St. Paul did.

Quote
It is curious that even while John was alive various churches appealed to Rome (ie the bishop of Rome) and not to John who was much closer in the East.

What various Churches?  The only one this is claimed for is Corinth, a colony of Rome and within its patriarchate.   That St. John was in prison at the time also put a crimp in writing him.

Quote
Explain to me why all the Eastern Patriarchs were in heresy several times and Rome never was in the first thousand years.

Explain to me how you skipped over Honorius, Vigilius, Zosimus, etc.

Quote
And the Bishop of Rome resolved the problems.

Wrong again.  Pope Sylvester had no hand at Nicea I, Constantinople I was held in the absence of Pope Damasus, Pope Cyril (of Alexandria) was NOT acting as Pope Celestine's legate at Ephesus, Chalcedon wrote its own definition instead of rubber stamping Pope Leo's (which they examined for its Orthodoxy), Constantinople II was held over Pope Vigilius' objections and it struck him from the diptychs until he submitted to its definition, Constantinople III did accept Pope Leo's condemnation of Pope Honorios, and the Pope had little to do with the triumph of Nicea II.

Quote
Even iconoclasm was an Eastern problem which the West resolved.

Yeah, by condemning Nicea II at the council of Frankfurt.

Quote
What does that mean?  What are Orthodox Latin popes? and what are Frankish usurpers?  These are all loaded terms with a prejudice. Either a person was pope or not.
Honorios was pope.  Explain him.

Quote
Pope Leo and  Pope Gregory come to mind as two popes who used supreme jurisdiction.


Yes, and we have their correspondence where they were complaining that their "supreme jurisdiction" was ignored.

Quote
And as Euthymios has mentioned there were many others. At that time,no one ever argued that the popes didn't have the authority nor did they ever argue that the pope was overstepping his role as bishop of Rome when they made universal calls.

Several did several times, starting with the rebuke "the whole Church," Eusebius tells us, was delievered to Pope St. Victor.

Quote
Others may not have liked what the pope did but even Nestorius never claimed that the pope didn't have the authority.

Several did, starting with the council of Ephesus which ignored Pope Celestine's instructions and conducted a trial of Nestorius.

Quote
There is something called development of dogma which most Orthodox reject which comes into play here.


Play is right.  And so is "reject."

Quote
As situations arose solutions were found based on tradition and the scriptures. Plus the very early church didn't need everything spelled out as to who was in charge. Everyone knew. Imperial Roman certainly knew. Most of the early popes were martyred for the faith. Why? Imperial Rome wanted to quash the upstart religion by attacking its leaders.

Most of the early patriarchs of all the patriarchates were martyred, as well most dioceses.

Quote
For a good analysis  of the popes and the early church, check out James Likoudis and his trilogy on the papacy.

What little I have seen by him has failed to impress.

Quote
There is not much point in repeating what he said since you have completely ignored what Euthymios has said.
By history, I mean the sources- the early Fathers and records of the councils, correspondence with the pope and eastern bishops.
BY EO mythology. I mean the  writing which purports to be an analysis of history but ignores the facts and original sources.
You mean Latin mythology?
« Last Edit: May 25, 2008, 02:38:26 PM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
LBK
No Reporting Allowed
Moderated
Toumarches
************
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 11,444


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #259 on: May 25, 2008, 05:47:54 PM »

Hello Skippy

You wrote:

Quote
Euthymios has supplied quite a list of the Divine Liturgies which honor Peter as the head of the choir, prince of the apostles, bishop of bishops etc.

Euthymios provided texts selectively to back his view, and ignored many others. As you have not supplied any liturgical material to back your case, here is a large proportion of the text for the Vigil of Apostles Peter and Paul. I apologise for the length of this post, however I felt that it would be more useful to quote extensively, lest I be accused of "quoting proof-texts", or "quoting out of context". The text is quite clear in ascribing equal regard and honour to Apostles Peter and Paul. There is a distinct and beautiful complementarity between the verses for each apostle:

From Vespers:

At “Lord, I have cried”:

With what beauties of hymnody should we sing the praise of Peter and Paul? The wings of the knowledge of God, who flew through the ends of the earth and were lifted up high to heaven; the hands of the Gospel of grace, the feet of the truth of the proclamation, the rivers of wisdom, the arms of the Cross, through which He has cast down the arrogance of demons, Christ our God, who has great mercy.

With what spiritual songs should we praise Peter and Paul? The sharp mouths of the dread sword of the Spirit that slaughter godlessness; the radiant ornaments of Rome; the delights of the whole inhabited world; the reasoning tablets, written by God, of the New Testament, which in Zion Christ proclaimed, who has great mercy.


At the Litia:

Come then today with fervour, acceptable sacrifice of the faithful; as we stand together in choir, let us garland with fitting songs Peter and Paul, the chosen weavers of grace; because they sowed the word unstintingly for all and enriched them with the gift of the Spirit; and being branches of the true vine, they have brought to perfection for us the ripe grape cluster, making our hearts glad. To them let us cry out, with faces unveiled and with pure consciences, as we say: Hail, guides of the unreasoning and servants of those with reason. Hail, fair chosen members of the Maker and Guardian of all. Hail, protectors of the good and persecutors of the deceitful. Let us implore them to ever entreat the Creator and Teacher to give the world stable peace and our souls His great mercy.

Let us, the whole world, praise as its champions the Disciples of Christ and foundations of the Church, the true pillars and bases, and inspired heralds of the doctrines and sufferings of Christ, the Princes, Peter and Paul. For they passed through the whole breadth of the earth as with a plough, and sowed the faith, and they made the knowledge of God well up for all, showing forth the understanding of the Trinity. O Peter, rock and foundation, and Paul, vessel of choice; the yoked oxen of Christ drew nations, cities and islands to knowledge of God. While they have brought Hebrews again to Christ and intercede that our souls may be saved.

Peter, Prince of the glorious Apostles, the rock of the faith, and inspired Paul, the preacher and beacon of the holy Churches, as you stand before the throne of God, intercede with Christ on our behalf.

Paul, mouth of the Lord, foundation of doctrines, once the persecutor of Jesus my Saviour, but now become first-throned of the Apostles, blessed one; therefore you saw things ineffable, O wise one, when you ascended to the third heaven, and you cried: Come with me, and let us not be deprived of the blessings.

The citizens of the Jerusalem on high, the rock of the faith, the preacher of the Church of Christ, the pair of the Trinity, the fishers of the world, leaving behind today the things on earth, have journeyed in truth to God, and they implore Him with boldness that our souls may be saved.

As the wisdom of God, the co-eternal Word of the Father, foretold in the Gospel, you are the fruitful branches, all-praised Apostles; you bear on your shoots the ripe and lovely grape cluster, which we faithful eat and experience a taste which brings delight. Peter, rock of the faith, and Paul, boast of the inhabited world, establish the flock which you have gained by your teachings.


At the Apostikha:

Who will recount your chains city by city and your afflictions, glorious Apostle Paul? The toils, the pains, the vigils, the sufferings from hunger and thirst, from cold and nakedness, the basket, the beatings, the stonings, the journeying, the deep, the shipwrecks? You became a spectacle to Angels and to humans. You endured all things in Christ who gave you power, that you might gain the world for Christ Jesus, your Lord. And so we beseech you, as we faithfully celebrate your memory, intercede without ceasing that our souls may be saved.

Verse: Their sound has gone out into all the earth; and their words to the ends of the world.

Who will recount your chains city by city and your afflictions, glorious Apostle Paul? Or who will set down the struggles and the toils, by which you toiled in the Gospel of Christ, that you might gain all people and bring the Church to Christ? But ask that she may keep safe your fair confession until her last breath, O Paul, Apostle and teacher of the Churches.

Verse: The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament proclaims the work of his hands.

Let us praise Peter and Paul, the great beacons of the Church; for they shone more brightly than the sun in the firmament of the faith, and with the rays of the proclamation they brought the nations from ignorance to the knowledge of God. The one was nailed to a cross and so found the path to heaven, where he was handed the keys of the kingdom by Christ; while the other was beheaded by the sword and so departed to the Saviour and is fittingly called blessed. Both denounced Israel for stretching out his hands unjustly against the Lord Himself. And so at their prayers, Christ our God, cast down those who are against us, and strengthen the Orthodox faith, as You love mankind.

A joyous feast has shone out today on the ends of the earth, the all-honoured memorial of the wisest Apostles and their princes, Peter and Paul; and so Rome dances and rejoices. Let us also, brethren, celebrate in songs and psalms this all-revered day, as we cry out to them: Hail, Peter, Apostle and true friend of your teacher, Christ our God. Hail, Paul, well-loved, herald of the faith and teacher of the inhabited world. Holy pair, chosen by God, as you have boldness, implore Christ God that our souls may be saved.


Troparion of the Feast:

First-throned of the Apostles and teachers of the inhabited world, intercede with the Master of all things to give peace to the world and to our souls His great mercy.

From Matins:

Sessional hymn:

Let us, the faithful, fittingly praise the champion Paul, the net of the world, and the most-praised Peter, the rock of the Church, who holds the keys of heaven, for the universe has been enlightened by them with the faith of the Trinity. Glory to Him who has glorified you, glory to Him who has strengthened you, glory to Him who because of you has given us everlasting life.

Magnification:

We magnify you, O Peter and Paul, Apostles of Christ, who enlightened the universe with your teachings, and led the ends of the earth to Christ.

Sessional hymn after the Polyeleos:

Let us praise Peter and the all-wise Paul, the great and radiant luminaries, who were shown to be pre-eminent among the disciples; for shining forth with the fire of the divine Spirit, they burned away all the gloom of deception. Therefore they have fittingly shown to be warriors of the Kingdom above, equally enthroned in grace. For this cause we exclaim: O Apostles of Christ our God, ask forgiveness of sins to those who with love celebrate your holy memory.

Sessional hymn after psalm 50:

Let us honour with hymns of praise the true preachers of piety, the all-radiant stars of the Church; Peter, the rock of faith, and Paul, the teacher of the truth and initiate of the mysteries of Christ. Having sown the word of truth in the hearts of the faithful, may they both entreat Christ our God, who gives abundantly to all, that our souls be saved.

There are two canons sung at this feast, one for each apostle. Some examples of complementary troparia:

From Ode 1:

Having foreknown you, O most-blessed Peter, the Pre-eternal One ordained you of old as the leader of His Church, the first-enthroned.

When Christ called existence out of non-existence, O most-blessed Paul, He chose you from your mother’s womb to carry His divine name which is above every name before the nations, for He has been gloriously glorified.


From Ode 3:

On the rock of your theology, Jesus the Master established the unassailable Church, and there we glorify you, O Apostle Peter.

You have been set as a precious foundation stone for the souls of the faithful, a cornerstone of the Saviour and Lord.


Ypakoi:

What dungeon did not hold you prisoner? What Church did not have you as an orator? Damascus extols you, O Paul, for it knew you blinded by the Light; and Rome, which received your blood, boasts in you; but Tarsus, your birthplace, rejoices yet more with love and honour. O Peter, rock of the Faith, and Paul, boast of the whole world, coming together from Rome, make us steadfast.

Kontakion:

The steadfast and divinely eloquent preachers, the foremost of Your apostles, O Lord, You have received into the delight of Your good things and into rest; for You have accepted their sufferings and death as greater than any whole-burnt offering, You who alone knows the hearts of men.

From Ode 7:

Having risen from the dead, Christ appeared to you, the first-called and most beloved, as the right glorious one who was first to preside over the apostles. ***

He who in latter times was called and surpassed all others in zeal, became the seal and crown of Your apostles, O Christ. With him the people of the Church sing to You: O God of our fathers, blessed are You.


(*** A note on “first to preside over the apostles”: Peter was the first to testify at the first Apostolic council at Jerusalem, which was presided over by James, Brother of the Lord, and Bishop of Jerusalem. As scripture and history shows, he may have been given primacy of honour among his fellow apostles, but this did not mean that his word would automatically prevail on the matters of faith being discussed. For instance, his position on the matter of circumcision prior to baptism did not prevail, following Paul’s eloquent and inspired repudiation of it.)

From Ode 8:

O Christ who announced to Peter that the nations were cleansed, by spiritual radiance purify my thoughts, for I cry: Bless the Lord, all you works of the Lord.

You betrothed the Church to Christ, presenting it to Him as a bride; for you were shown to be its wedding-escort, O God-bearing Paul. Therefore, it glorifies you for all ages.


Exaposteilarion:

Let us all hymn the foremost among the apostles, the godly Peter and Paul, the universal luminaries, the preachers of the Faith, the divinely sounded clarions, the speakers of dogmas, the pillars of the Church and destroyers of falsehood.

From the Praises:

The most honoured feast of the apostles has arrived for the Church of Christ, bringing salvation to us all. Therefore, mystically weaving hymns for them, let us say: Hail, O lamps to those who are in darkness, shedding forth rays of the spiritual Sun! Hail, O Peter and Paul, unshakeable foundations of the divine doctrines, friends of Christ, precious vessels! Come into our midst, bestowing immaterial gifts to those who praise your feast with hymns.

There are two simple and very accessible sources of doctrine which are consistent across the whole Orthodox world: iconography, and liturgical texts. The Orthodox Church regards Apostles Peter and Paul as the pre-eminent apostles, not just Peter. This is abundantly clear in both iconography, and in the text for the vigil of Sts Peter and Paul. Both are held in equal regard, hence the joint feast-day. The joint commemoration has a purpose: to remove any notions of supremacy. Another example of this is the feast of the Three Hierarchs, instituted to show the Church's equal regard for Sts Basil the Great, John Chrysostom and Gregory the Theologian.

The feast for Sts Peter and Paul dates back to no later than the mid-8thC, given that the canons at Matins were written by St John of Damascus, and other hymns by his contemporaries, including St Andrew of Crete.

Individual fathers may contradict each other, but the liturgical texts represent the distillation, the essence, the core, of the teachings of the Church for any feast. It is what the whole Orthodox Church espouses and proclaims, irrespective of geographic location or jurisdiction. It is the same with iconography. Individual icons of Apostle Peter exist in great numbers, but there is no indication at all that he is supreme over all the others. In icons of the assembly of the Twelve Apostles, Peter and Paul are in the foreground, often jointly holding a model of a church building, a motif also used in icons of saints regarded as "equals to the Apostles", such as the enlightener-saints e.g. Sts Vladimir and Olga of Kiev, Constantine and Helen, Nina of Georgia, Olaf of Norway, etc. Apostle Andrew is shown standing behind Peter and Paul, but still in a position of prominence, as he was the first to be chosen by Christ to be a disciple. All of this is completely consistent with Orthodox teaching.

Every single Orthodox church in the world uses the same text as this when celebrating this feast. Only the liturgical language used will vary. In the light of the liturgical and iconographic tradition, is it still possible for an Orthodox Christian to honestly and unreservedly conclude that Peter has the higher authority over all the other apostles, including Paul?
Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,929


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #260 on: May 26, 2008, 01:58:14 AM »

BTW, contrary to what you think, ad hominems do win points in debates. The object in a debate is to muzzle the opponent or confuse the issue so that people think you have said something important.
But when people realize that this is your objective, they only recognize that what you say is lacking of any substance and totally irrelevant to the discussion.


Few catholics would argue that every thing that a pope says is perfect.  You confuse impeccability with infallibility.
I didn't confuse anything with anything.  I just quoted what your Pope Pius IX is reputed to have said once.  Now, can you defend the substance of what His Holiness said when he stated, "I AM TRADITION!" ?
« Last Edit: May 26, 2008, 02:09:02 AM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
Entscheidungsproblem
Formerly Friul & Nebelpfade
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Machine God
Posts: 4,495



WWW
« Reply #261 on: May 26, 2008, 09:30:46 AM »

I didn't confuse anything with anything.  I just quoted what your Pope Pius IX is reputed to have said once.  Now, can you defend the substance of what His Holiness said when he stated, "I AM TRADITION!" ?

Poor Cardinal Guidi sure got an earful from Pope Pius IX.  Io, io sono la tradizione, io, io sono la Chiesa!
Logged

As a result of a thousand million years of evolution, the universe is becoming conscious of itself, able to understand something of its past history and its possible future.
-- Sir Julian Sorell Huxley FRS
skippy
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 94


« Reply #262 on: May 26, 2008, 12:38:02 PM »

Yes and Peter is a type for the episcopacy. All bishops who profess the faith of Peter and have apostlic succession are the successors of Peter.  And yes, primacy was granted to the bishops of 5 cities, the canons of the councils established this primacy, they did not exist before and those same canons took away primacy when it re-ordered the rankings. Future canons can abolish this primacy altogether..
Oh so you admit that Peter is bishop of bishops?
The primacy of Peter and his successors as bishop of Rome (Peter's diocese) was not by canons but divinely given by Jesus.
Logged
skippy
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 94


« Reply #263 on: May 26, 2008, 12:44:02 PM »

Is this guy for real?
Even our most devout Catholic posters have never said anything as flagrantly inane as this.
This is either a joke, or a poor attempt to troll.
Peter and the popes are the physical representatives (vicars)  of Christ as head of the church. Deal with it.

The coin from the fish to pay the temple tax was for Peter and Jesus. Why weren't the others included?
Peter spoke for the others as the leader, at Pentecost, and many other occassions. Seems like more than honor.
Jesus changed only Simon's name to Rock which indicates a change in role.


Logged
skippy
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 94


« Reply #264 on: May 26, 2008, 12:51:20 PM »

Probably only seen "Eastern Catholic" liturgies.
What difference does it make? Is this a red herring or an ad hominem or both?
How sad that you have to resort to such comments to make points!!
I have not even mentioned the non-byzantine eastern liturgies i have also attended but they are irrelevant to the topic at hand.
As for the liturgies acknowledging the role of the popes as leader I am referring  not just to the feast of Peter and Paul but of popes such as Leo and Gregory whom the EO also honor.

Logged
skippy
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 94


« Reply #265 on: May 26, 2008, 12:52:23 PM »

I agree... Ive never encountered this in our high school's cathecism classes...   Undecided
Sorry to hear that.
Perhaps you might consult the CCC.
Logged
skippy
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 94


« Reply #266 on: May 26, 2008, 12:55:33 PM »

21-May-2008  -- Catholic World News Brief
 
Moscow Patriarchate Rejects Catholic-Orthodox Statement on Papal
Primacy
 

Moscow, May. 20, 2008 (CWNews.com) - The Russian Orthodox Church has officially rejected a doctrinal statement approved by a joint Catholic-Orthodox theological commission at a meeting in Ravenna, Italy last October.
 
The Ravenna meeting reached agreement that the Bishop of Rome traditionally enjoyed primacy among all the world's bishops, of both the Eastern and Western churches. While Vatican officials hailed the agreement as an important ecumenical landmark, they cautioned that the Catholic and Orthodox churches have a different understanding of primacy. Indeed the Ravenna document noted "differences of
understanding with regard to the manner in which it is to be exercised, and also with regard to its scriptural and theological foundations."
 
The Russian Orthodox rejection of the Ravenna statement is not a surprise, since representatives of the Moscow patriarchate were critical of the document when it first appeared. Russian prelates said that the Ravenna agreement implied that the Patriarch of Constantinople was the leader of the Orthodox world, just as the Pope is the leader of the Catholic Church. The Moscow patriarchate, which has often contested Constantinople's leadership, rejected that idea.
 
In January, Patriarch Alexei of Moscow charged that the Ravenna meeting had been "deliberately orchestrated to exclude the Moscow patriarchate." In fact, Russian Orthodox representatives walked out of the meeting before discussions began, protesting the seating of a delegation from the Estonian Orthodox Church, which Moscow does not recognize.
 
The patriarch is getting all bent out of shape over the Estionians and the patriarch's [ of Constantinople] role as leader of the Orthodox. He wants that role for himself.
He has yet to comment on the substance of Ravenna.
Logged
skippy
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 94


« Reply #267 on: May 26, 2008, 01:16:51 PM »

1. Peter, not the pope of Rome.
2. Nothing that validates VI infallibility, nor supremacy.
Have no idea what you are referring to
Quote
In fact, show us some evidence that the pope of Rome was commemorated (outside the normal diptychs, which mention all the patriarchs) in the DL, as is required by those in the East who submit to Rome now.
I never even hinted  that the popes are commemorated at each EO liturgy.
Quote
I presume you mean the Church's teaching.
no idea what you are referring to.

Quote
  Read Galatians on what St. Paul did.
so?!! Peter was lax in in observance of what he preached. Paul rebuked him. so what?


Quote
Explain to me how you skipped over Honorius, Vigilius, Zosimus, etc.
I didn't skip over them. There is no problem.

Quote
Pope Sylvester had no hand at Nicea I

and the Pope had little to do with the triumph of Nicea II.
Oh but they did. They didn't have to be present. They usually sent delegates who were heard. The popes had to approve the final outcome. The popes often exercised a line veto and dismissed  canons

Quote
Honorios was pope.  Explain him.
what is to explain? He was discussed at length in Vatican I before infallibility was pronounced.
 

Quote
Yes, and we have their correspondence where they were complaining that their "supreme jurisdiction" was ignored.
So what ? Disgruntled employees. No one said that the others fall into line just the popes have the authority. There have always been renegades like Judas.

Quote
Several did several times, starting with the rebuke "the whole Church," Eusebius tells us, was delivered to Pope St. Victor.
St Francis also rebuked the pope. so what? Again you are confusing impeccability with infallibility.


Logged
skippy
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 94


« Reply #268 on: May 26, 2008, 01:27:54 PM »

I was misled. I was under the impression that this is a Christian forum.
My bad. I was confused by the name of the website.

I foolishly expected Orthodox Christianity or at least orthodox Christianity. It is neither orthodox nor Christian.
I was fooled because sometimes I see the  right words and phrases but the general tone is not one of a follower of Christ. What a shame!! Orthodox Christianity could offer much to the secular world.

No need to respond to this.
 
If you want  serious dialogue you can PM me.

Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,929


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #269 on: May 26, 2008, 02:05:43 PM »

How sad that you have to resort to such comments to make points!!
Said the black pot to the black kettle. laugh
Logged
Tags: St. Peter ecclesiology Petrine Primacy Pope Troll Primacy of Peter Supremacy of Peter 
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 »   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.168 seconds with 73 queries.