Author Topic: Is Pope Clement's Letter to the Corinthians evidence of Papal Supremacy?  (Read 3781 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Euchologion

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 178
  • "Soul of Christ sanctify me."
  • Faith: Catholic (confused)
  • Jurisdiction: Latin-Rite Diocese of Wilmington
Re: Is Pope Clement's Letter to the Corinthians evidence of Papal Supremacy?
« Reply #180 on: April 06, 2015, 08:48:09 PM »

By ignoring it don't we?  I mean for starters there are: no Jewish doctors, no public baths(I would think swimming at pools would fall under this),  no going to theaters or bars(inns), bishops not transferring Sees, etc.  There are a whole bunch of them we routinely ignore hierarchs included.  Do we consider them non-binding or is it like speeding, you are breaking the law but the police have to catch you for punishment to be applied?  Which brings up the worrisome thought of a bishop deciding he is going to start applying penalties to these long unenforced canons.

This is what I was getting at. This is why the Catholic Church permits Councils and the Roman See to amend canons, abrogate them, or alter them (besides, of course, anathemas, which are infallible and unchanging).

Online Mor Ephrem

  • The Fourteenth Apostle and Judge of the Interwebs
  • Section Moderator
  • Protostrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 24,020
  • All who love ZZ, honour ZZ!
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: But my heart belongs to Czech Lands
Re: Is Pope Clement's Letter to the Corinthians evidence of Papal Supremacy?
« Reply #181 on: April 06, 2015, 11:33:36 PM »
I am not sure I follow you. Some canons are doctrinal and are always in force.  Some canons are disciplinary and disciplines have changed.

Sure, but the underlying principles involved in those disciplinary canons haven't changed.  I'm not saying that a given canon is always invoked in a particular situation, only that the canon remains a canon.  We don't amend the canon, declare it non-binding, replace it with something else, etc. 

By ignoring it don't we?  I mean for starters there are: no Jewish doctors, no public baths(I would think swimming at pools would fall under this),  no going to theaters or bars(inns), bishops not transferring Sees, etc.  There are a whole bunch of them we routinely ignore hierarchs included.  Do we consider them non-binding or is it like speeding, you are breaking the law but the police have to catch you for punishment to be applied? 

If a canon is not enforced, it does not follow that it is no longer in force.  What makes a canon canonical is the canon within the canon, not "Because we said so".   

There are plenty of canons which are not enforced, or which are not followed to the letter due to a widely accepted economy, or a number of other reasons.  But they remain in force.  Sure, it's not as clean as the Roman system, but the Roman system sees nothing wrong with abolishing the Nicene canons with one stroke of the pen in the early 1980's.   

Quote
Which brings up the worrisome thought of a bishop deciding he is going to start applying penalties to these long unenforced canons.

Well, let him try.  How long do you think he'd get away with it? 



Quote
For example how can we that the canon that says a bishop must not put away his wife is enforce when none of us allow a married man to be bishop?

If we started to allow married men to become bishops, would we have to make up a new canon to establish that a bishop must not put away his wife?

Sadly, I think we would need several.

My point was merely that we already have something in place for that situation, we wouldn't need to create a new canon because the old one expired, but LOL. 
"Do not tempt the Mor thy Mod."

New thread topic.  Rate the sexual attractiveness of members of OC.net on a scale of 1-10.

Mor Ephrem: 11/10

Offline Volnutt

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,145
Re: Is Pope Clement's Letter to the Corinthians evidence of Papal Supremacy?
« Reply #182 on: April 06, 2015, 11:55:58 PM »
You say that it is wrong to remove the markers of your fathers as the Romans have done. We say that this "widely accepted economy" is a removal of the markers. The canons in question have been reduced to legal fictions.
« Last Edit: April 06, 2015, 11:56:29 PM by Volnutt »

Offline Justin Kissel

  • Protospatharios
  • ****************
  • Posts: 32,787
Re: Is Pope Clement's Letter to the Corinthians evidence of Papal Supremacy?
« Reply #183 on: April 07, 2015, 12:20:10 AM »
Having bought a $3 copy of the Schaff Fathers collection for my Kindle not too long ago, and having started reading it, and having come to St. Clement of Rome first thing, and having compared what he said with what is said in this thread, I can now fully certify that we have gone off topic.
« Last Edit: April 07, 2015, 12:20:40 AM by Justin Kissel »
Jesus ♫   ♫   ♫   ♫
Jesus ♫   ♫   ♫   ♫
The original bleeding heart ♫
That is what thou art ♫
Jesus ♫   ♫   ♫   ♫

Online Mor Ephrem

  • The Fourteenth Apostle and Judge of the Interwebs
  • Section Moderator
  • Protostrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 24,020
  • All who love ZZ, honour ZZ!
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: But my heart belongs to Czech Lands
Re: Is Pope Clement's Letter to the Corinthians evidence of Papal Supremacy?
« Reply #184 on: April 07, 2015, 12:21:36 AM »
You say that it is wrong to remove the markers of your fathers as the Romans have done. We say...

First of all, who is "we"?  "Might become Orthodox" isn't exactly "we".  Or are you Roman/Eastern Catholic? 

Quote
...that this "widely accepted economy" is a removal of the markers. The canons in question have been reduced to legal fictions.

Which canons in question?  And how exactly are they legal fictions?

If you want to discuss the validity of exercising economy, a principle which is firmly established in the canonical tradition, we can.  If you want to discuss how "widely accepted economy" is problematic, we can discuss that too.  But you are taking something (which it is absolutely unclear you understand properly) to mean that which the Orthodox Church would reject. 
"Do not tempt the Mor thy Mod."

New thread topic.  Rate the sexual attractiveness of members of OC.net on a scale of 1-10.

Mor Ephrem: 11/10

Online Mor Ephrem

  • The Fourteenth Apostle and Judge of the Interwebs
  • Section Moderator
  • Protostrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 24,020
  • All who love ZZ, honour ZZ!
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: But my heart belongs to Czech Lands
Re: Is Pope Clement's Letter to the Corinthians evidence of Papal Supremacy?
« Reply #185 on: April 07, 2015, 12:22:43 AM »
Having bought a $3 copy of the Schaff Fathers collection for my Kindle not too long ago, and having started reading it, and having come to St. Clement of Rome first thing, and having compared what he said with what is said in this thread, I can now fully certify that we have gone off topic.

I could've told you that and you could've saved $2. 
"Do not tempt the Mor thy Mod."

New thread topic.  Rate the sexual attractiveness of members of OC.net on a scale of 1-10.

Mor Ephrem: 11/10

Online byhisgrace

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 551
  • Oh Holy Apostle, St. John, pray for us
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Re: Is Pope Clement's Letter to the Corinthians evidence of Papal Supremacy?
« Reply #186 on: April 07, 2015, 12:56:25 AM »
Having bought a $3 copy of the Schaff Fathers collection for my Kindle not too long ago, and having started reading it, and having come to St. Clement of Rome first thing, and having compared what he said with what is said in this thread, I can now fully certify that we have gone off topic.
Lol I know, right.  :laugh:

It's okay, though. My OP question has long been answered to my satisfaction.   
Not posting. Will be back on October 1st.

Offline JoeS2

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,451
  • St. Mark Defender of the true Faith (old CAF guy)
Re: Is Pope Clement's Letter to the Corinthians evidence of Papal Supremacy?
« Reply #187 on: April 07, 2015, 01:13:09 AM »
Having bought a $3 copy of the Schaff Fathers collection for my Kindle not too long ago, and having started reading it, and having come to St. Clement of Rome first thing, and having compared what he said with what is said in this thread, I can now fully certify that we have gone off topic.
Lol I know, right.  :laugh:

It's okay, though. My OP question has long been answered to my satisfaction.

Look if Catholics want to believe in Papal Supremacy let them think that. As for us we will go on with our business.

Offline Cavaradossi

  • 法網恢恢,疏而不漏
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,751
Re: Is Pope Clement's Letter to the Corinthians evidence of Papal Supremacy?
« Reply #188 on: April 07, 2015, 02:44:56 AM »
You say that it is wrong to remove the markers of your fathers as the Romans have done. We say that this "widely accepted economy" is a removal of the markers. The canons in question have been reduced to legal fictions.

Read canon 102 of Trullo. The use of economy itself is canonical. You incorrectly conceive of the canons as a strict legal code (a mistake made by many converts who either try to apply all of the canons and wind up "hyperdox" or who decide that all of the canons are hopelessly outdated and choose to disregard or even mock them, becoming ungrounded and liberal), when they should be understood as a set of witnesses established by the fathers, which live on into modern times through an interpretive tradition. We don't abolish canons, precisely because to abolish them would be to abolish sacred tradition. It is one thing to modify the realization of the canons in response to the differences between life in the times of the Empire and life now (like not enforcing canons which forbid laymen from attending theaters, for the reason that theater in the present era lacks the associations with paganism which theater in the Roman empire had), but it is another to abolish them, and in so doing, to lose the authentic Christian witness of the canons which is passed down as a part of sacred tradition.
Be comforted, and have faith, O Israel, for your God is infinitely simple and one, composed of no parts.

Offline Volnutt

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,145
Re: Is Pope Clement's Letter to the Corinthians evidence of Papal Supremacy?
« Reply #189 on: April 07, 2015, 05:06:13 AM »
You say that it is wrong to remove the markers of your fathers as the Romans have done. We say...

First of all, who is "we"?  "Might become Orthodox" isn't exactly "we".  Or are you Roman/Eastern Catholic?

Sorry. I meant me, Deacon Lance, and apparently Euchologion who all seem to be of the same opinion here.

Quote
...that this "widely accepted economy" is a removal of the markers. The canons in question have been reduced to legal fictions.

Which canons in question?  And how exactly are they legal fictions?

If you want to discuss the validity of exercising economy, a principle which is firmly established in the canonical tradition, we can.  If you want to discuss how "widely accepted economy" is problematic, we can discuss that too.  But you are taking something (which it is absolutely unclear you understand properly) to mean that which the Orthodox Church would reject.

I don't dispute the validity of economy. I dispute the fact that some canons seem to be in a perpetual state of economy to the extent that they don't really exist anymore except on paper. Maybe I'm just being too pragmatic, but the Roman approach to this makes a lot more sense to me.
« Last Edit: April 07, 2015, 05:07:43 AM by Volnutt »

Offline Volnutt

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,145
Re: Is Pope Clement's Letter to the Corinthians evidence of Papal Supremacy?
« Reply #190 on: April 07, 2015, 05:09:39 AM »
You say that it is wrong to remove the markers of your fathers as the Romans have done. We say that this "widely accepted economy" is a removal of the markers. The canons in question have been reduced to legal fictions.

Read canon 102 of Trullo. The use of economy itself is canonical. You incorrectly conceive of the canons as a strict legal code (a mistake made by many converts who either try to apply all of the canons and wind up "hyperdox" or who decide that all of the canons are hopelessly outdated and choose to disregard or even mock them, becoming ungrounded and liberal), when they should be understood as a set of witnesses established by the fathers, which live on into modern times through an interpretive tradition. We don't abolish canons, precisely because to abolish them would be to abolish sacred tradition. It is one thing to modify the realization of the canons in response to the differences between life in the times of the Empire and life now (like not enforcing canons which forbid laymen from attending theaters, for the reason that theater in the present era lacks the associations with paganism which theater in the Roman empire had), but it is another to abolish them, and in so doing, to lose the authentic Christian witness of the canons which is passed down as a part of sacred tradition.

I wouldn't go that far. An abolished canon can still be a witness as a part of Church history, especially when one knows the reason it was abolished.
« Last Edit: April 07, 2015, 05:10:17 AM by Volnutt »

Offline Cavaradossi

  • 法網恢恢,疏而不漏
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,751
Re: Is Pope Clement's Letter to the Corinthians evidence of Papal Supremacy?
« Reply #191 on: April 07, 2015, 05:24:35 AM »
You say that it is wrong to remove the markers of your fathers as the Romans have done. We say that this "widely accepted economy" is a removal of the markers. The canons in question have been reduced to legal fictions.

Read canon 102 of Trullo. The use of economy itself is canonical. You incorrectly conceive of the canons as a strict legal code (a mistake made by many converts who either try to apply all of the canons and wind up "hyperdox" or who decide that all of the canons are hopelessly outdated and choose to disregard or even mock them, becoming ungrounded and liberal), when they should be understood as a set of witnesses established by the fathers, which live on into modern times through an interpretive tradition. We don't abolish canons, precisely because to abolish them would be to abolish sacred tradition. It is one thing to modify the realization of the canons in response to the differences between life in the times of the Empire and life now (like not enforcing canons which forbid laymen from attending theaters, for the reason that theater in the present era lacks the associations with paganism which theater in the Roman empire had), but it is another to abolish them, and in so doing, to lose the authentic Christian witness of the canons which is passed down as a part of sacred tradition.

I wouldn't go that far. An abolished canon can still be a witness as a part of Church history, especially when one knows the reason it was abolished.

If they merely become a part of Church history, having been abrogated, then they de facto have lost any value as living witnesses precisely because they no longer can be enforced. People often gawk, for example, at the severity of the penitential canons of St. Basil without realizing that there is a time when it might be appropriate to enforce those canons (which as St. Basil himself remarks, should be adjusted for the state of the penitent). But since we no longer live in 4th Century Rome, it is much rarer that it would be beneficial to apply those canons in their full severity. We are spiritually more infirm in modern times, so we often employ economia to lessen such penances, but that doesn't mean we should abrogate the old penitential canons with new ones and effectively pass down our impoverished state of spiritual infirmity to future generations as a standard to be emulated. What the fathers established as standards of spiritual health, we should keep, that we may ever struggle to achieve them.
Be comforted, and have faith, O Israel, for your God is infinitely simple and one, composed of no parts.

Offline Volnutt

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,145
Re: Is Pope Clement's Letter to the Corinthians evidence of Papal Supremacy?
« Reply #192 on: April 07, 2015, 05:38:40 AM »
You say that it is wrong to remove the markers of your fathers as the Romans have done. We say that this "widely accepted economy" is a removal of the markers. The canons in question have been reduced to legal fictions.

Read canon 102 of Trullo. The use of economy itself is canonical. You incorrectly conceive of the canons as a strict legal code (a mistake made by many converts who either try to apply all of the canons and wind up "hyperdox" or who decide that all of the canons are hopelessly outdated and choose to disregard or even mock them, becoming ungrounded and liberal), when they should be understood as a set of witnesses established by the fathers, which live on into modern times through an interpretive tradition. We don't abolish canons, precisely because to abolish them would be to abolish sacred tradition. It is one thing to modify the realization of the canons in response to the differences between life in the times of the Empire and life now (like not enforcing canons which forbid laymen from attending theaters, for the reason that theater in the present era lacks the associations with paganism which theater in the Roman empire had), but it is another to abolish them, and in so doing, to lose the authentic Christian witness of the canons which is passed down as a part of sacred tradition.

I wouldn't go that far. An abolished canon can still be a witness as a part of Church history, especially when one knows the reason it was abolished.

If they merely become a part of Church history, having been abrogated, then they de facto have lost any value as living witnesses precisely because they no longer can be enforced. People often gawk, for example, at the severity of the penitential canons of St. Basil without realizing that there is a time when it might be appropriate to enforce those canons (which as St. Basil himself remarks, should be adjusted for the state of the penitent). But since we no longer live in 4th Century Rome, it is much rarer that it would be beneficial to apply those canons in their full severity. We are spiritually more infirm in modern times, so we often employ economia to lessen such penances, but that doesn't mean we should abrogate the old penitential canons with new ones and effectively pass down our impoverished state of spiritual infirmity to future generations as a standard to be emulated. What the fathers established as standards of spiritual health, we should keep, that we may ever struggle to achieve them.

I've never bought the "they were spiritual giants back then and we all suck now" line. It seems to me that every era of not just Church history but history in general has been full of people that complained that "the days of our fathers" were so much better in every way.

It's just like how every era has thought they were living on the literal cusp of the End Times.

Offline Euchologion

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 178
  • "Soul of Christ sanctify me."
  • Faith: Catholic (confused)
  • Jurisdiction: Latin-Rite Diocese of Wilmington
Re: Is Pope Clement's Letter to the Corinthians evidence of Papal Supremacy?
« Reply #193 on: April 07, 2015, 05:15:08 PM »

There are plenty of canons which are not enforced, or which are not followed to the letter due to a widely accepted economy, or a number of other reasons.  But they remain in force.  Sure, it's not as clean as the Roman system, but the Roman system sees nothing wrong with abolishing the Nicene canons with one stroke of the pen in the early 1980's.

I am not entirely sure that's the case. Could be wrong, though. I know at least the anathemas and dogmatic definitions, are, by their nature, always in force.

Online Mor Ephrem

  • The Fourteenth Apostle and Judge of the Interwebs
  • Section Moderator
  • Protostrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 24,020
  • All who love ZZ, honour ZZ!
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: But my heart belongs to Czech Lands
Re: Is Pope Clement's Letter to the Corinthians evidence of Papal Supremacy?
« Reply #194 on: April 07, 2015, 05:26:40 PM »

There are plenty of canons which are not enforced, or which are not followed to the letter due to a widely accepted economy, or a number of other reasons.  But they remain in force.  Sure, it's not as clean as the Roman system, but the Roman system sees nothing wrong with abolishing the Nicene canons with one stroke of the pen in the early 1980's.

I am not entirely sure that's the case. Could be wrong, though. I know at least the anathemas and dogmatic definitions, are, by their nature, always in force.

But you admitted it earlier when I asked about the Nicene canons and you specified at least two that were no longer valid in the RCC.  While you keep bringing up "anathemas and dogmatic definitions", I have left them out because those are not the canons I'm talking about. 
"Do not tempt the Mor thy Mod."

New thread topic.  Rate the sexual attractiveness of members of OC.net on a scale of 1-10.

Mor Ephrem: 11/10

Offline WPM

  • Revolutionary Writer
  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 3,198
Re: Is Pope Clement's Letter to the Corinthians evidence of Papal Supremacy?
« Reply #195 on: April 07, 2015, 05:33:34 PM »
Just a note: The end times were always pushed back on the historical timeline .. Hence every era thinking they are in the end.

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 39,544
Re: Is Pope Clement's Letter to the Corinthians evidence of Papal Supremacy?
« Reply #196 on: April 07, 2015, 07:57:29 PM »
Just a note: The end times were always pushed back on the historical timeline .. Hence every era thinking they are in the end.
one time they will be right.
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

Offline Euchologion

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 178
  • "Soul of Christ sanctify me."
  • Faith: Catholic (confused)
  • Jurisdiction: Latin-Rite Diocese of Wilmington
Re: Is Pope Clement's Letter to the Corinthians evidence of Papal Supremacy?
« Reply #197 on: April 07, 2015, 09:18:53 PM »


But you admitted it earlier when I asked about the Nicene canons and you specified at least two that were no longer valid in the RCC.  While you keep bringing up "anathemas and dogmatic definitions", I have left them out because those are not the canons I'm talking about.

I did admit it, it's just that someone claimed all the canons were abrogated, completely. I am not sure that's the case.

Offline Frederic

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 90
  • St Frederick of Utrecht
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox (former RC)
  • Jurisdiction: Antioch
Re: Is Pope Clement's Letter to the Corinthians evidence of Papal Supremacy?
« Reply #198 on: August 04, 2015, 11:32:05 PM »
Some Catholic apologists say that if the Pope was just the first among equals, not universal jurisdiction, then why didn't the Church ask the apostle John, who lived much closer to Corinth (on a deserted Greek island, because of banishment) to settle the issue of unjust removal of presbyters in Corinth? After all, John was an apostle, so by non-RCC standards, he would have had greater authority than Clement had. Why did they have to go all the way to Rome and ask Clement?

Is there any weight to this argument? I read 1 Clement myself, and personally, I don't see any indication of Papal Supremacy in the text. I think it's also reasonable to assume that the Corinthians may have lost contact with John at the time, because of his banishment.

I have not been on this forum for ages and I find interesting topics.

1°/ We do not know who between Rome and Corinth made the first move, but it is more likely that Clement of Rome first learnt of the dissension through the grapevine.

Quote
It is disgraceful, beloved, yea, highly disgraceful, and unworthy of your Christian profession, that such a thing should be heard of as that the most steadfast and ancient Church of the Corinthians should, on account of one or two persons, engage in sedition against its presbyters. And this rumour has reached not only us, but those also who are unconnected with us; so that, through your infatuation, the name of the Lord is blasphemed, while danger is also brought upon yourselves. (1 Clem, 47:6-7)

2°/ The reason of a letter between Rome and Corinth has more to do with Saint Paul. He founded the Church of Corinth and co-founded the Church of Rome, and Clement was one of his companions. Paul's epistle to the Romans was written from Corinth. The Church of Corinth had already suffered a schism (cf. 1 Cor), and Clement reminds it:

Quote
Take up the epistle of the blessed Apostle Paul. What did he write to you at the time when the Gospel first began to be preached? Truly, under the inspiration of the Spirit, he wrote to you concerning himself, and Cephas, and Apollos, because even then parties had been formed among you. But that inclination for one above another entailed less guilt upon you, inasmuch as your partialities were then shown towards apostles, already of high reputation, and towards a man whom they had approved. But now reflect who those are that have perverted you, and lessened the renown of your far-famed brotherly love. (1 Clem, 47:1-5)

Special brotherly ties united the two Churches, and this had nothing to do with geography, even though Corinth is nearer to Patmos than to Rome.

3°/ Quotes hinting that it is by brotherly love and not by a kind of supremacy that Clement wrote the letter:

Quote
These things, dearly beloved, we write, not only as admonishing you, but also as putting ourselves in remembrance. For we are in the same lists, and the same contest awaiteth us. (1 Clem 7:1)

Quote
Let us accept chastisement, whereat no man ought to be vexed, dearly beloved. The admonition which we give one to another is good and exceeding useful; for it joineth us unto the will of God. (1 Clem 56:2)
« Last Edit: August 04, 2015, 11:48:06 PM by Frederic »
«One cannot understand the least thing about modern civilization if one does not first realize that it is a universal conspiracy to destroy the inner life.» (Georges Bernanos)

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 39,544
Re: Is Pope Clement's Letter to the Corinthians evidence of Papal Supremacy?
« Reply #199 on: August 05, 2015, 12:07:38 AM »

By ignoring it don't we?  I mean for starters there are: no Jewish doctors, no public baths(I would think swimming at pools would fall under this),  no going to theaters or bars(inns), bishops not transferring Sees, etc.  There are a whole bunch of them we routinely ignore hierarchs included.  Do we consider them non-binding or is it like speeding, you are breaking the law but the police have to catch you for punishment to be applied?  Which brings up the worrisome thought of a bishop deciding he is going to start applying penalties to these long unenforced canons.

This is what I was getting at. This is why the Catholic Church permits Councils and the Roman See to amend canons, abrogate them, or alter them (besides, of course, anathemas, which are infallible and unchanging).
Then why did the Vatican drop the anathema against Pope Honorius in the papal oath of office and the office of Pope St. Leo II?
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

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 39,544
Re: Is Pope Clement's Letter to the Corinthians evidence of Papal Supremacy?
« Reply #200 on: August 05, 2015, 12:09:11 AM »


But you admitted it earlier when I asked about the Nicene canons and you specified at least two that were no longer valid in the RCC.  While you keep bringing up "anathemas and dogmatic definitions", I have left them out because those are not the canons I'm talking about.

I did admit it, it's just that someone claimed all the canons were abrogated, completely. I am not sure that's the case.
For the Catholic Church, no.
For your Vatican, yes. At least that is what its supreme pontiff said.
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