Author Topic: Best arguments for Petrine primacy?  (Read 3359 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Agabus

  • The user formerly known as Agabus.
  • Section Moderator
  • Protokentarchos
  • *****
  • Posts: 5,391
  • Faith: without works is dead.
  • Jurisdiction: Foolishness to the Greeks
Best arguments for Petrine primacy?
« on: October 27, 2017, 03:48:54 PM »
Catholics:

I'm looking to read what books Catholics think is actually the best arguments for Petrine primacy. I'm not looking to disprove or be convinced of it, but after a somewhat frustrating conversation online today in which a Catholic apologist just hurled a bunch of verses at me and insisted, "Now it's self evident," I was wondering which Catholic writers and their apologia you think best distill the pro-papacy argument. I've interacted with this theological line for 15 years without ever being convinced there's a serious case to be made outside of the strict historical argument, which is itself way messier than pop apologists will admit.

I'm a smart enough fellow, so don't be afraid to throw something tough my way.

Blessed Nazarius practiced the ascetic life. His clothes were tattered. He wore his shoes without removing them for six years.

THE OPINIONS HERE MAY NOT REFLECT THE ACTUAL OR PERCEIVED ORTHODOX CHURCH

Take a breath, read Ecclesiastes 1:9.

Offline Luke

  • Formerly Gamliel
  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 5,426
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Metropolis of San Francisco
Re: Best arguments for Petrine primacy?
« Reply #1 on: October 27, 2017, 03:57:58 PM »

Offline xOrthodox4Christx

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,322
  • Faith: Orthodox Catholic Church
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Best arguments for Petrine primacy?
« Reply #2 on: October 27, 2017, 04:32:52 PM »
I think Stephen K. Ray was the best one I've ever read. But most books about how "Catholicism is right" hardly even make an effort in the way modern apologists like Catholic Answers do.
I reject all that I wrote that isn't in accordance with the teachings of the Orthodox Church. Also, my posts reflect my opinions (present or former) and nothing else.

Offline Agabus

  • The user formerly known as Agabus.
  • Section Moderator
  • Protokentarchos
  • *****
  • Posts: 5,391
  • Faith: without works is dead.
  • Jurisdiction: Foolishness to the Greeks
Re: Best arguments for Petrine primacy?
« Reply #3 on: October 27, 2017, 04:35:24 PM »
I think Stephen K. Ray was the best one I've ever read.

Upon this Rock?
Blessed Nazarius practiced the ascetic life. His clothes were tattered. He wore his shoes without removing them for six years.

THE OPINIONS HERE MAY NOT REFLECT THE ACTUAL OR PERCEIVED ORTHODOX CHURCH

Take a breath, read Ecclesiastes 1:9.

Offline Iconodule

  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 14,807
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Ecumenical Patriarchate (ACROD)
Re: Best arguments for Petrine primacy?
« Reply #4 on: October 27, 2017, 04:46:53 PM »
The most compelling thing I've seen is Newman's essay on the development of doctrine.
Quote
When a time revolts against eternity, the only thing to set against it is genuine eternity itself, and not some other time which has already roused, and not without reason, a violent reaction against itself.
- Berdyaev

If you would like a private forum for non-polemical topics, comment here.

Online Antonis

  • Μέγα το Θαύμα!
  • Moderator
  • Archon
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,921
  • Jurisdiction: Mt. Lathos
Re: Best arguments for Petrine primacy?
« Reply #5 on: October 27, 2017, 04:51:09 PM »
I think Stephen K. Ray was the best one I've ever read. But most books about how "Catholicism is right" hardly even make an effort in the way modern apologists like Catholic Answers do.
In my experience with Catholic Answers, they are extremely underqualified (sometimes to a humorous extent) in all areas except philosophy.
"Verily they that seek Thee, Lord, and keep the canons of Thy Holy Church shall never want any good thing.”
St. John the Merciful

"This is the one from the beginning, who seemed to be new, yet was found to be ancient and always young, being born in the hearts of the saints."
Letter to Diognetus 11.4

Offline Agabus

  • The user formerly known as Agabus.
  • Section Moderator
  • Protokentarchos
  • *****
  • Posts: 5,391
  • Faith: without works is dead.
  • Jurisdiction: Foolishness to the Greeks
Re: Best arguments for Petrine primacy?
« Reply #6 on: October 27, 2017, 04:56:57 PM »
The most compelling thing I've seen is Newman's essay on the development of doctrine.

I read it years ago but don't recall much about it other than the core thesis.
« Last Edit: October 27, 2017, 05:34:16 PM by Agabus »
Blessed Nazarius practiced the ascetic life. His clothes were tattered. He wore his shoes without removing them for six years.

THE OPINIONS HERE MAY NOT REFLECT THE ACTUAL OR PERCEIVED ORTHODOX CHURCH

Take a breath, read Ecclesiastes 1:9.

Online Volnutt

  • Dull Sublunary Lover
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,224
  • too often left in the payment of false ponchos
  • Faith: Evangelical by default
  • Jurisdiction: Spiritually homeless
Re: Best arguments for Petrine primacy?
« Reply #7 on: October 27, 2017, 05:31:46 PM »
The most compelling thing I've seen is Newman's essay on the development of doctrine.

The idea being that Petrine primacy is there in an embryonic form in authors such as St. Cyprian even if they themselves would not have thought of it as such and by providence it evolved into the robust current form?
Christ my God, set my heart on fire with love in You, that in its flame I may love You with all my heart, with all my mind, and with all my soul and with all my strength, and my neighbor as myself, so that by keeping Your commandments I may glorify You the Giver of every good and perfect gift. Amen.

Offline Vanhyo

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 922
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Layman in the Bulgarian Orthodox Church
Re: Best arguments for Petrine primacy?
« Reply #8 on: October 29, 2017, 04:57:20 AM »
Maybe you mean universal supremacy and personal infallibility ? Because we do have primacy in the Church.
« Last Edit: October 29, 2017, 04:58:00 AM by Vanhyo »

Offline Rohzek

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,216
Re: Best arguments for Petrine primacy?
« Reply #9 on: October 29, 2017, 10:43:26 AM »
In terms of a pro-Catholic, although more balanced assessment, see The Shepherd and the Rock by Archbishop J. Michael Miller. Seems like it is out of print tho. In terms of more standard apologetics, albeit better argued ones than most, Upon this Rock by Stephen K. Ray and Jesus, Peter & the Keys: A Scriptural Handbook on the Papacy by Scott Butler et al. This is how Fr. Laurent A. Cleenewerck, author of His Broken Body, ranks them at least.
"Il ne faut imaginer Dieu ni trop bon, ni méchant. La justice est entre l'excès de la clémence et la cruauté, ainsi que les peines finies sont entre l'impunité et les peines éternelles." - Denise Diderot, Pensées philosophiques 1746

Offline LivenotoneviL

  • Done
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,607
  • Intercede for my wretched soul, Saint Alban.
  • Faith: Outside the Church
  • Jurisdiction: Lost for now.
Re: Best arguments for Petrine primacy?
« Reply #10 on: November 11, 2017, 12:35:32 AM »
I have "Jesus, Peter, and the Keys," and I personally thought that this book was pretty lacking, especially when compared to Newman's "development of doctrine." - from what I remember reading, all it does is quote mines the Church Fathers anecdotally and tries to use Old Testament quotes to prove the Papacy. The book was also not organized that well; it's structured in a Q and A type fashion. Although, to be fair, the book seems more aimed at Protestants than Orthodox inquirers.

It didn't even compare to Michael Whelton, who in his book "Two Paths, Papal Monarchy and Collegial Tradition" fundamentally just shatters the premises by accusing Catholics of anticipating their own conclusion whenever they find a quote from the Church Fathers referring to Peter, as well as accusing the Catholics of using Sola Scriptura and trying to create some backwards Old Testament typology rather than simply looking into history or what the Church has taught historically.
« Last Edit: November 11, 2017, 12:38:16 AM by LivenotoneviL »
I'm done.

Offline dreuter032003

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 3
  • Faith: Catholic
  • Jurisdiction: Kansas City Diocese
Re: Best arguments for Petrine primacy?
« Reply #11 on: November 11, 2017, 04:06:33 AM »
Catholics:

I'm looking to read what books Catholics think is actually the best arguments for Petrine primacy. I'm not looking to disprove or be convinced of it, but after a somewhat frustrating conversation online today in which a Catholic apologist just hurled a bunch of verses at me and insisted, "Now it's self evident," I was wondering which Catholic writers and their apologia you think best distill the pro-papacy argument. I've interacted with this theological line for 15 years without ever being convinced there's a serious case to be made outside of the strict historical argument, which is itself way messier than pop apologists will admit.

I'm a smart enough fellow, so don't be afraid to throw something tough my way.

Yep. All the Catholic books on primacy are what you say. Hurl as many quotes as possible from as many church fathers or saints as possible. Then put on Peter goggles and interpret them to the hilt. This creates the appearance "it was self-evident to everybody." You know the drill.

With that said, try this one from 1837: "The Primacy of the Apostolic see, and the Authority of General Councils, Vindicated" by Francis Patrick Kenrick, a bishop who played a part at Vatican I.

Older Catholic apologists, such as Orestes Brownson, would refer all doubters to this book as if it was case closed after that. So, there's a book Catholics think good enough to settle the matter.

Offline RaphaCam

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,845
  • It is honourable to reveal the works of God
    • Em Espírito e em Verdade
  • Faith: Big-O Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Exarchate of Gotham City
Re: Best arguments for Petrine primacy?
« Reply #12 on: November 11, 2017, 11:03:35 PM »
Since I unfortunately always prefer fantastic arguments rather than rational, my favourite ones non-ironically are:
  • the Acts of the Apostles begin in Jerusalem and end in Rome because they show the see of the Church being taken from Jerusalem to Rome
  • the Donation of Constantine
  • the continuity of the OT High Priests as vicars of God to his flock
« Last Edit: November 11, 2017, 11:05:17 PM by RaphaCam »
"May the Lord our God remember in His kingdom all Holy Catholic Apostolic Church, which heralds the Word of Truth and fearlessly offers and distributes the Holy Oblation despite human deficiencies and persecutions moved by the powers of this world, in all time and unto the ages of ages."

May the Blessed Light shine Forth

Offline Sharbel

  • Glory to God in all things!
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,325
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Greek Metropolis of Denver
Re: Best arguments for Petrine primacy?
« Reply #13 on: November 24, 2017, 04:15:38 PM »
It didn't even compare to Michael Whelton, who in his book "Two Paths, Papal Monarchy and Collegial Tradition" fundamentally just shatters the premises by accusing Catholics of anticipating their own conclusion whenever they find a quote from the Church Fathers referring to Peter, as well as accusing the Catholics of using Sola Scriptura and trying to create some backwards Old Testament typology rather than simply looking into history or what the Church has taught historically.
I'm ashamed to say that I wore such glasses wholeheartedly, until I really studied Church History.  Interestingly enough, the most influential author on my research was a Dominican friar, Fr. Aidan Nichols, whose integrity in his scholar works greatly motivated me to expand my research to all the most important issues between the Eastern and the Western Churches.
Sanctus Deus
ܩܕܝܫܐ ܐܢ̱ܬ ܠܐ ܡܝܘܬܐ
Άγιος ο Θεός

Offline LivenotoneviL

  • Done
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,607
  • Intercede for my wretched soul, Saint Alban.
  • Faith: Outside the Church
  • Jurisdiction: Lost for now.
Re: Best arguments for Petrine primacy?
« Reply #14 on: November 24, 2017, 05:38:43 PM »
Maybe you mean universal supremacy and personal infallibility ? Because we do have primacy in the Church.

The Roman Catholics equivocate the terms "supremacy" and "primacy" as one in the same.
I'm done.

Online Volnutt

  • Dull Sublunary Lover
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,224
  • too often left in the payment of false ponchos
  • Faith: Evangelical by default
  • Jurisdiction: Spiritually homeless
Re: Best arguments for Petrine primacy?
« Reply #15 on: November 25, 2017, 02:50:07 AM »
Since I unfortunately always prefer fantastic arguments rather than rational, my favourite ones non-ironically are:
  • the Acts of the Apostles begin in Jerusalem and end in Rome because they show the see of the Church being taken from Jerusalem to Rome

That's... depressing that someone would believe that. I mean, I know you don't. But that somebody would.

  • the continuity of the OT High Priests as vicars of God to his flock

Doesn't Orthodoxy also have a form of this belief?
« Last Edit: November 25, 2017, 02:51:16 AM by Volnutt »
Christ my God, set my heart on fire with love in You, that in its flame I may love You with all my heart, with all my mind, and with all my soul and with all my strength, and my neighbor as myself, so that by keeping Your commandments I may glorify You the Giver of every good and perfect gift. Amen.

Online Volnutt

  • Dull Sublunary Lover
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,224
  • too often left in the payment of false ponchos
  • Faith: Evangelical by default
  • Jurisdiction: Spiritually homeless
Re: Best arguments for Petrine primacy?
« Reply #16 on: November 25, 2017, 02:53:23 AM »
Catholics:

I'm looking to read what books Catholics think is actually the best arguments for Petrine primacy. I'm not looking to disprove or be convinced of it, but after a somewhat frustrating conversation online today in which a Catholic apologist just hurled a bunch of verses at me and insisted, "Now it's self evident," I was wondering which Catholic writers and their apologia you think best distill the pro-papacy argument. I've interacted with this theological line for 15 years without ever being convinced there's a serious case to be made outside of the strict historical argument, which is itself way messier than pop apologists will admit.

I'm a smart enough fellow, so don't be afraid to throw something tough my way.

Yep. All the Catholic books on primacy are what you say. Hurl as many quotes as possible from as many church fathers or saints as possible. Then put on Peter goggles and interpret them to the hilt. This creates the appearance "it was self-evident to everybody." You know the drill.

With that said, try this one from 1837: "The Primacy of the Apostolic see, and the Authority of General Councils, Vindicated" by Francis Patrick Kenrick, a bishop who played a part at Vatican I.

Older Catholic apologists, such as Orestes Brownson, would refer all doubters to this book as if it was case closed after that. So, there's a book Catholics think good enough to settle the matter.

Welcome to the forum! Why do you think Fr. Kenrick is no longer cited?
Christ my God, set my heart on fire with love in You, that in its flame I may love You with all my heart, with all my mind, and with all my soul and with all my strength, and my neighbor as myself, so that by keeping Your commandments I may glorify You the Giver of every good and perfect gift. Amen.

Offline Asteriktos

  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 37,830
Re: Best arguments for Petrine primacy?
« Reply #17 on: November 25, 2017, 02:56:56 AM »
Since I unfortunately always prefer fantastic arguments rather than rational, my favourite ones non-ironically are:
  • the Acts of the Apostles begin in Jerusalem and end in Rome because they show the see of the Church being taken from Jerusalem to Rome

That's... depressing that someone would believe that. I mean, I know you don't. But that somebody would.

I'd agree, though I'm not sure it's much worse than the common argument having to do with St. Peter dying in Rome.

Online Volnutt

  • Dull Sublunary Lover
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,224
  • too often left in the payment of false ponchos
  • Faith: Evangelical by default
  • Jurisdiction: Spiritually homeless
Re: Best arguments for Petrine primacy?
« Reply #18 on: November 25, 2017, 03:02:44 AM »
Since I unfortunately always prefer fantastic arguments rather than rational, my favourite ones non-ironically are:
  • the Acts of the Apostles begin in Jerusalem and end in Rome because they show the see of the Church being taken from Jerusalem to Rome

That's... depressing that someone would believe that. I mean, I know you don't. But that somebody would.

I'd agree, though I'm not sure it's much worse than the common argument having to do with St. Peter dying in Rome.

Yeah, that is a weird one. Though tbf they also add in St. Paul dying there as being a part of it AFAIK. Though, I'm not sure it makes it much better.

I'd have much more respect for Catholic apologetics if they;d just admit that it was because Rome was the most important city in the Empire at the time. Nothing wrong with that, I could buy the idea that it was God's will for the Church to be headquartered where the most people and the seat of governance were (though I suppose it would open Catholics up to the question of why, by the same logic, didn't the Apostolic See switch to Ravenna or Aachen once they became more important cities in the West?)
« Last Edit: November 25, 2017, 03:04:26 AM by Volnutt »
Christ my God, set my heart on fire with love in You, that in its flame I may love You with all my heart, with all my mind, and with all my soul and with all my strength, and my neighbor as myself, so that by keeping Your commandments I may glorify You the Giver of every good and perfect gift. Amen.

Offline Agabus

  • The user formerly known as Agabus.
  • Section Moderator
  • Protokentarchos
  • *****
  • Posts: 5,391
  • Faith: without works is dead.
  • Jurisdiction: Foolishness to the Greeks
Re: Best arguments for Petrine primacy?
« Reply #19 on: November 25, 2017, 02:49:36 PM »
(though I suppose it would open Catholics up to the question of why, by the same logic, didn't the Apostolic See switch to Ravenna or Aachen once they became more important cities in the West?)

Because Avignon is so lovely in the springtime?
Blessed Nazarius practiced the ascetic life. His clothes were tattered. He wore his shoes without removing them for six years.

THE OPINIONS HERE MAY NOT REFLECT THE ACTUAL OR PERCEIVED ORTHODOX CHURCH

Take a breath, read Ecclesiastes 1:9.

Offline byhisgrace

  • AOCB
  • Site Supporter
  • OC.net guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,265
  • Memory Eternal to my Younger Brother
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOARCH
Re: Best arguments for Petrine primacy?
« Reply #20 on: November 25, 2017, 03:14:18 PM »
@Agabus
I think one of the strongest arguments for Papal Supremacy is that at least a few of the Fathers have unambiguously taught at least some elementary form of that doctrine. Yes, there are plenty of those bad Patristic quote-mining fueled by a host of non-sequiturs, combined with the Peter-syndrome. Yes, there are many quotes that are ambiguous and leave room for either a pro-Orthodox or a pro-Catholic interpretation. But a select few, in my opinion, leave little to room for any other rational interpretation other than Papal supremacy. Irenaeaus and Optatus comes to my mind. A few Father's opinions does not make doctrine, but I wonder why they have not been rebuked by other Christians back then, if what they said was unorthodox. Have they just ignored them? Possibly, but it's also just as possible that they silently agreed with them.
« Last Edit: November 25, 2017, 03:14:44 PM by byhisgrace »
Oh Holy Apostle, St. John, pray for us

Online Volnutt

  • Dull Sublunary Lover
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,224
  • too often left in the payment of false ponchos
  • Faith: Evangelical by default
  • Jurisdiction: Spiritually homeless
Re: Best arguments for Petrine primacy?
« Reply #21 on: November 25, 2017, 03:21:13 PM »
@Agabus
I think one of the strongest arguments for Papal Supremacy is that at least a few of the Fathers have unambiguously taught at least some elementary form of that doctrine. Yes, there are plenty of those bad Patristic quote-mining fueled by a host of non-sequiturs, combined with the Peter-syndrome. Yes, there are many quotes that are ambiguous and leave room for either a pro-Orthodox or a pro-Catholic interpretation. But a select few, in my opinion, leave little to room for any other rational interpretation other than Papal supremacy. Irenaeaus and Optatus comes to my mind. A few Father's opinions does not make doctrine, but I wonder why they have not been rebuked by other Christians back then, if what they said was unorthodox. Have they just ignored them? Possibly, but it's also just as possible that they silently agreed with them.

Well, there's the idea of Rome's moral authority as the most steadfast See in terms of its orthodoxy that gave it the ability to be a "court of last appeal" in inter-patriarchal disputes. I believe this is what is sometimes referred as Rome "presiding in love." I don't think that's an idea that is controversial in Orthodoxy, but it's a far cry from universal ordinary jurisdiction, Rome being the only truly "Apostolic See," etc.
Christ my God, set my heart on fire with love in You, that in its flame I may love You with all my heart, with all my mind, and with all my soul and with all my strength, and my neighbor as myself, so that by keeping Your commandments I may glorify You the Giver of every good and perfect gift. Amen.

Offline Porter ODoran

  • PHILIA NIKA
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,135
  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Re: Best arguments for Petrine primacy?
« Reply #22 on: November 25, 2017, 04:24:17 PM »
@Agabus
I think one of the strongest arguments for Papal Supremacy is that at least a few of the Fathers have unambiguously taught at least some elementary form of that doctrine. Yes, there are plenty of those bad Patristic quote-mining fueled by a host of non-sequiturs, combined with the Peter-syndrome. Yes, there are many quotes that are ambiguous and leave room for either a pro-Orthodox or a pro-Catholic interpretation. But a select few, in my opinion, leave little to room for any other rational interpretation other than Papal supremacy. Irenaeaus and Optatus comes to my mind. A few Father's opinions does not make doctrine, but I wonder why they have not been rebuked by other Christians back then, if what they said was unorthodox. Have they just ignored them? Possibly, but it's also just as possible that they silently agreed with them.

You'd really have to provide citations for your Iranaeus and Optatus allusion for this to become a useful argument.
"Love ... is an abyss of illumination, a mountain of fire ... . It is the condition of angels, the progress of eternity" (Climacus).

Quote from: Seekingtrue
Yes we who are far from sainthood we can recognize a living saint and I'm talking from personal experience.Yes they are gentle soo gentle it can not be described it is like gentleness and humility in one and also they have this light this energy it's beyond words...and when you are near them you feel ecstatic and very happy

Offline Asteriktos

  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 37,830
Re: Best arguments for Petrine primacy?
« Reply #23 on: November 25, 2017, 04:50:02 PM »
I would agree that certain Fathers did seem to believe in something akin to papal supremacy (though I'm not sure that St. Irenaeus was among them, based on the quotes I remember seeing). Regarding people responding, this is a popular argument and makes sense in some contexts (like John 6), but I'm not sure it does here. The overwhelming majority of stuff written down from that time has perished; it's possible this or that Father did respond, in writing or in person, but we simply don't have a record of it.  Since such claims had little practical impact (e.g., the Pope didn't simply get his way in the Eastern controversy), even those who were aware of such claims probably wouldn't have been much bothered by them up through the 9th-10th centuries. It's not that Rome was silent before that, but up till that time other sees (especially Constantinople and Alexandria) were also engaging in partisan jockeying for position with each other. It was only when this stuff started to have practical implications (changing the creed, affirming the filioque, sparring missionaries in the Balkans and E. Europe) that Rome started trying to throw its weight around with a more dogmatic tone, and that forced the East was to respond more loudly and directly. I would also point out that sometimes Fathers contradicted themselves as far as Roman primacy--St. Cyprian, for example, is often quoted as having a lofty view of Rome, yet when he found himself in disagreement with Rome he very readily treated Rome as though it were like any other foreign local church: worthy of respect when orthodox but not obligated to be obedient.

Offline byhisgrace

  • AOCB
  • Site Supporter
  • OC.net guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,265
  • Memory Eternal to my Younger Brother
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOARCH
Re: Best arguments for Petrine primacy?
« Reply #24 on: November 25, 2017, 05:24:16 PM »
@Agabus
I think one of the strongest arguments for Papal Supremacy is that at least a few of the Fathers have unambiguously taught at least some elementary form of that doctrine. Yes, there are plenty of those bad Patristic quote-mining fueled by a host of non-sequiturs, combined with the Peter-syndrome. Yes, there are many quotes that are ambiguous and leave room for either a pro-Orthodox or a pro-Catholic interpretation. But a select few, in my opinion, leave little to room for any other rational interpretation other than Papal supremacy. Irenaeaus and Optatus comes to my mind. A few Father's opinions does not make doctrine, but I wonder why they have not been rebuked by other Christians back then, if what they said was unorthodox. Have they just ignored them? Possibly, but it's also just as possible that they silently agreed with them.

Well, there's the idea of Rome's moral authority as the most steadfast See in terms of its orthodoxy that gave it the ability to be a "court of last appeal" in inter-patriarchal disputes. I believe this is what is sometimes referred as Rome "presiding in love." I don't think that's an idea that is controversial in Orthodoxy, but it's a far cry from universal ordinary jurisdiction, Rome being the only truly "Apostolic See," etc.

I would agree that certain Fathers did seem to believe in something akin to papal supremacy (though I'm not sure that St. Irenaeus was among them, based on the quotes I remember seeing). Regarding people responding, this is a popular argument and makes sense in some contexts (like John 6), but I'm not sure it does here. The overwhelming majority of stuff written down from that time has perished; it's possible this or that Father did respond, in writing or in person, but we simply don't have a record of it.  Since such claims had little practical impact (e.g., the Pope didn't simply get his way in the Eastern controversy), even those who were aware of such claims probably wouldn't have been much bothered by them up through the 9th-10th centuries. It's not that Rome was silent before that, but up till that time other sees (especially Constantinople and Alexandria) were also engaging in partisan jockeying for position with each other. It was only when this stuff started to have practical implications (changing the creed, affirming the filioque, sparring missionaries in the Balkans and E. Europe) that Rome started trying to throw its weight around with a more dogmatic tone, and that forced the East was to respond more loudly and directly. I would also point out that sometimes Fathers contradicted themselves as far as Roman primacy--St. Cyprian, for example, is often quoted as having a lofty view of Rome, yet when he found himself in disagreement with Rome he very readily treated Rome as though it were like any other foreign local church: worthy of respect when orthodox but not obligated to be obedient.

These are very good counter-points, yes.
« Last Edit: November 25, 2017, 05:24:43 PM by byhisgrace »
Oh Holy Apostle, St. John, pray for us

Offline LivenotoneviL

  • Done
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,607
  • Intercede for my wretched soul, Saint Alban.
  • Faith: Outside the Church
  • Jurisdiction: Lost for now.
Re: Best arguments for Petrine primacy?
« Reply #25 on: November 26, 2017, 12:05:29 PM »
@Agabus
I think one of the strongest arguments for Papal Supremacy is that at least a few of the Fathers have unambiguously taught at least some elementary form of that doctrine. Yes, there are plenty of those bad Patristic quote-mining fueled by a host of non-sequiturs, combined with the Peter-syndrome. Yes, there are many quotes that are ambiguous and leave room for either a pro-Orthodox or a pro-Catholic interpretation. But a select few, in my opinion, leave little to room for any other rational interpretation other than Papal supremacy. Irenaeaus and Optatus comes to my mind. A few Father's opinions does not make doctrine, but I wonder why they have not been rebuked by other Christians back then, if what they said was unorthodox. Have they just ignored them? Possibly, but it's also just as possible that they silently agreed with them.

You'd really have to provide citations for your Iranaeus and Optatus allusion for this to become a useful argument.

Optatus, Against the Donatists:

1:10
"Now there is another question: For what purpose have you mentioned those who have not the Sacraments which you and we alike possess? Sound health does not clamour for medicine; strength which is secure in itself does not need outside help; truth has no lack of arguments; it is the mark of a sick man to seek remedies; it is the sign of a sluggard and a weakling to run in search of auxiliaries; it belongs to a liar to rake up arguments. To return to your book, you have said that the Endowments of the Church cannot be with heretics, and in this you have said rightly, for we know that the churches of each of the heretics have no lawful Sacraments, since they are adulteresses, without the rights of honest wedlock, and are rejected by Christ, who is the Bridegroom of One Church, as strangers. This He Himself makes clear in the Canticle of Canticles. When He praises One, He condemns the others because, besides the One which is the true Catholic Church, the others amongst the heretics are thought to be churches, but are not such. Thus He declares in the Canticle of Canticles (as we have already pointed out) that His Dove is One, and that she is also the chosen Spouse, and again a garden enclosed, and a fountain sealed up.

Therefore none of the heretics possess either the Keys, which Peter alone received, or the Ring, with which we read that the Fountain has been sealed; nor is any heretic one of those to whom that Garden belongs in which God plants His young trees. Concerning these men, that which you have written at length (although it has nothing to do with our present business) is abundantly sufficient."

2:2
"You cannot then deny that you do know that upon Peter first in the City of Rome was bestowed the Episcopal chair, on which sat Peter, the Head of all the Apostles (for which reason he was called Cephas), that, in this one chair, unity should be preserved by all, lest the other Apostles might claim----each for himself----separate chairs, so that he who should set up a second chair against the unique chair would already be a schismatic and a sinner."

2:4
"It is a branch of your error growing out of a lie, not from the root of truth. In a word, were Macrobius to be asked where he sits in the City, will he be able to say on Peter's chair? I doubt whether he has even set eyes upon it, and schismatic that he is, he has not drawn nigh to Peter's 'Shrine,' against the precept of the Apostle who writes.....

Behold, in Rome are the 'Shrines' of the two Apostles. Will you tell me whether he has been able to approach them, or has offered Sacrifice in those places, where----as is certain----are these 'Shrines' of the Saints."
« Last Edit: November 26, 2017, 12:07:22 PM by LivenotoneviL »
I'm done.

Offline LivenotoneviL

  • Done
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,607
  • Intercede for my wretched soul, Saint Alban.
  • Faith: Outside the Church
  • Jurisdiction: Lost for now.
Re: Best arguments for Petrine primacy?
« Reply #26 on: November 26, 2017, 12:22:39 PM »
Irenaeus

(Against the Heresies, 3:3)

"Since, however, it would be very tedious, in such a volume as this, to reckon up the successions of all the Churches, we do put to confusion all those who, in whatever manner, whether by an evil self-pleasing, by vainglory, or by blindness and perverse opinion, assemble in unauthorized meetings; [we do this, I say,] by indicating that tradition derived from the apostles, of the very great, the very ancient, and universally known Church founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul; as also [by pointing out] the faith preached to men, which comes down to our time by means of the successions of the bishops. For it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its preeminent authority, that is, the faithful everywhere, inasmuch as the tradition has been preserved continuously by those [faithful men] who exist everywhere."
I'm done.

Offline Xavier

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 621
  • Immaculate Heart of Mary, Pray for US!
  • Faith: Catholic Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Apostolic Throne of St. Peter's
Re: Best arguments for Petrine primacy?
« Reply #27 on: November 26, 2017, 12:45:24 PM »
I would strongly encourage this work, it is one of a kind and peerless, it was written by a former Russian Orthodox theologian, a man of the highest repute, named Vladimir Soloviev. He was a tireless advocate for his fellow Orthodox theologians to strongly consider reunion with Rome. In case someone doesn't want to take just my word for it, a few sample reviews from Amazon,
https://www.amazon.com/Russian-Church-Papacy-Vladimir-Soloviev/product-reviews/1888992298/ref=cm_cr_dp_d_txt?ie=UTF8&reviewerType=all_reviews&sortBy=recent#RR1KSPFSX281F

"A valuable challenge to those who dismiss the claim of Papal headship in the Body of Christ. Soloviev is a compelling writer of deep erudition married to passion for the truth.", "In this abridged volume of the original work Russian philosopher Vladimir Soloviev makes a creative and compelling case for why the Russian Orthodox Church should reunite with Rome to experience the true fullness of the apostolic, Christian faith ... Soloviev's work is well worth reading for anyone wanting to learn more about Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy. I have read and re-read it now several times and find that it - like a bottle of wine - gets only better with time."...

"As a person of partly Greek ancestry, and Protestant upbringing, when I contemplated conversion to Roman Catholicism, I asked the priest why I should not become Orthoodox. He smiled and said that would be going in the right direction but why not come all the way home. He gave me this book. Indeed I became a Roman Catholic.

I count as kin and the best of friends and brothers in Christ many Orthodox. I am thankful and do believe that I understand them and their religion better than ever for reading this book. Though it condemns certain errors, Soloviev speaks with a true voice of love for the Orthodox. This personal note is all I can add to the excellent reviews that have gone before mine. I do recommend this book especially to Orthodox Christians who are so very important to the future of all Christendom."

"Soloviev's 'The Russian Church and the Papacy' is an absolutely brilliant tour de force apologetic work in defense of the papacy and easily the very best I've ever read. A must-read for non-Catholics who still maintain that the papacy is an invention of the Roman Bishops or that the Pope has a 'primacy of honor' only."
« Last Edit: November 26, 2017, 12:47:45 PM by Xavier »
"My daughter, look at My Heart surrounded with thorns with which ungrateful men pierce it at every moment by their blasphemies and ingratitude. You, at least, try to console Me, and say that I promise to assist at the hour of death, with all the graces necessary for salvation, all those who, on the first Saturday of five consecutive months go to confession and receive Holy Communion, recite five decades of the Rosary and keep Me company for a quarter of an hour" - The Theotokos to Sr. Lucia.

Online Volnutt

  • Dull Sublunary Lover
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,224
  • too often left in the payment of false ponchos
  • Faith: Evangelical by default
  • Jurisdiction: Spiritually homeless
Re: Best arguments for Petrine primacy?
« Reply #28 on: November 26, 2017, 02:44:49 PM »
I would strongly encourage this work, it is one of a kind and peerless, it was written by a former Russian Orthodox theologian, a man of the highest repute, named Vladimir Soloviev. He was a tireless advocate for his fellow Orthodox theologians to strongly consider reunion with Rome. In case someone doesn't want to take just my word for it, a few sample reviews from Amazon,
https://www.amazon.com/Russian-Church-Papacy-Vladimir-Soloviev/product-reviews/1888992298/ref=cm_cr_dp_d_txt?ie=UTF8&reviewerType=all_reviews&sortBy=recent#RR1KSPFSX281F

"A valuable challenge to those who dismiss the claim of Papal headship in the Body of Christ. Soloviev is a compelling writer of deep erudition married to passion for the truth.", "In this abridged volume of the original work Russian philosopher Vladimir Soloviev makes a creative and compelling case for why the Russian Orthodox Church should reunite with Rome to experience the true fullness of the apostolic, Christian faith ... Soloviev's work is well worth reading for anyone wanting to learn more about Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy. I have read and re-read it now several times and find that it - like a bottle of wine - gets only better with time."...

"As a person of partly Greek ancestry, and Protestant upbringing, when I contemplated conversion to Roman Catholicism, I asked the priest why I should not become Orthoodox. He smiled and said that would be going in the right direction but why not come all the way home. He gave me this book. Indeed I became a Roman Catholic.

I count as kin and the best of friends and brothers in Christ many Orthodox. I am thankful and do believe that I understand them and their religion better than ever for reading this book. Though it condemns certain errors, Soloviev speaks with a true voice of love for the Orthodox. This personal note is all I can add to the excellent reviews that have gone before mine. I do recommend this book especially to Orthodox Christians who are so very important to the future of all Christendom."

Do you have any idea how patronizing that kind of talk comes off as? I'm not even Orthodox and it makes me want to throw up.

I'd rather be told I'm a hellbound heretic than pat on the head and told what a mischievous little scamp I am.
« Last Edit: November 26, 2017, 02:46:28 PM by Volnutt »
Christ my God, set my heart on fire with love in You, that in its flame I may love You with all my heart, with all my mind, and with all my soul and with all my strength, and my neighbor as myself, so that by keeping Your commandments I may glorify You the Giver of every good and perfect gift. Amen.

Offline Sharbel

  • Glory to God in all things!
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,325
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Greek Metropolis of Denver
Re: Best arguments for Petrine primacy?
« Reply #29 on: November 26, 2017, 03:27:46 PM »
I would strongly encourage this work, it is one of a kind and peerless, it was written by a former Russian Orthodox theologian, a man of the highest repute, named Vladimir Soloviev. He was a tireless advocate for his fellow Orthodox theologians to strongly consider reunion with Rome. In case someone doesn't want to take just my word for it, a few sample reviews from Amazon...
Not everything that echoes so pleasantly in a Catholic echo chamber sounds as well outside of it.  As a fellow Catholic, I understand how this rings to you, but you have to consider the persons reading you if you want to be compellingly persuasive.  Oftentimes we Catholics come across as if pulling rank or throwing the book or reading the riot act to those without Catholic ears.  And, no, coming to the Catholic Church is not a matter of training ears, but of changing hearts, even stubborn hearts.
Sanctus Deus
ܩܕܝܫܐ ܐܢ̱ܬ ܠܐ ܡܝܘܬܐ
Άγιος ο Θεός

Offline Sharbel

  • Glory to God in all things!
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,325
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Greek Metropolis of Denver
Re: Best arguments for Petrine primacy?
« Reply #30 on: November 26, 2017, 03:48:50 PM »
"For it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its preeminent authority, that is, the faithful everywhere, inasmuch as the tradition has been preserved continuously by those [faithful men] who exist everywhere." (Against Heresies, St. Irenaeus)
St. Irenaeus wrote to Christians in the West and I wonder if he's using a hyperbolic figure of speech to bring the heretics back to the Apostolic See in Rome to whom they owe their faith. 
Sanctus Deus
ܩܕܝܫܐ ܐܢ̱ܬ ܠܐ ܡܝܘܬܐ
Άγιος ο Θεός

Offline ErmyCath

  • Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 282
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: ROCOR
Re: Best arguments for Petrine primacy?
« Reply #31 on: November 26, 2017, 05:23:07 PM »
As for St. Irenaeus, I may be off-base, but it seems to me erroneous to equate “Church of Rome” solely with the person of the pope. The Church of Rome in the quote is a body of people. If he’d intended to refer to the singular person of the bishop, he’d have said so. There are many logical inferences one must make in order to get from what he says to the person of the pope.
"You must have an opinion on everything and loudly confront everyone with it." - Cyrillic

Offline byhisgrace

  • AOCB
  • Site Supporter
  • OC.net guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,265
  • Memory Eternal to my Younger Brother
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOARCH
Re: Best arguments for Petrine primacy?
« Reply #32 on: November 26, 2017, 06:05:31 PM »
"For it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its preeminent authority, that is, the faithful everywhere, inasmuch as the tradition has been preserved continuously by those [faithful men] who exist everywhere." (Against Heresies, St. Irenaeus)
St. Irenaeus wrote to Christians in the West and I wonder if he's using a hyperbolic figure of speech to bring the heretics back to the Apostolic See in Rome to whom they owe their faith.

As for St. Irenaeus, I may be off-base, but it seems to me erroneous to equate “Church of Rome” solely with the person of the pope. The Church of Rome in the quote is a body of people. If he’d intended to refer to the singular person of the bishop, he’d have said so. There are many logical inferences one must make in order to get from what he says to the person of the pope.

Yeah, fair enough. I can concede to that.
Oh Holy Apostle, St. John, pray for us

Offline RaphaCam

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,845
  • It is honourable to reveal the works of God
    • Em Espírito e em Verdade
  • Faith: Big-O Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Exarchate of Gotham City
Re: Best arguments for Petrine primacy?
« Reply #33 on: December 04, 2017, 10:52:47 AM »
That's... depressing that someone would believe that. I mean, I know you don't. But that somebody would.
I'm afraid there are much weirder beliefs thriving under the World Christianity umbrella.

Quote
  • the continuity of the OT High Priests as vicars of God to his flock
Doesn't Orthodoxy also have a form of this belief?
How so?
"May the Lord our God remember in His kingdom all Holy Catholic Apostolic Church, which heralds the Word of Truth and fearlessly offers and distributes the Holy Oblation despite human deficiencies and persecutions moved by the powers of this world, in all time and unto the ages of ages."

May the Blessed Light shine Forth

Online Volnutt

  • Dull Sublunary Lover
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,224
  • too often left in the payment of false ponchos
  • Faith: Evangelical by default
  • Jurisdiction: Spiritually homeless
Re: Best arguments for Petrine primacy?
« Reply #34 on: December 04, 2017, 12:02:39 PM »
That's... depressing that someone would believe that. I mean, I know you don't. But that somebody would.
I'm afraid there are much weirder beliefs thriving under the World Christianity umbrella.

Well, yeah, obviously. Cryptojew as I am, I just don't like to see Christians denigrate Jerusalem.

Quote
  • the continuity of the OT High Priests as vicars of God to his flock
Doesn't Orthodoxy also have a form of this belief?
How so?

Isn't that the basis for the Orthodox priesthood? I could've sworn I saw Mor say as much.

The altar is divided from the people as a continuation of the Temple, isn't it?
« Last Edit: December 04, 2017, 12:03:22 PM by Volnutt »
Christ my God, set my heart on fire with love in You, that in its flame I may love You with all my heart, with all my mind, and with all my soul and with all my strength, and my neighbor as myself, so that by keeping Your commandments I may glorify You the Giver of every good and perfect gift. Amen.

Offline RaphaCam

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,845
  • It is honourable to reveal the works of God
    • Em Espírito e em Verdade
  • Faith: Big-O Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Exarchate of Gotham City
Re: Best arguments for Petrine primacy?
« Reply #35 on: December 04, 2017, 03:40:04 PM »
Isn't that the basis for the Orthodox priesthood? I could've sworn I saw Mor say as much.

The altar is divided from the people as a continuation of the Temple, isn't it?
oh, I see
"May the Lord our God remember in His kingdom all Holy Catholic Apostolic Church, which heralds the Word of Truth and fearlessly offers and distributes the Holy Oblation despite human deficiencies and persecutions moved by the powers of this world, in all time and unto the ages of ages."

May the Blessed Light shine Forth

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Ο προκαθήμενος της Ορθοδοξίας - The President of Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Hypatos
  • *****
  • Posts: 34,345
  • Two half-eggs
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: But my heart belongs to FOCOF
Re: Best arguments for Petrine primacy?
« Reply #36 on: December 04, 2017, 04:05:04 PM »
Quote
  • the continuity of the OT High Priests as vicars of God to his flock
Doesn't Orthodoxy also have a form of this belief?
How so?

Isn't that the basis for the Orthodox priesthood? I could've sworn I saw Mor say as much.

Where?

Online Volnutt

  • Dull Sublunary Lover
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,224
  • too often left in the payment of false ponchos
  • Faith: Evangelical by default
  • Jurisdiction: Spiritually homeless
Re: Best arguments for Petrine primacy?
« Reply #37 on: December 04, 2017, 04:24:06 PM »
Quote
  • the continuity of the OT High Priests as vicars of God to his flock
Doesn't Orthodoxy also have a form of this belief?
How so?

Isn't that the basis for the Orthodox priesthood? I could've sworn I saw Mor say as much.

Where?

Quote
John the Baptist may have taken a Nazerene vow, and was probably a priest.

What basis is there for saying this? Nothing of the sort is said in scriptures. Josephus lumped him in with the Essenes.

Why would the Scriptures need to specify that John the Baptist was a priest?  His father was the high priest.  As for the Nazirite hypothesis, it's not explicit, but there are similarities between the requirements for living according to this vow and the words of the archangel Gabriel to John's father.   

I can see the latter, at least to the extent the commands of the angel evoke the ancient purity of the Nazarites. I can also grant the former on a technicality, that John would without doubt have been eligible for priesthood. Thanks to you and William for following up on this.

"Eligible for priesthood"?  It was hereditary.  He was the only son of his high priest father. 

Our friend Vanhyo's zeal to prove Jesus was a priest in order to erect a protective hedge around his long hair to keep the heretics away was a bit misguided, but in the liturgical traditions there are allusions to the passing on of the priesthood to Christ from John when the latter placed his hands on the Lord's head at his baptism in the Jordan.  That allusion may be more poetic or allegorical than anything else, but the implication is that the priesthood is one, stretches back from Moses until today, and the Christian (i.e., Orthodox) priesthood is the only legitimate heir of the Aaronic/Levitical priesthood.  But you couldn't make such an allusion at all if John wasn't a priest in the first place.

Emphasis mine.
Christ my God, set my heart on fire with love in You, that in its flame I may love You with all my heart, with all my mind, and with all my soul and with all my strength, and my neighbor as myself, so that by keeping Your commandments I may glorify You the Giver of every good and perfect gift. Amen.

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Ο προκαθήμενος της Ορθοδοξίας - The President of Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Hypatos
  • *****
  • Posts: 34,345
  • Two half-eggs
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: But my heart belongs to FOCOF
Re: Best arguments for Petrine primacy?
« Reply #38 on: December 04, 2017, 06:22:38 PM »
Emphasis mine.

Thanks.  I don't see "vicars of God" in that quote, though.

Online Volnutt

  • Dull Sublunary Lover
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,224
  • too often left in the payment of false ponchos
  • Faith: Evangelical by default
  • Jurisdiction: Spiritually homeless
Re: Best arguments for Petrine primacy?
« Reply #39 on: December 04, 2017, 06:37:16 PM »
Emphasis mine.

Thanks.  I don't see "vicars of God" in that quote, though.

Ok, I was just thinking of the idea of the Orthodox priesthood as a continuation of the Levitical one.

But, doesn't the whole idea that the priest needs to look like Jesus (long hair, beards, no physical blemishes, etc) imply a sort of vicarhood?
Christ my God, set my heart on fire with love in You, that in its flame I may love You with all my heart, with all my mind, and with all my soul and with all my strength, and my neighbor as myself, so that by keeping Your commandments I may glorify You the Giver of every good and perfect gift. Amen.

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Ο προκαθήμενος της Ορθοδοξίας - The President of Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Hypatos
  • *****
  • Posts: 34,345
  • Two half-eggs
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: But my heart belongs to FOCOF
Re: Best arguments for Petrine primacy?
« Reply #40 on: December 04, 2017, 07:05:38 PM »
Emphasis mine.

Thanks.  I don't see "vicars of God" in that quote, though.

Ok, I was just thinking of the idea of the Orthodox priesthood as a continuation of the Levitical one.

But, doesn't the whole idea that the priest needs to look like Jesus (long hair, beards, no physical blemishes, etc) imply a sort of vicarhood?

Priests do not need to have long hair.  It's not even a "good thing to seriously consider adding to your life", let alone a requirement. 

Re: "physical blemishes", I'd have to know what exactly you have in mind.  There are canons that require candidates for ordination to be without certain physical conditions, but that has more to do with ensuring the candidate is able to perform the duties of the ministry than it does with "looking like Jesus". 

Online Volnutt

  • Dull Sublunary Lover
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,224
  • too often left in the payment of false ponchos
  • Faith: Evangelical by default
  • Jurisdiction: Spiritually homeless
Re: Best arguments for Petrine primacy?
« Reply #41 on: December 04, 2017, 08:24:22 PM »
Emphasis mine.

Thanks.  I don't see "vicars of God" in that quote, though.

Ok, I was just thinking of the idea of the Orthodox priesthood as a continuation of the Levitical one.

But, doesn't the whole idea that the priest needs to look like Jesus (long hair, beards, no physical blemishes, etc) imply a sort of vicarhood?

Priests do not need to have long hair.  It's not even a "good thing to seriously consider adding to your life", let alone a requirement.

Alright. My mistake.

Re: "physical blemishes", I'd have to know what exactly you have in mind.  There are canons that require candidates for ordination to be without certain physical conditions, but that has more to do with ensuring the candidate is able to perform the duties of the ministry than it does with "looking like Jesus".

I can see how dwarfism or having only one arm or leg, or being in a wheelchair would interfere. But I've also heard that grievous facial scaring or having only one eye is a disqualification and I don't see how either of those would really interfere with performance of the priestly duties (being blind in both eyes, sure).
Christ my God, set my heart on fire with love in You, that in its flame I may love You with all my heart, with all my mind, and with all my soul and with all my strength, and my neighbor as myself, so that by keeping Your commandments I may glorify You the Giver of every good and perfect gift. Amen.

Offline ZackShenouda439

  • Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 268
    • http://www.saintmarkkc.org
  • Faith: Coptic Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Patriarchate of Alexandria
Re: Best arguments for Petrine primacy?
« Reply #42 on: December 04, 2017, 10:33:04 PM »
I'm not sure how catholics are satisfied with this doctrine of papal primacy(assuming this includes the doctrine of Papal infallibility). What if the pope teaches a error & makes the church adopt it as dogma? Does RCC  theology leave any room to "override" a popes decisions?

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Ο προκαθήμενος της Ορθοδοξίας - The President of Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Hypatos
  • *****
  • Posts: 34,345
  • Two half-eggs
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: But my heart belongs to FOCOF
Re: Best arguments for Petrine primacy?
« Reply #43 on: December 04, 2017, 10:53:37 PM »
I'm not sure how catholics are satisfied with this doctrine of papal primacy(assuming this includes the doctrine of Papal infallibility). What if the pope teaches a error & makes the church adopt it as dogma? Does RCC  theology leave any room to "override" a popes decisions?

An assassination followed by a conclave in which a successor is elected who will reverse the predecessor's decisions without reversing them so that they're reversed without having been reversed, but it's the Orthodox who are confused. 

Offline Xavier

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 621
  • Immaculate Heart of Mary, Pray for US!
  • Faith: Catholic Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Apostolic Throne of St. Peter's
Re: Best arguments for Petrine primacy?
« Reply #44 on: December 05, 2017, 02:23:31 AM »
Not sure what review was "patronizing", Volnutt, and why it was deemed offensive. Soloviev was a tireless advocate of Holy Unia with Rome and, as a a Russian theologian and Orthodox by birth, urged his fellow theologians to seriously consider the historical and dogmatic evidence showing the primacy of the Roman Church. I only cited the reviews to show Soloviev's work is one of first-rank scholarship, to answer the OP question. At any rate, Fr. Adrian Fortescue's works, some of which can be read in the Catholic Encyclopedia, are also excellent. Then there is Dom John Chapman et al, "Studies on the Early Papacy". Luke Rivington's "The Primitive Church and the See of Peter" is also an outstanding read. Ebook here for those interested. http://www.biblicalcatholic.com/apologetics/LukeRivingtonPrimitiveChurchSeePeter.pdf

The fact of Petrine primacy is writ large on the page of history, from the very beginning of Christian ages, where Pope St. Clement of Rome plainly exercises supreme jurisdiction over the Church of Corinth. Speaking in tones of supreme authority, the Sovereign Pontiff, while St. John the Apostle was still alive, reverses their decision and commands all in Corinth to receive Rome's decision as the voice of the Holy Spirit. This is a true and proper primacy of jurisdiction, such as the Church of Rome has always exercised in the Church Catholic, which the canons of the Council of Sardica presided over by St. Athanasius would later make formal, and which must needs be pacifically received by all prelates who wish to remain in full Catholic communion. Fr. Rivington writes, "such was the first recorded act of the Church of Rome ... it is spoken of in terms of enthusiasm by St. Irenaeus ... it is also alluded to by St. Ignatius on his way to martyrdom." One by one, Father demolishes the Protestant(in particular, Anglican)/Orthodox objections to the plain texts of the Fathers of later ages.
« Last Edit: December 05, 2017, 02:25:24 AM by Xavier »
"My daughter, look at My Heart surrounded with thorns with which ungrateful men pierce it at every moment by their blasphemies and ingratitude. You, at least, try to console Me, and say that I promise to assist at the hour of death, with all the graces necessary for salvation, all those who, on the first Saturday of five consecutive months go to confession and receive Holy Communion, recite five decades of the Rosary and keep Me company for a quarter of an hour" - The Theotokos to Sr. Lucia.