Canon of the apostles 34. no pope then?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Miguel25
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

Miguel25

Guest
  1. Do not ye receive any stranger, whether bishop, or presbyter, or deacon, without commendatory letters; and when such are offered, let them be examined. And if they be preachers of piety, let them be received; but if not, supply their wants, but do not receive them to communion: for many things are done by surprise.
  2. *The bishops of every country ought to know who is the chief among them, and to esteem him as their head, and not to do any great thing without his consent; but every one to manage only the affairs that belong to his own parish, and the places subject to it. But let him not do anything without the consent of all; for it is by this means there will be unanimity, and God will be glorified by Christ, in the Holy Spirit. *
  3. A bishop must not venture to ordain out of his own bounds for cities or countries that are not subject to him. But if he be convicted of having done so without the consent of such as governed those cities or countries, let him be deprived, both the bishop himself and those whom he has ordained.
 
whispers

The Pope is the Bishop of Rome…

@rcwitness— it’s from the Ante-Nicene Fathers, from a bit called “The Ecclesiastical Canons of the Same Holy Apostles” which is a subsection of the “Constitutions of the Holy Apostles.”
 
adf417 said:
There seems to be a pope in 35.
Click to expand...
Yes.
Also, 34 and 36 seems to imply either a pope or at least a very high ranking patriarch. Who else could write “commendatory letters” in 34? It shows even a bishop is under a human authority higher than himself. Even a validly ordained bishop needs continued authorization for his public ministry.

In 36, I can’t help thinking of an example from the last few decades - but if I mention it, that would send this thread in another direction (!). But clearly, even validly ordained bishops and archbishops are under a human authority higher than themselves, no bishop has the “right” to ordain on his own only because he is a bishop. He ordains within relationship to proper authority.
 
commenter said:
Also, 34 and 36 seems to imply either a pope or at least a very high ranking patriarch. Who else could write “commendatory letters” in 34? It shows even a bishop is under a human authority higher than himself. Even a validly ordained bishop needs continued authorization for his public ministry.
Click to expand...
I don’t think that’s what’s being asserted here. Look at some of the earlier canons in the document. They’re really concerned about clerics being suspended in one diocese and then going somewhere else (where their suspension is unknown).

All this canon is saying, I think, is that a bishop who is “received” in a diocese needs to have his canonical status as a cleric well-known in that diocese, in order to prevent any irregularity from occurring.

So, it seems that @Miguel25 is just trying to set up a straw man in order to further the cause for his rejection of the papacy… 🤷‍♂️
 
im catholic brother. Just asking cause an orthodox priest told me that.

God bless u
 
to be honest i see the model of eclesiology of the eastern orthodox i dont see anything about rome supremacy over all
 
Miguel25 said:
to be honest i see the model of eclesiology of the eastern orthodox i dont see anything about rome supremacy over all
Click to expand...
You posted as item #35.
The bishops of every country ought to know who is the chief among them, and to esteem him as their head, and not to do any great thing without his consent;
Click to expand...
Granted, i am not familiar with document but if you dont see what Catholic Church considers the office of the pope in this statment then i suggest you are not understanding what the church teaches about this office. This “chief among them” is the pope.

If this is supposed to be a view of the eclesiology of the EO then one must ask who is this “chief” in the EO and what is his purpose?

Peace!!!
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top