It seems to me that others here are building the pope up; leaving many of us with little to do. Where did I say that my opinions were more important than the pope’s? Please read. I said I don’t have to agree with anything the pope says unless he speaks “ex cathedra”. I would assume, as a Catholic yourself, you would know that. And what I think of our Patriarch has nothing to do with the pope. The pope is not my patriarch; he’s the patriarch of the West.
But he is the divinely appointed visible head of the Universal Church. That’s more than what your patriarch is to you. No offense. Just honest truth.
I did read, your post is right below. The Pope speaks for the Universal Church? Or what does the non existing in history, “First among equals” mean to you? What about the constitution of the Church, Faith and Morals, Dogma. Bonds which bind us to the Church are the profession of faith, the sacraments, and ecclesiastical government and communion
How does this relate to what I stated above.
Because that’s the trend modern Orthodoxy carries in its polemics. To reinvent history. So much so that they even deny the evident facts that the Popes primacy in the first millenium entailed jurisdiction and not merely honor alone
That’s right and there’s no reason to believe otherwise. Especially not by some created doctrine called “First among Equals”. Its a double standard, why exactly should I believe this unhistoric fiction and not the very real fact of the Primacy.Because that’s the trend modern Orthodoxy carries in its polemics. To reinvent history. So much so that they even deny the evident facts that the Popes primacy in the first millenium entailed jurisdiction and not merely honor alone
We see it being claimed from early times that no council can judge the popes and that they rule over the entire church as in the faculty of Peter. Yet not as a dictator but as a head of family.
The popes have made swooping claims before in the first millenium. Did they just make them up against the tradition they knew? Come on now
There is “no” reason to believe the Primacy didn’t “always” exist. Disobedience doesn’t constitute a fact which disregards this reality.I honestly don’t know what you expect to accomplish by posting this kind of garbage. Are you trying to give a black eye to us Christians?
No Council can Judge the Popes? Than how do you explain Pope Honorius and the Council of Constance? How could an “Ecumenical Council” depose a Pope? How could a Pope be condemned for heresy?Because that’s the trend modern Orthodoxy carries in its polemics. To reinvent history. So much so that they even deny the evident facts that the Popes primacy in the first millenium entailed jurisdiction and not merely honor alone
We see it being claimed from early times that no council can judge the popes and that they rule over the entire church as in the faculty of Peter. Yet not as a dictator but as a head of family.
The popes have made swooping claims before in the first millenium. Did they just make them up against the tradition they knew? Come on now
The First Among Equals is a phrase that describes the general relationship that the Roman Patriarch had (in good times) with his brother bishops. It isn’t a “doctrine”…I have no idea where that comes from. Unhistoric Fiction? The only fiction here is the idea of Papal Supremacy.That’s right and there’s no reason to believe otherwise. Especially not by some created doctrine called “First among Equals”. Its a double standard, why exactly should I believe this unhistoric fiction and not the very real fact of the Primacy.
Yeah like Pope Leo and Gregory who both taught supremacy … Oh ant they taught flioque too
Pope Martin V already dealt with Constance by pronouncing that no council may judge a pope. This was later restated at Vatican 1
I thought that the Council at Constance did judge the three popes at the time and elected Martin V as the pope.
That does not exist in history! Where is it historically? You failed to provide this,.no such thing!
The Joint International Commission for the Theological Dialogue between the Roman Catholic and the Orthodox Church, 13 October 2007, says that the bishop of Rome is protos (Πρῶτος) among the patriarchs.
It’s not garbage, it’s a fact. Black eye…I think enough of us have been slaughtered. Am I to perceive that you don’t read the news???
Glad you agree, no such thing as “First among equals” It doesn’t exist , no reason to believe it, its a fairy tale.
What council was this term quoted and defined? It never existed in the Church.What you said was such ridiculous hyperbole that it’s worthless. So, yes, garbage is a pretty good assessment.
Yup The Ecumenical Council of Constance (1415), taught the heresy of Conciliarism along with many things that were very good. Such errors of the Council of Constance were disavowed by Pope Martin V and annulled by Pope Sixtus IV.
Obviously you don’t read the news either. Just ask yourself; what would happen to me, in an Islamic country, if I were to proclaim that I’m a Christian. Egypt, Syria, Lybia, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Kenya, etc…
Christians were doing just fine in Syria, Egypt, Lybia and Iraq until the USA started to mess around in the politics of those countries. What business does the USA have in that area except to support Israel and insure that Americans have enough oil to drive their SUV’s and pollute the global atmosphere.