Catholicism and Orthodoxy

[Randy_Carson]

Rome has taught heresy and so must be shunned.

Name and prove the heresy.

Thanks.

 

[searn77]

The topic of papal supremacy never gets resolved on any forum by quotes of the early church fathers. I have seen many threads where Orthodox and Catholics both use quotes from the fathers to prove their beliefs about the pope and the issue never gets settled this way. It really depends on how one presents and interprets the early church fathers. If you want quotes from John Chrysostom that would lead to a more Orthodox view of the pope, here are just a couple:

Here’s one about how St. Paul is on an equal footing with Peter:
Where the Cherubim sing the glory, where the Seraphim are flying, there shall we see Paul, with Peter, and as chief and leader of the choir of the saints, and shall enjoy his generous love…I love Rome even for this, although indeed one has other grounds for praising it…Not so bright is the heaven, when the sun sends forth his rays, as is the city of Rome, sending out these two lights into all parts of the world. From thence will Paul be caught up, thence Peter. Just bethink you, and shudder, at the thought of what a sight Rome will see, when Paul ariseth suddenly from that deposit, together with Peter, and is lifted up to meet the Lord. What a rose will Rome send up to Christ!..what two crowns will the city have about it! what golden chains will she be girded with! what fountains possess! Therefore I admire the city, not for the much gold, nor for the columns, not for the other display there, but for these pillars of the Church (1 Cor. 15:38) (Philip Schaff, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1956), Volume XI, Saint Chrysostom, Homilies on the Epistle to the Romans, Homily 32, Ver. 24, pp. 561-562.).

Here’s one that shows how St. James possessed the chief rule and authority in Jerusalem and over the Jerusalem Council:
This (James) was bishop, as they say, and therefore he speaks last…There was no arrogance in the Church. After Peter Paul speaks, and none silences him: James waits patiently; not starts up (for the next word). No word speaks John here, no word the other Apostles, but held their peace, for James was invested with the chief rule, and think it no hardship. So clean was their soul from love of glory. Peter indeed spoke more strongly, but James here more mildly: for thus it behooves one in high authority, to leave what is unpleasant for others to say, while he himself appears in the milder part (Philip Schaff, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1956), Volume XI, Saint Chrysostom, Homilies on the Acts of the Apostles, Homily 33, pp. 205, 207).

And here’s a quote from a website (I’m not sure if I’m allowed to post the web address of the website on the forum or not but you can pm me if you want to take a look at it) about St. Augustine’s view on Matthew 16:18:

At the end of his life, Augustine wrote his Retractations where he corrects statements in his earlier writings which he says were erroneous. One of these had to do with the interpretation of the rock in Matthew 16. At the beginning of his ministry Augustine had written that the rock was Peter. However, very early on he later changed his position and throughout the remainder of his ministry he adopted the view that the rock was not Peter but Christ or Peter’s confession which pointed to the person of Christ. The following are statements from his Retractations which refer to his interpretation of the rock of Matthew 16:

In a passage in this book, I said about the Apostle Peter: ‘On him as on a rock the Church was built’...But I know that very frequently at a later time, I so explained what the Lord said: ‘Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church,’ that it be understood as built upon Him whom Peter confessed saying: ‘Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God,’ and so Peter, called after this rock, represented the person of the Church which is built upon this rock, and has received ‘the keys of the kingdom of heaven.’ For, ‘Thou art Peter’ and not ‘Thou art the rock’ was said to him. But ‘the rock was Christ,’ in confessing whom, as also the whole Church confesses, Simon was called Peter. But let the reader decide which of these two opinions is the more probable (The Fathers of the Church (Washington D.C., Catholic University, 1968), Saint Augustine, The Retractations Chapter 20.1).

So as you can see, I can use quotes from the very same fathers that would lead to a more Orthodox standpoint. If you want to use quotes from the fathers, you really have to view them in their entirety and in their context to get a good understanding of them.

 

[jam070406]

you really have to view them in their entirety and in their context to get a good understanding of them.

Ironic that you would say this, because the Orthodox don’t. They ignore the quotes that refer to Peter as the rock etc. etc. The whole basis of the Papal office as laid out by the Catholic Church.

 

[searn77]

Ironic that you would say this, because the Orthodox don’t. They ignore the quotes that refer to Peter as the rock etc. etc. The whole basis of the Papal office as laid out by the Catholic Church.

I would have to disagree with you on this. Orthodoxy does not ignore any of the quotes about Peter being the rock. It’s just that we have a different understanding of the subject. Peter was a leader and great example of the church and I know for a fact that Orthodox don’t ignore any quotes from the church fathers. If you want to play this little game, I could say that Catholics ignore all of the quotes from the fathers on Mathew 16:18 that denounce their papal views. But I don’t because obviously all Catholics don’t ignore these quotes, they just understand them differently or maybe believe them to be in error.

And also, on my last post, I wasn’t posting those quotes to attack the previous posts and try and say something like “my church is right and your church is wrong”. If any offense was taken from that, I apologize because that was not my intent. I was just posting them to show that quotes from the fathers have to be viewed in their context and in their entirety to be properly understand.

 

[jam070406]

I would have to disagree with you on this. Orthodoxy does not ignore any of the quotes about Peter being the rock. It’s just that we have a different understanding of the subject. Peter was a leader and great example of the church and I know for a fact that Orthodox don’t ignore any quotes from the church fathers. If you want to play this little game, I could say that Catholics ignore all of the quotes from the fathers on Mathew 16:18 that denounce their papal views. But I don’t because obviously all Catholics don’t ignore these quotes, they just understand them differently or maybe believe them to be in error.

And also, on my last post, I wasn’t posting those quotes to attack the previous posts and try and say something like “my church is right and your church is wrong”. If any offense was taken from that, I apologize because that was not my intent. I was just posting them to show that quotes from the fathers have to be viewed in their context and in their entirety to be properly understand.

Most Orthodox posters that have come through these boards have stated that the rock is Peter’s confession alone. Because, if they were to claim Peter himself (and his confession) as the rock then they would be coming dangerously close to giving consent to Rome and Rome’s interpretation, which the Orthodox posters here always seek to distance themselves from.

 

[searn77]

Most Orthodox posters that have come through these boards have stated that the rock is Peter’s confession alone. Because, if they were to claim Peter himself (and his confession) as the rock then they would be coming dangerously close to giving consent to Rome and Rome’s interpretation, which the Orthodox posters here always seek to distance themselves from.

Well if they say that it’s just Peter’s confession alone for the sake of not coming close to the views of Catholicism, they are wrong in what they do. But some Orthodox believe it’s just Peter’s confession, and others believe it was Peter and his confession. But to say which one of these views are most right is, as far as I know of, not an issue within the Orthodox church. But I’m pretty sure no Orthodox believes that this means Peter exclusively.

 

[narrowpath]

The Problem is that, even if it IS established that Peter is the Rock, the Orthodox (as I understand them) consider every Bishop Peter’s successor, not just the Roman Bishop, and the Priests as the other Apostles.

Roman Catholic view:
Peter - Pope
Other Apostles - Other Bishops

Orthodox view:
Peter - Bishops
Other Apostles - Priests

If I’ve mixed up anything here, please correct me. I got this from an article on ecclesiology on Orthodox Answers.

 

[jam070406]

Well if they say that it’s just Peter’s confession alone for the sake of not coming close to the views of Catholicism, they are wrong in what they do. But some Orthodox believe it’s just Peter’s confession, and others believe it was Peter and his confession. But to say which one of these views are most right is, as far as I know of, not an issue within the Orthodox church. But I’m pretty sure no Orthodox believes that this means Peter exclusively.

I appreciate your honesty.
The Catholic Church doesn’t view it as Peter alone either.
I pray the two Churches will resolve this difference, in God’s time.

God bless!

 

[searn77]

The Problem is that, even if it IS established that Peter is the Rock, the Orthodox (as I understand them) consider every Bishop Peter’s successor, not just the Roman Bishop, and the Priests as the other Apostles.

Roman Catholic view:
Peter - Pope
Other Apostles - Other Bishops

Orthodox view:
Peter - Bishops
Other Apostles - Priests

If I’ve mixed up anything here, please correct me. I got this from an article on ecclesiology on Orthodox Answers.

I’m pretty sure I just read the same article as you did on Orthodox Answers. I’m pretty sure it is saying that the Orthodox view is

Apostles - Bishops

And it is saying that Peter was the symbol of the bishop (a team leader/example type). I’ll try to look up about the priests.

 

[searn77]

I appreciate your honesty.
The Catholic Church doesn’t view it as Peter alone either.
I pray the two Churches will resolve this difference, in God’s time.

God bless!

When I said “I’m pretty sure no Orthodox believes that this means Peter exclusively”, I meant that I’m pretty sure no Orthodox believes that Peter was the only rock. As in the apostles were rocks as well. When I reread that post, I had made it sound like Peter without his confession would still be the rock. It was bad wording on my part.

But anyways, I appreciate your appreciation (that sounds weird). I too pray that the churches will resolve their differences.

 

[narrowpath]

orthodoxanswers.org/ecclesiology.pdf

Here’s the article I was reading.

Q:

Who then carries the keys of Peter?

Looking at Isaiah 22:22 we see that the Keys of the Kingdom are clearly references to these keys (or vise-versa), and we know that these Keys were passed on to successors. Who has Peter’s keys? I should probably restate: the article seems to say in parts that each Bishop has these keys. Maybe I’m reading it wrong:shrug: feel free to correct me.

Oh, I found it, its on page 15. "Likewise the Bishop occupies the ‘place of Peter’ in the Church’.