Did the Orthodox Churches ever submit to the Pope's Authority?

  • Thread starter Thread starter GodHeals
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Did Peter have that faith on his own, or did Christ have to train him for the Primacy Role ?
People can never become something they are not. Unless you are suggesting that Peter has been predetermined for a role and did not have his own free will on the matter. Are you?
Over and over, scripture recounts those training events Peter needed to grow into the job.
Thus, Christ is giving us more evidence than we SHOULD ever need to see the PREPPING of PAPA Pope.
This is a case of you reading too much into the Gospel accounts. Yes, Peter does pray a prominent role, no doubt about it. But is it really the role that Catholics claim it to be? It is not apparent to a mind that is not clouded with that idea.
 
That is why I am saying “perceived”. If the Ecumenical Patriarch is heretic, so what? If the Patriarch of Moscow is heretic, so what? Try opening a thread here on CAF asking about certain questionable acts of any Pope in history and people will rush in with buttered up versions of what happened, it is as if the Pope can do no wrong and if he did, its over for the Church. And precisely why it is not a big deal in Orthodoxy, though certain bishops play certain roles, they are all equal. There is no one episcopal office that defines Orthodoxy, unlike the Papacy.
I agree; so what. I also agree, obviously, that there is no one episcopal office that defines Orthodoxy, unlike the Papacy. I was simply talking about the discernment of truth via an Ecumenical Council within Eastern Orthodoxy. This is what Constantinos (he is an Eastern Orthodox Christian) had to say on an Eastern Orthodox forum; his original post can be found here:

monachos.net/forum/showthread.php?4945-Criteria-for-an-ecumenical-council&
What I’m asking is: what is the externally measurable internal criterion by which we judge ecumenicity? And if we don’t have one, how are we not simply taking our doctrine and acceptance of councils on blind faith?
For example, Rome posits all of the above–to be ecumenical, a council has to be in harmony with the unbroken teaching of the Church, etc. etc.–but as its externally visible internal principle of authority, it says “to be ecumenical, a council needs papal ratification.” Thus, any council purporting to be ecumenical, accepted by the Pope, is an ecumenical council. Thus the Roman Catholic gains internal consistency, and a standard by which to measure the history of his church.
Problem is, the Orthodox don’t seem to have such a principle, and their attempts at establishing one, leads to logical dead ends. By all the proposed standards, the Orthodox should logically reject some councils as ecumenical, and/or accept some that are presently rejected.
Participation by the Pentarchy means Constantinople I should be out, and Florence should be in. Ratification by the Pentarchy means that at least Chalcedon should be out. Ratification by the laity means that Chalcedon, Ephesus I, and possibly Nicea I should be out. So are we Orthodox just schizophrenic–thus making, say, Catholicism look a lot more consistent and appealing–or is there an historically consistent internal principle at work that I’m missing?
 
You’re confusing leadership with authority. If you and a bunch of friends went out and you let one person decide where to eat, does that mean that person has authority over the whole group? I think its sad that Catholics have a view of St. Peter’s role as nothing but a position of authority. It is not. God is the only authority. St. Peter is the leader, no question about that. Any Orthodox who denies it is overly polemic. But leadership doesn’t mean subjugation of the other Apostles, it does not mean he is above everyone else.
In John 21:15-17 Jesus said to Peter “feed my lambs,” “tend my sheep,” “feed my sheep”. Sheep means all people, even the apostles.

And in Luke 22:31-32 Jesus prays for Peter alone, that his faith may not fail, and charges him to strengthen the rest of the apostles.

For Holy Scripture and Early Church Fathers on the Primacy of Peter see the following website: ScriptureCatholic.
 
Peter raised the dead AND walked on water. So, lets give him the greater gifts !
Also, scripture teaches Paul showed due deference ALWAYS to Peter!
St. John saw in a vision the end of the world. What is your point then? It is not a contest on who gets the most miracles. Did people place cloths on St. Peter and took it to other people and healed those other people? Did Jesus appear to St. Peter after the Ascension? He appeared to St. Paul twice (on his conversion and once again in prison). C’mon now, your reasoning is flawed.
 
Matt. 17:26-27 - Jesus pays the half-shekel tax with one shekel, for both Jesus and Peter. Peter is Christ’s representative on earth.

Mark 11:21 - Peter speaks on behalf of the disciples in remembering Jesus’ curse on the fig tree.

Luke 5:3 – Jesus teaches from Peter’s boat which is metaphor for the Church. Jesus guides Peter and the Church into all truth.

For Holy Scripture and Early Church Fathers on the Primacy of Peter see the following website: ScriptureCatholic.
 
ConstantineTG;10211451]You’re confusing leadership with authority. If you and a bunch of friends went out and you let one person decide where to eat, does that mean that person has authority over the whole group?
I think its sad that Catholics have a view of St. Peter’s role as nothing but a position of authority.
Not me. Moreover, that is not the teaching of the CC. Leaders, when attempting to resolve doctrinal difference (in the future if they should occur, just as they did during the first 7 councils) must also lead authoritatively when faced with resistance e.g. heresy of Nestorius or Arius. Right?
It is not. God is the only authority.
The CC agrees with you.
St. Peter is the leader, no question about that. Any Orthodox who denies it is overly polemic. But leadership doesn’t mean subjugation of the other Apostles, it does not mean he is above everyone else.
The CC agrees with you. 👍
 
In John 21:15-17 Jesus said to Peter “feed my lambs,” “tend my sheep,” “feed my sheep”. Sheep means all people, even the apostles.
And how does this translate into authority? Again, you are confusing the passage to mean authoritative rule. To feed the flock of the Lord is to be a servant of the Lord, just as the servants who were sent to the vineyard of the Master. It holds no meaning about authoritative rule, but rather a ministry.
And in Luke 22:31-32 Jesus prays for Peter alone, that his faith may not fail, and charges him to strengthen the rest of the apostles.
So again how does this translate to authority over the Apostles?

You know what is funny here? If it were a Protestant saying this, Catholics would counter, “not everything in the Bible.” Yet if it is about a Catholic belief, suddenly the argument is, “it is not mentioned in the Bible,” or “only Peter is mentioned in the Bible.”
 
Matt. to Rev. - Peter is mentioned 155 times and the rest of apostles combined are only mentioned 130 times. Peter is also always listed first except in 1 Cor. 3:22 and Gal. 2:9 (which are obvious exceptions to the rule).

Gal.1:18 - Paul spends fifteen days with Peter privately before beginning his ministry, even after Christ’s Revelation to Paul.

For Holy Scripture and Early Church Fathers on the Primacy of Peter see the following website: ScriptureCatholic.
 
Not at all.
If you and I confess this confession of faith…we are also unshakable rock.
St. John Chrysostom, like Jesus, called him the unshakable Rock, just as so many other Fathers did. Yes or no friend? 🙂
 
You know what is funny here? If it were a Protestant saying this, Catholics would counter, “not everything in the Bible.” Yet if it is about a Catholic belief, suddenly the argument is, “it is not mentioned in the Bible,” or “only Peter is mentioned in the Bible.”
“The church of God which sojourns at Rome to the church of God which sojourns at Corinth … But if any disobey the words spoken by him through us, let them know that they will involve themselves in transgression and in no small danger.” Clement of Rome, Pope, 1st Epistle to the Corinthians, 1,59:1 (c. A.D. 96).

“Ignatius, who is also called Theophorus, to the Church which has obtained mercy, through the majesty of the Mast High God the Father, and of Jesus Christ, His only-begotten Son; the Church which is sanctified and enlightened by the will of God, who farmed all things that are according to the faith and love of Jesus Christ, our God and Saviour; the Church which presides in the place of the region of the Romans, and which is worthy of God, worthy of honour, worthy of the highest happiness, worthy of praise, worthy of credit, worthy of being deemed holy, and which presides over love…” Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to the Romans, Prologue (A.D. 110).

"There is extant also another epistle written by Dionysius to the Romans, and addressed to Soter, who was bishop at that time. We cannot do better than to subjoin some passages from this epistle…In this same epistle he makes mention also of Clement’s epistle to the Corinthians, showing that it had been the custom from the beginning to read it in the church. His words are as follows: To-day we have passed the Lord’s holy day, in which we have read your epistle. From it, whenever we read it, we shall always be able to draw advice, as also from the former epistle, which was written to us through Clement.’ Dionysius of Corinth, To Pope Soter (A.D. 171).

“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 pre- eminent authority, that is, the faithful everywhere, inasmuch as the apostolical tradition has been preserved continuously by those [faithful men] who exist everywhere.” Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 3:3:2 (A.D. 180).

"A question of no small importance arose at that time. For the parishes of all Asia, as from an older tradition, held that the fourteenth day of the moon, on which day the Jews were commanded to sacrifice the lamb, should be observed as the feast of the Saviour’s Passover. It was therefore necessary to end their fast on that day, whatever day of the week it should happen to be. But it was not the custom of the churches in the rest of the world to end it at this time, as they observed the practice which, from apostolic tradition, has prevailed to the present time, of terminating the fast on no other day than on that of the resurrection of our Saviour…Thereupon Victor, who presided over the church at Rome, immediately attempted to cut off from the common unity the parishes of all Asia, with the churches that agreed with them, as heterodox; and he wrote letters and declared all the brethren there wholly excommunicated.” Pope Victor & Easter (c. A.D. 195).

“And he says to him again after the resurrection, ‘Feed my sheep.’ It is on him that he builds the Church, and to him that he entrusts the sheep to feed. And although he assigns a like power to all the apostles, yet he founded a single Chair, thus establishing by his own authority the source and hallmark of the (Church’s) oneness. No doubt the others were all that Peter was, but a primacy is given to Peter, and it is (thus) made clear that there is but one flock which is to be fed by all the apostles in common accord. If a man does not hold fast to this oneness of Peter, does he imagine that he still holds the faith? If he deserts the Chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built, has he still confidence that he is in the Church? This unity firmly should we hold and maintain, especially we bishops, presiding in the Church, in order that we may approve the episcopate itself to be the one and undivided.” Cyprian, The Unity of the Church, 4-5 (A.D. 251-256).

For Holy Scripture and Early Church Fathers on the Primacy of Peter see the following website: ScriptureCatholic.
 
Matt. to Rev. - Peter is mentioned 155 times and the rest of apostles combined are only mentioned 130 times.
So what? St John is the only apostle referred to as: the one whom Jesus loved. Does that mean that he does not love the others? No.
 
Matt. 16:19 - only Peter receives the keys, which represent authority over the Church and facilitate dynastic succession to his authority.

Matt. 17:24-25 - the tax collector approaches Peter for Jesus’ tax. Peter is the spokesman for Jesus. He is the Vicar of Christ.

“The chair of the Roman Church, in which Peter sat, and in which Anastasius sits today.” Augustine, Against the Letters of Petillian, 2:51 (A.D. 402).

For Holy Scripture and Early Church Fathers on the Primacy of Peter see the following website: ScriptureCatholic.
 
St. John Chrysostom, like Jesus, called him the unshakable Rock, just as so many other Fathers did.
None of the fathers would claim that the Church is founded on only one apostle. Many had great things to say about the great apostle St Peter. But the rock is the confession of faith.

A friend of mine (a priestmonk) once had this to say:

Let us look at a quick summary of the way that the Church Fathers interpreted that verse -
**“Thou are Peter and upon this rock…” **

Archbishop Kenrick of Saint Louis, who was one of America’s
extraordinary bishops, was opposed to the doctrine of
papal infallibilty and at the First Vatican Council
in 1869 he voted against it. He wanted to deliver
a speech against the proposed doctrine at the Council
but instead he ceased to attend the Council meetings.

In his speech prepared for, but not delivered in, the
Vatican Council, and published at Naples in 1870,
he declares that Roman Catholics cannot establish
the Petrine privilege from Scripture, because of the
clause in the Creed of Pius IV, binding them to
interpret Scripture only according to the unanimous
consent of the Fathers.

And he adds that there are five different patristic
interpretations of St. Matt. 16:18

Let’s look at how the Church Fathers line up over this verse:

1…“That St. Peter is the Rock” is taught
by seventeen (17) Fathers

2…That the whole Apostolic College is the Rock,
represented by Peter as its chief,
is taught by eight (8) Church Fathers

3…That St. Peter’s faith is the Rock,
is taught by forty-four (44) Church Fathers

4…That Christ is the Rock,
is taught by sixteen Fathers (16)

5…That the rock is the whole body of the faithful.
Archbp. Kendrick gives no figure.

Archbishop Kendrick summarises

“If we are bound to follow the greater number
of Fathers in this matter, then we must hold
for certain that the word “Petra” means not Peter
professing the Faith, but the faith professed by Peter.”
 
1 Peter 5:1 - Peter acts as the chief bishop by “exhorting” all the other bishops and elders of the Church.

1 Peter 5:13 - Some Protestants argue against the Papacy by trying to prove Peter was never in Rome. First, this argument is irrelevant to whether Jesus instituted the Papacy. Secondly, this verse demonstrates that Peter was in fact in Rome. Peter writes from “Babylon” which was a code name for Rome during these days of persecution. See, for example, Rev. 14:8, 16:19, 17:5, 18:2,10,21, which show that “Babylon” meant Rome. Rome was the “great city” of the New Testament period. Because Rome during this age was considered the center of the world, the Lord wanted His Church to be established in Rome.

“The church of God which sojourns at Rome to the church of God which sojourns at Corinth … But if any disobey the words spoken by him through us, let them know that they will involve themselves in transgression and in no small danger.” Clement of Rome, Pope, 1st Epistle to the Corinthians, 1,59:1 (c. A.D. 96).

For Holy Scripture and Early Church Fathers on the Primacy of Peter see the following website: ScriptureCatholic.
 
Mickey;10211517]None of the fathers would claim that the Church is founded on only one apostle. Many had great things to say about the great apostle St Peter. But the rock is the confession of faith.
If you want to ignore a very simple question, that’s cool. No biggie brother. 🙂
A friend of mine (a priestmonk) once had this to say:

Let us look at a quick summary of the way that the Church Fathers interpreted that verse -
**“Thou are Peter and upon this rock…” **
Archbishop Kenrick of Saint Louis, who was one of America’s
extraordinary bishops, was opposed to the doctrine of
papal infallibilty and at the First Vatican Council
in 1869 he voted against it. He wanted to deliver
a speech against the proposed doctrine at the Council
but instead he ceased to attend the Council meetings.
In his speech prepared for, but not delivered in, the
Vatican Council, and published at Naples in 1870,
he declares that Roman Catholics cannot establish
the Petrine privilege from Scripture, because of the
clause in the Creed of Pius IV, binding them to
interpret Scripture only according to the unanimous
consent of the Fathers. Ok…🤷
And he adds that there are five different patristic
interpretations of St. Matt. 16:18
Let’s look at how the Church Fathers line up over this verse:
1…“That St. Peter is the Rock” is taught
by seventeen (17) Fathers
One more time: Do you agree with those 17 Fathers?
2…That the whole Apostolic College is the Rock,
represented by Peter as its chief,
is taught by eight (8) Church Fathers
👍
3…That St. Peter’s faith is the Rock,
is taught by forty-four (44) Church Fathers
👍
4…That Christ is the Rock,
is taught by sixteen Fathers (16)
👍👍
5…That the rock is the whole body of the faithful.
Archbp. Kendrick gives no figure.
“Living stones…”👍
Archbishop Kendrick summarises
Could you provide an online source brother regarding Archbishop Kendrick statistical claims? 👍
 
Acts 5:3 - Peter declares the first anathema of Ananias and Sapphira which is ratified by God, and brings about their death. Peter exercises his binding authority.

Acts 10:5 - Cornelius is told by an angel to call upon Peter. Angels are messengers of God. Peter was granted this divine vision.

Acts 12:6-11 - Peter is freed from jail by an angel. He is the first object of divine intervention in the early Church.

Matt. 16:17 - Peter alone is told he has received divine knowledge by a special revelation from God the Father.

2 Peter 3:16 - Peter is making a judgment on the proper interpretation of Paul’s letters. Peter is the chief shepherd of the flock.

For Holy Scripture and Early Church Fathers on the Primacy of Peter see the following website: ScriptureCatholic.
 
Mickey 2…That the whole Apostolic College is the Rock,
represented by Peter as its chief,
is taught by eight (8) Church Fathers
Mickey, could you please provide those 8 quotes? Thanks. I would like to add them to my list. 👍
 
“The church of God which sojourns at Rome to the church of God which sojourns at Corinth … But if any disobey the words spoken by him through us, let them know that they will involve themselves in transgression and in no small danger.” Clement of Rome, Pope, 1st Epistle to the Corinthians, 1,59:1 (c. A.D. 96).

“Ignatius, who is also called Theophorus, to the Church which has obtained mercy, through the majesty of the Mast High God the Father, and of Jesus Christ, His only-begotten Son; the Church which is sanctified and enlightened by the will of God, who farmed all things that are according to the faith and love of Jesus Christ, our God and Saviour; the Church which presides in the place of the region of the Romans, and which is worthy of God, worthy of honour, worthy of the highest happiness, worthy of praise, worthy of credit, worthy of being deemed holy, and which presides over love…” Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to the Romans, Prologue (A.D. 110).

"There is extant also another epistle written by Dionysius to the Romans, and addressed to Soter, who was bishop at that time. We cannot do better than to subjoin some passages from this epistle…In this same epistle he makes mention also of Clement’s epistle to the Corinthians, showing that it had been the custom from the beginning to read it in the church. His words are as follows: To-day we have passed the Lord’s holy day, in which we have read your epistle. From it, whenever we read it, we shall always be able to draw advice, as also from the former epistle, which was written to us through Clement.’ Dionysius of Corinth, To Pope Soter (A.D. 171).

“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 pre- eminent authority, that is, the faithful everywhere, inasmuch as the apostolical tradition has been preserved continuously by those [faithful men] who exist everywhere.” Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 3:3:2 (A.D. 180).

"A question of no small importance arose at that time. For the parishes of all Asia, as from an older tradition, held that the fourteenth day of the moon, on which day the Jews were commanded to sacrifice the lamb, should be observed as the feast of the Saviour’s Passover. It was therefore necessary to end their fast on that day, whatever day of the week it should happen to be. But it was not the custom of the churches in the rest of the world to end it at this time, as they observed the practice which, from apostolic tradition, has prevailed to the present time, of terminating the fast on no other day than on that of the resurrection of our Saviour…Thereupon Victor, who presided over the church at Rome, immediately attempted to cut off from the common unity the parishes of all Asia, with the churches that agreed with them, as heterodox; and he wrote letters and declared all the brethren there wholly excommunicated.” Pope Victor & Easter (c. A.D. 195).

“And he says to him again after the resurrection, ‘Feed my sheep.’ It is on him that he builds the Church, and to him that he entrusts the sheep to feed. And although he assigns a like power to all the apostles, yet he founded a single Chair, thus establishing by his own authority the source and hallmark of the (Church’s) oneness. No doubt the others were all that Peter was, but a primacy is given to Peter, and it is (thus) made clear that there is but one flock which is to be fed by all the apostles in common accord. If a man does not hold fast to this oneness of Peter, does he imagine that he still holds the faith? If he deserts the Chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built, has he still confidence that he is in the Church? This unity firmly should we hold and maintain, especially we bishops, presiding in the Church, in order that we may approve the episcopate itself to be the one and undivided.” Cyprian, The Unity of the Church, 4-5 (A.D. 251-256).

For Holy Scripture and Early Church Fathers on the Primacy of Peter see the following website: ScriptureCatholic.
Good find …

CONSTANTINE ---- Did u note the quote above from Irenaeus…he said AUTHORITY …CHECKMATE 😃
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top