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.
ā€œFor to this church [ROME] on account of her more powerful principality it is necessary that every church should agree (or come together), that is the faithful from everywhere, in which, always, that which is the tradition from the Apostles has been preserved by those who are from everywhere.ā€ Irenaeus

Communion with the See of Peter was considered necessary for inclusion in the Most Holy Catholic Church.

ā€œWhy! a ^^^^^ that is cut off from the vine retains its shape. But what use is that shape, if it is not living from the root? come, brothers, if you wish to be engrafted in the vine. It is grievous when we see you thus lying cut off. Number the priests (i.e., bishops) even from the see of Peter itself. And in that order of fathers see who to whom succeeded: that is the rock which the proud gates of hades do not conquer.ā€ Augustine

Augustine states that the papacy was one of the things which kept him in the bosom of the Catholic Church.

ā€œThere are many things which rightly keep me in the bosom of the Catholic Church. The consent of peoples and nations keeps me, her authority keeps me, inaugurated by miracles, nourished in hope, enlarged by love, and established by age. The succession of priests keeps me, from the very see of the Apostle Peter (to whom the Lord after His resurrection gave charge to feed his sheep) down to the present episcopate.ā€

Leos Tomb is but another point.

Church militant is still militant is all I see and its noticed.

ā€œCOMMUNIONā€ of the Church tis required. Unless we would like to also call this ā€œancientā€ thinking?
 
GaryTaylor said:
ā€œFor to this church [ROME] on account of her more powerful principality it is necessary that every church should agree (or come together), that is the faithful from everywhere, in which, always, that which is the tradition from the Apostles has been preserved by those who are from everywhere.ā€ Irenaeus

Communion with the See of Peter was considered necessary for inclusion in the Most Holy Catholic Church.

ā€œWhy! a ^^^^^ that is cut off from the vine retains its shape. But what use is that shape, if it is not living from the root? come, brothers, if you wish to be engrafted in the vine. It is grievous when we see you thus lying cut off. Number the priests (i.e., bishops) even from the see of Peter itself. And in that order of fathers see who to whom succeeded: that is the rock which the proud gates of hades do not conquer.ā€ Augustine

Augustine states that the papacy was one of the things which kept him in the bosom of the Catholic Church.

ā€œThere are many things which rightly keep me in the bosom of the Catholic Church. The consent of peoples and nations keeps me, her authority keeps me, inaugurated by miracles, nourished in hope, enlarged by love, and established by age. The succession of priests keeps me, from the very see of the Apostle Peter (to whom the Lord after His resurrection gave charge to feed his sheep) down to the present episcopate.ā€

Leos Tomb is but another point.

Church militant is still militant is all I see and its noticed.

ā€œCOMMUNIONā€ of the Church tis required. Unless we would like to also call this ā€œancientā€ thinking?
Click to expand...
Augustine saw it as well ā€¦ the AUTHORITY of Catholicism resided in Rome & with Peter !

Does this convince ya great Constantineā€¦ the WiseMan of the East ?
Come West to Rome, and bring Mickey the whole brotherhood @ Constantinople with you. Lets very soon break bread & share the cup together again ā€¦as we did in ancient times of our Early Fathers & Apostles !
 
Have we ever began a thread with the premise that "In the Holy Spirit it is IMPOSSIBLE that we are separate? btw James is absolutely the Bishop of Jerusalem even when Peter is present! I am Roman rite Catholic.

ĪšĻĻĪ¹Īµ į¼øĪ·ĻƒĪæįæ¦ Ī§ĻĪ¹ĻƒĻ„Ī­, Ī„į¼±į½² Ļ„Īæįæ¦ Ī˜ĪµĪæįæ¦, į¼Ī»Ī­Ī·ĻƒĻŒĪ½ Ī¼Īµ Ļ„į½øĪ½ į¼Ī¼Ī±ĻĻ„Ļ‰Ī»ĻŒĪ½

Peace
 
hazcompat said:
btw James is absolutely the Bishop of Jerusalem even when Peter is present! I am Roman rite Catholic.

ĪšĻĻĪ¹Īµ į¼øĪ·ĻƒĪæįæ¦ Ī§ĻĪ¹ĻƒĻ„Ī­, Ī„į¼±į½² Ļ„Īæįæ¦ Ī˜ĪµĪæįæ¦, į¼Ī»Ī­Ī·ĻƒĻŒĪ½ Ī¼Īµ Ļ„į½øĪ½ į¼Ī¼Ī±ĻĻ„Ļ‰Ī»ĻŒĪ½

Peace
Click to expand...
No one doubts that James was the Bishop in Jerusalem. nor does anyone doubt when Peter spoke all fell ā€œsilentā€.

The bishops met to examine the matter and debatedā€¦

After listening to the debate, Peter gave his teaching.

The Council fell ā€œsilentā€.

Then, Paul and Barnabas tell about their missionary journey to confirm Peterā€™s teaching.

And, thereafter, James gives a ruling. And this has nothing to do with the previous points.
 
GaryTaylor said:
No one doubts that James was the Bishop in Jerusalem. nor does anyone doubt when Peter spoke all fell ā€œsilentā€.

The bishops met to examine the matter and debatedā€¦

After listening to the debate, Peter gave his teaching.

The Council fell ā€œsilentā€.

Then, Paul and Barnabas tell about their missionary journey to confirm Peterā€™s teaching.

And, thereafter, James gives a ruling. And this has nothing to do with the previous points.
Click to expand...
Exactlyā€¦

Does a Prime Minister (Papa with Primacy) function alone ?
And, is he not elected for a term ā€¦and holds court with other ministers ?
And, do they not have a King & Queen ?

Iā€™m not saying Englandā€™s got it all right. But, at least they are attempting to imitate what they read in scripture, and whatā€™s ingrained in their earliest roots.

Let East & West reunify at lastā€¦and prepare the way for our KINGā€™s return.
 
GaryTaylor said:
Augustine states that the papacy was one of the things which kept him in the bosom of the Catholic Church.
Click to expand...
St Augustine saw St Peterā€™s succession in every bishop. Iā€™m thinking if he were alive today, he would be in the Holy Orthodox Church. šŸ™‚
 
brb3 said:
Does this convince ya great Constantineā€¦ the WiseMan of the East ?
Click to expand...
Your snarky sarcasm does not help your credibility. šŸ¤·
brb3 said:
Lets very soon break bread & share the cup together again ā€¦as we did in ancient times of our Early Fathers & Apostles !
Click to expand...
The door is always open for Rome to return to the fold and take Her place in the same capacity that She held for most of the first millennium. šŸ‘
 
Mickey said:
St Augustine saw St Peterā€™s succession in every bishop. Iā€™m thinking if he were alive today, he would be in the Holy Orthodox Church. šŸ™‚
Click to expand...
He saw the unity of the Church and how divinity established itself, Spoke well in the Lords KIngdom, the Lord captivated his mind, after conversion through intercession, and then he defended the Kingdom, pretty impressive imho.

Retraction brings much clarity to how his works have been misused. Which is why quotes from Saints etc is a futile path. St. John Chrysostom is another who gets raked through the coals here. Many of them. And they all give way to the Church teaching as they grew and insist on unity of agreement thus communion.

We could rest assured though. If Augustine were here today he would still be speaking out.
 
Mickey said:
St Augustine saw St Peterā€™s succession in every bishop. Iā€™m thinking if he were alive today, he would be in the Holy Orthodox Church. šŸ™‚
Click to expand...
Of course he would. He would explain the infallibilty of the Holy Spirit as it is manifest through the Divine institution of the papacy in the person of Benedict XVI.

Peace
 
Mickey said:
That has nothing to do with the institution of a sureme infallible bishop of Rome which one must be in submission to.
Click to expand...
ā€œWhat do you mean by it? What is the substance of this infallibility you accuse our popes of having?ā€

I posted that in response to your statement the first time I read it. Whatā€™s the answer, Mickey? What do you mean by ā€˜submission.ā€™ What does ā€˜infallibleā€™ mean to you? These are important questions and Iā€™d like to know how you answer them. After all, if youā€™re going to hold these opinions, isnā€™t it fair to make sure you know why you hold them?
 
Mickey said:
Thatā€™s what I figured. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Thatā€™s in response to my admission I didnā€™t know the author of something I posted. I also said the post speaks for itself, which it does. Why didnā€™t you acknowledge that instead of truncating my remarks and posting a useless wise crack?
 
Mickey said:
I was not making reference to the protestant assemblies.
Click to expand...
You were suggesting that, because you recite the Creed, it automatically means you are the true Church. The point was made, so do Protestants and we know they are heretics.

If you respond to what was actually said to you, the conversation will have some validity. If all youā€™re going to do is declare your primacy over and over again, the conversation will stagnate.
 
Mickey said:
Your snarky sarcasm does not help your credibility. šŸ¤·
The door is always open for Rome to return to the fold and take Her place in the same capacity that She held for most of the first millennium. šŸ‘
Click to expand...
Oh brother ā€¦:ballspin::ballspin:
 
Mickey said:
Your snarky sarcasm does not help your credibility. šŸ¤·
The door is always open for Rome to return to the fold and take Her place in the same capacity that She held for most of the first millennium. šŸ‘
Click to expand...
No sarcasm intended when I ask: which church? the EO Church or the OO church? Which autocephalous church?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top