J
jimmy
Guest
St. Maximus the Confessor
- Status
J
jimmy
Guest
St. Maximus the Confessor
J
jimmy
Guest
St. Maximus the Confessor
F
Fr_Ambrose
Guest
What of the millions of Byzantine Catholics who have returned home to Orthodoxy? What did they find wrong with the papacy which caused them to reject it?
Byzantine Catholics number about 12 million. Roughly 5 million of them are Ukrainians.
Let’s look at the movements which brought so many of them home into the bosom of holy Orthodoxy.
If you are in the States the most obvious is the return to Orthodoxy set in motion by Saint Alexis Toth. St Alexis, himself a former Greek Catholic priest, had brought 65 Greek Catholic communities in the US with some 20,000 parishioners out of Catholicism and into Orthodoxy by the time of his death in 1909. The descendents of these former Greek Catholics still figure prominently in the Orthodox Church in America.
Alexis Toth and the Uniate Return to Orthodoxy
oca.org/pages/orth_chri/Orthodox-Church-Introduction/North-America-1794-1994/Immigration-and-Conversion.html#toth
Life of Saint Alexis
oca.org/pages/orth_chri/Feasts-and-Saints/OCA/St-Alexis-Toth/
In the 19th century in the Ukraine, Metropolitan Joseph Siemashko returned to Orthodoxy, with a total of 3 million Ukrainian Greek Catholics. Why did they reject the papacy, abandon Rome and choose to be fully Orthodox again?
http://www.pagesorthodoxes.net/saints-d’amerique/alexistoth-debout.jpg
M
Maccabees
Guest
Fr Ambrose:
Peter De Rosa’s primary sources are known not to check out.
Please use objective sources the next thing you are going to do is use the likes of Malachi Martin, Jack Chick and Dave Hunt.
His well known anti-catholic work is VICARS OF CHRIST THE DARK SIDE OF THE PAPACY.
Now that is an objective title if I ever saw one.
Here is what a book reviewer said of this work of a guy who rejects about every catholic doctrine there is.
From Publishers Weekly
De Rosa ( Prayers for Pagans and Hypocrites ) is an angry Catholic. In the worst proselytizing tradition, this devil’s advocate overstates familiar arguments, bludgeoning the reader with his dossier against the Church. Among De Rosa’s tamer charges: Jesus renounced possessions, but his vicars celebrate high mass garbed in cloth of gold; the Church has never lifted strictures against usury, yet the Vatican operates a bank. De Rosa sweeps through Church history to parade popes who begat children, popes who fornicated on a grand scale, popes who married. Then in the second half of this polemic, he addresses Church teaching, conjoining the “immaculate conception” doctrine to decrees governing birth control, abortion, celibacy. The doctrine of papal infallibility is dealt with, as is Church anti-Semitism through the ages leading to the Holocaust silence of Pius XII, the “one man in the world whose witness Hitler feared.” And in wrapping up his catalog of “the sins of the papacy,” De Rosa virtually dismisses internal reform: “It is not Catholics but other Christians who chiefly can make the papacy what it ought to be.”
Copyright 1988 Reed Business Information, Inc.
Yeah sounds like no hidden agenda here.
Father Ambrose I am dissapointed you stoop to such tactics to prove your point. Am I to trust your other sources as well?
I expect this stuff from fundamentalist but an Orthodox Priest?
I hear Fox’s Book of Martyr’s is a great source of truth as well.
Jesuit theologian Peter de Rosa is a dissident who is quoted by many anti-catholic apologist. He’s kinds of like the John Cornwall Hitler’s Pope. A guy with an agenda that you can see through.
Peter De Rosa’s primary sources are known not to check out.
Please use objective sources the next thing you are going to do is use the likes of Malachi Martin, Jack Chick and Dave Hunt.
His well known anti-catholic work is VICARS OF CHRIST THE DARK SIDE OF THE PAPACY.
Now that is an objective title if I ever saw one.
Here is what a book reviewer said of this work of a guy who rejects about every catholic doctrine there is.
From Publishers Weekly
De Rosa ( Prayers for Pagans and Hypocrites ) is an angry Catholic. In the worst proselytizing tradition, this devil’s advocate overstates familiar arguments, bludgeoning the reader with his dossier against the Church. Among De Rosa’s tamer charges: Jesus renounced possessions, but his vicars celebrate high mass garbed in cloth of gold; the Church has never lifted strictures against usury, yet the Vatican operates a bank. De Rosa sweeps through Church history to parade popes who begat children, popes who fornicated on a grand scale, popes who married. Then in the second half of this polemic, he addresses Church teaching, conjoining the “immaculate conception” doctrine to decrees governing birth control, abortion, celibacy. The doctrine of papal infallibility is dealt with, as is Church anti-Semitism through the ages leading to the Holocaust silence of Pius XII, the “one man in the world whose witness Hitler feared.” And in wrapping up his catalog of “the sins of the papacy,” De Rosa virtually dismisses internal reform: “It is not Catholics but other Christians who chiefly can make the papacy what it ought to be.”
Copyright 1988 Reed Business Information, Inc.
Yeah sounds like no hidden agenda here.
Father Ambrose I am dissapointed you stoop to such tactics to prove your point. Am I to trust your other sources as well?
I expect this stuff from fundamentalist but an Orthodox Priest?
I hear Fox’s Book of Martyr’s is a great source of truth as well.
G
GAssisi
Guest
Father,
My history is a little rusty. Could the three million converts have been during the time of the forced conversions of Catholics by the Russian Czar. Is that around the same timeframe? If this is what you are referring to, I would hardly call that something for Orthodoxy to be proud of! If we are talking of two different periods, then please correct me.
God bless,
Greg
My history is a little rusty. Could the three million converts have been during the time of the forced conversions of Catholics by the Russian Czar. Is that around the same timeframe? If this is what you are referring to, I would hardly call that something for Orthodoxy to be proud of! If we are talking of two different periods, then please correct me.
God bless,
Greg
A
Aris
Guest
Yup. My feelings exactly.
O
Orthodoc
Guest
EUSEBIUS:
"Upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it’; and elsewhere: ‘The rock, moreover, was Christ.’ For, as the Apostle indicates with these words: ‘No other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid, which is Christ Jesus.’ Then, too, after the Savior himself, you may rightly judge the foundations of the Church to be the words of the prophets and apostles, in accordance with the statement of the Apostle: ‘Built upon the foundation of the apostles and the prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone.’ These foundations of the world have been laid bare because the enemies of God, who once darkened the eyes of our mind, lest we gaze upon divine things, have been routed and put to flight—scattered by the arrows sent from God and put to flight by the rebuke of the Lord and by the blast from his nostrils. As a result, having been saved from these enemies and having received the use of our eyes, we have seen the channels of the sea and have looked upon the foundations of the world. This has happened in our lifetime in many parts of the world (EUSEBIUS-Commentary on the Psalms, M.P.G., Vol. 23, Col. 173, 176).
======
Orthodoc
"Upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it’; and elsewhere: ‘The rock, moreover, was Christ.’ For, as the Apostle indicates with these words: ‘No other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid, which is Christ Jesus.’ Then, too, after the Savior himself, you may rightly judge the foundations of the Church to be the words of the prophets and apostles, in accordance with the statement of the Apostle: ‘Built upon the foundation of the apostles and the prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone.’ These foundations of the world have been laid bare because the enemies of God, who once darkened the eyes of our mind, lest we gaze upon divine things, have been routed and put to flight—scattered by the arrows sent from God and put to flight by the rebuke of the Lord and by the blast from his nostrils. As a result, having been saved from these enemies and having received the use of our eyes, we have seen the channels of the sea and have looked upon the foundations of the world. This has happened in our lifetime in many parts of the world (EUSEBIUS-Commentary on the Psalms, M.P.G., Vol. 23, Col. 173, 176).
======
Orthodoc
O
Orthodoc
Guest
**AUGUSTINE, Blessed:
**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).
And I tell you…‘You are Peter, Rocky, and on this rock I shall build my Church, and the gates of the underworld will not conquer her. To you shall I give the keys of the kingdom. Whatever you bind on earth shall also be bound in heaven; whatever you loose on earth shall also be loosed in heaven’ (Mt 16:15-19). In Peter, Rocky, we see our attention drawn to the rock. Now the apostle Paul says about the former people, ‘They drank from the spiritual rock that was following them; but the rock was Christ’ (1 Cor 10:4). So this disciple is called Rocky from the rock, like Christian from Christ…Why have I wanted to make this little introduction? In order to suggest to you that in Peter the Church is to be recognized. Christ, you see, built his Church not on a man but on Peter’s confession. What is Peter’s confession? ‘You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.’ There’s the rock for you, there’s the foundation, there’s where the Church has been built, which the gates of the underworld cannot conquer (John Rotelle, Ed., The Works of Saint Augustine (New Rochelle: New City Press, 1993), Sermons, Vol. 6, Sermon 229P.1, p. 327).
Christ, you see, built his Church not on a man but on Peter’s confession. What is Peter’s confession? ‘You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.’ There’s the rock for you, there’s the foundation, there’s where the Church has been built, which the gates of the underworld cannot conquer. (AUGUSTINE, Sermon 229).
======
Orthodoc
**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).
And I tell you…‘You are Peter, Rocky, and on this rock I shall build my Church, and the gates of the underworld will not conquer her. To you shall I give the keys of the kingdom. Whatever you bind on earth shall also be bound in heaven; whatever you loose on earth shall also be loosed in heaven’ (Mt 16:15-19). In Peter, Rocky, we see our attention drawn to the rock. Now the apostle Paul says about the former people, ‘They drank from the spiritual rock that was following them; but the rock was Christ’ (1 Cor 10:4). So this disciple is called Rocky from the rock, like Christian from Christ…Why have I wanted to make this little introduction? In order to suggest to you that in Peter the Church is to be recognized. Christ, you see, built his Church not on a man but on Peter’s confession. What is Peter’s confession? ‘You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.’ There’s the rock for you, there’s the foundation, there’s where the Church has been built, which the gates of the underworld cannot conquer (John Rotelle, Ed., The Works of Saint Augustine (New Rochelle: New City Press, 1993), Sermons, Vol. 6, Sermon 229P.1, p. 327).
Christ, you see, built his Church not on a man but on Peter’s confession. What is Peter’s confession? ‘You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.’ There’s the rock for you, there’s the foundation, there’s where the Church has been built, which the gates of the underworld cannot conquer. (AUGUSTINE, Sermon 229).
======
Orthodoc
O
Orthodoc
Guest
**AMBROSE, St. of Milano:
**Upon this rock your house is built. Your rock is your faith, and faith is the foundation of the Church. If you are a rock, you will be in the Church, because the Church is on a rock. If you are in the Church the gates of hell will not prevail against you…He who has conquered the flesh is a foundation of the Church; and if he cannot equal Peter, he can imitate him (AMBROSE, Commentary in Luke VI.98, CSEL 32.4).
They sucked honey out of the firm rock,’ (Deut. xxxii.13): for the flesh of Christ is a rock, which redeemed heaven and the whole world (AMBROSE, Epistle 43.9.)
When the cock crew, the very rock of the Church did away with his guilt (Hymn. Aeterne rerum conditor. p. 76).
=======
Orthodoc
**Upon this rock your house is built. Your rock is your faith, and faith is the foundation of the Church. If you are a rock, you will be in the Church, because the Church is on a rock. If you are in the Church the gates of hell will not prevail against you…He who has conquered the flesh is a foundation of the Church; and if he cannot equal Peter, he can imitate him (AMBROSE, Commentary in Luke VI.98, CSEL 32.4).
They sucked honey out of the firm rock,’ (Deut. xxxii.13): for the flesh of Christ is a rock, which redeemed heaven and the whole world (AMBROSE, Epistle 43.9.)
When the cock crew, the very rock of the Church did away with his guilt (Hymn. Aeterne rerum conditor. p. 76).
=======
Orthodoc
O
Orthodoc
Guest
JOHN. St. CHRYSOSTOME of Constantinople:
Do you not see that the headship was in the hands of these three (Peter, John, James) especially of Peter and James? This was the chief cause of their condemnation by Herod (Saint Chrysostom, Homilies on the Acts of the Apostles, Homily XXVI, p. 169)
For the Son of thunder, the beloved of Christ, the pillar of the Churches throughout the world, who holds the keys of heaven, who drank the cup of Christ, and was baptized with His baptism, who lay upon his Master’s bosom, with much confidence, this man now comes forward to us now (Saint Chrysostom, Homilies on the Gospel of John, Homily 1.1, p. 1)
And this He did to withdraw them (Peter and John) from their unseasonable sympathy for each other; for since they were about to receive the charge of the world, it was necessary that they should no longer be closely associated together (Saint Chrysostom, Homilies on the Gospel of John, Homily 88.1-2, pp. 331-332).
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 (Saint Chrysostom, Homilies on the Acts of the Apostles, Homily 33, pp. 205, 207).
He speaks from this time lowly things, on his way to His passion, that He might show His humanity. For He that hath built His church upon Peter’s confession, and has so fortified it, that ten thousand dangers and deaths are not to prevail over it…(Sant Chrysostom, On Matthew, Homily 82.3, p. 494).
========
Orthodoc
Do you not see that the headship was in the hands of these three (Peter, John, James) especially of Peter and James? This was the chief cause of their condemnation by Herod (Saint Chrysostom, Homilies on the Acts of the Apostles, Homily XXVI, p. 169)
For the Son of thunder, the beloved of Christ, the pillar of the Churches throughout the world, who holds the keys of heaven, who drank the cup of Christ, and was baptized with His baptism, who lay upon his Master’s bosom, with much confidence, this man now comes forward to us now (Saint Chrysostom, Homilies on the Gospel of John, Homily 1.1, p. 1)
And this He did to withdraw them (Peter and John) from their unseasonable sympathy for each other; for since they were about to receive the charge of the world, it was necessary that they should no longer be closely associated together (Saint Chrysostom, Homilies on the Gospel of John, Homily 88.1-2, pp. 331-332).
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 (Saint Chrysostom, Homilies on the Acts of the Apostles, Homily 33, pp. 205, 207).
He speaks from this time lowly things, on his way to His passion, that He might show His humanity. For He that hath built His church upon Peter’s confession, and has so fortified it, that ten thousand dangers and deaths are not to prevail over it…(Sant Chrysostom, On Matthew, Homily 82.3, p. 494).
========
Orthodoc
O
Orthodoc
Guest
THEODORET, St of Cyr:
Other foundation no man can lay but that which is laid, which is Christ Jesus (1 Cor. iii.11). It is necessary to build upon, not to lay foundations. For it is impossible for him who wishes to build wisely to lay another foundation. The blessed Peter also laid this foundation, or rather the Lord Himself. For Peter having said, ‘Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God;’ the Lord said, ‘Upon this rock I will build My Church.’ Therefore call not yourselves after men’s names, for Christ is the foundation (St. Theodoret of Cyr, 117Commentary on 1 Corinthians 1,12.).
CYRIL, St. of Alexandria:
It is likely that by these words (Is. 33:16) our Lord Jesus Christ is called a rock, in Whom, as some cave or sheepfold, the Church is conceived as having a safe and unshaken abiding place for its well-being; ‘For thou art Peter,’ the Saviour says, ‘and upon this rock I will build My Church’ (Cyril of AlexandriaCommentary on Isaiah 3.iii, on Isaiah 28:16).
Other foundation no man can lay but that which is laid, which is Christ Jesus (1 Cor. iii.11). It is necessary to build upon, not to lay foundations. For it is impossible for him who wishes to build wisely to lay another foundation. The blessed Peter also laid this foundation, or rather the Lord Himself. For Peter having said, ‘Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God;’ the Lord said, ‘Upon this rock I will build My Church.’ Therefore call not yourselves after men’s names, for Christ is the foundation (St. Theodoret of Cyr, 117Commentary on 1 Corinthians 1,12.).
CYRIL, St. of Alexandria:
It is likely that by these words (Is. 33:16) our Lord Jesus Christ is called a rock, in Whom, as some cave or sheepfold, the Church is conceived as having a safe and unshaken abiding place for its well-being; ‘For thou art Peter,’ the Saviour says, ‘and upon this rock I will build My Church’ (Cyril of AlexandriaCommentary on Isaiah 3.iii, on Isaiah 28:16).
**HILARY, St. of Pointiers:**This faith is that which is the foundation of the Church; through this faith the gates of hell cannot prevail against her. This is the faith which has the keys of the kingdom of heaven. Whatsoever this faith shall have loosed or bound on earth shall be loosed or bound in heaven…The very reason why he is blessed is that he confessed the Son of God. This is the Father’s revelation, this the foundation of the Church, this the assurance of her permanence. Hence has she the keys of the kingdom of heaven, hence judgment in heaven and judgment on earth…Thus our one immovable foundation, our one blissful rock of faith, is the confession from Peter’s mouth, Thou art the Son of the living God (Hilaryof Poitiers,On The Trinity, Book VI.36,37; Book II.23; Book VI.20.).
Orthodoc
O
Orthodoc
Guest
JEROME, St.:
The one foundation which the apostolic architect laid is our Lord Jesus Christ. Upon this stable and firm foundation, which has itself been laid on solid ground, the Church of Christ is built…For the Church was founded upon a rock…upon this rock the Lord established his Church; and the apostle Peter received his name FROM this rock (Mt. 16.18) (Jerome, Commentary on Matthew 7.25,).
EPIPHANIUS
Epiphanius was born in Palestine and was bishop of Salamis on Cyprus. He was an ardent defender of Nicene orthodoxy. He gives an interpretation of the rock of Matthew 16 that is consistent with the overall Eastern exegesis:
He confessed that ‘Christ’ is ‘the Son of the living God,’ and was told, ‘On this rock of sure faith will I build my church’—for he plainly confessed that Christ is true Son (The Panarion of Epiphanius of Salamis Books II and III, Haer. 59.7, 6-8,3, pp. 108-109).
BASIL OF SELEUCIA
Basil was a fifth century Eastern bishop of Seleucia in Isauria. He took part in the Council of Chalcedon in 451:
Now Christ called this confession a rock, and he named the one who confessed it ‘Peter,’ perceiving the appellation which was suitable to the author of this confession. For this is the solemn rock of religion, this the basis of salvation, this the wall of faith and the foundation of truth: ‘For no other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid, which is Christ Jesus.’ To whom be glory and power forever (Oratio XXV.4, M.P.G., Vol. 85, Col. 296-297).
PAUL OF EMESA (Died—ca. A.D. 444)
Paul was consecrated bishop of Emesa just after 410 A.D. He took part in the Council of Ephesus:
Whom do you say that I am?’ Instantly, the Coryphaeus of the apostles, the mouth of the disciples, Peter, ‘Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God…Upon this faith the Church of God has been founded. With this expectation, upon this rock the Lord God placed the foundations of the Church (Homily of the Nativity).
JOHN OF DAMASCUS
This is that firm and immovable faith upon which, as upon the rock whose surname you bear, the Church is founded. Against this the gates of hell, the mouths of heretics, the machines of demons—for they will attack—will not prevail. They will take up arms but they will not conquer (Homily on the Transfiguration, M.P.G., Vol. 96, Col. 554-555).
This rock was Christ, the incarnate Word of God, the Lord, for Paul clearly teaches us: ‘The rock was Christ’ (1 Cor. 10:4) (Homily on the Transfiguration, M.P.G., Vol. 96, Col. 548).
=======
Orthodoc
The one foundation which the apostolic architect laid is our Lord Jesus Christ. Upon this stable and firm foundation, which has itself been laid on solid ground, the Church of Christ is built…For the Church was founded upon a rock…upon this rock the Lord established his Church; and the apostle Peter received his name FROM this rock (Mt. 16.18) (Jerome, Commentary on Matthew 7.25,).
EPIPHANIUS
Epiphanius was born in Palestine and was bishop of Salamis on Cyprus. He was an ardent defender of Nicene orthodoxy. He gives an interpretation of the rock of Matthew 16 that is consistent with the overall Eastern exegesis:
He confessed that ‘Christ’ is ‘the Son of the living God,’ and was told, ‘On this rock of sure faith will I build my church’—for he plainly confessed that Christ is true Son (The Panarion of Epiphanius of Salamis Books II and III, Haer. 59.7, 6-8,3, pp. 108-109).
BASIL OF SELEUCIA
Basil was a fifth century Eastern bishop of Seleucia in Isauria. He took part in the Council of Chalcedon in 451:
Now Christ called this confession a rock, and he named the one who confessed it ‘Peter,’ perceiving the appellation which was suitable to the author of this confession. For this is the solemn rock of religion, this the basis of salvation, this the wall of faith and the foundation of truth: ‘For no other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid, which is Christ Jesus.’ To whom be glory and power forever (Oratio XXV.4, M.P.G., Vol. 85, Col. 296-297).
PAUL OF EMESA (Died—ca. A.D. 444)
Paul was consecrated bishop of Emesa just after 410 A.D. He took part in the Council of Ephesus:
Whom do you say that I am?’ Instantly, the Coryphaeus of the apostles, the mouth of the disciples, Peter, ‘Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God…Upon this faith the Church of God has been founded. With this expectation, upon this rock the Lord God placed the foundations of the Church (Homily of the Nativity).
JOHN OF DAMASCUS
This is that firm and immovable faith upon which, as upon the rock whose surname you bear, the Church is founded. Against this the gates of hell, the mouths of heretics, the machines of demons—for they will attack—will not prevail. They will take up arms but they will not conquer (Homily on the Transfiguration, M.P.G., Vol. 96, Col. 554-555).
This rock was Christ, the incarnate Word of God, the Lord, for Paul clearly teaches us: ‘The rock was Christ’ (1 Cor. 10:4) (Homily on the Transfiguration, M.P.G., Vol. 96, Col. 548).
=======
Orthodoc
G
GAssisi
Guest
If indeed Christ is not the rock, then Peter himself could not be the rock. That is called sacramental theology, brother Orthodoc.
God bless,
Greg
God bless,
Greg
T
Tmaque
Guest
This isn’t complicated because we know what CHRIST SAID. I found this on a website and I thought I’d share it.
He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. * Simon makes a profession of faith *
And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon bar-Jona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. *Jesus calls Simon blessed and Simon “bar-Jonah,” which means “son of the Dove” (the Holy Spirit) *
And I say also unto THEE, *Jesus is talking to Simon *
That THOU art Peter (KEPHA, translated into Koine Greek as “petros” meaning “rock” and into English as “Peter”), He is still talking to Simon and now renames him “Kepha,” or “Rock.” He said “THOU art Rock,” not “I am Rock” or “your faith is rock”
AND UPON THIS ROCK I will build my church; and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it. *According to some, after just calling Simon blessed and renaming him “Rock,” Jesus is suddenly talking about another “rock” (Peter’s faith, or Jesus Himself) *
And I will give unto THEE the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever THOU shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever THOU shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. *Now they say He just as suddenly is talking to/about Peter again – as He gives him the keys to Heaven! *
Reading the verse honestly, especially in context and without anti-Catholic prejudice, shows the above sort of rendering to be – well, quite absurd.
He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. * Simon makes a profession of faith *
And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon bar-Jona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. *Jesus calls Simon blessed and Simon “bar-Jonah,” which means “son of the Dove” (the Holy Spirit) *
And I say also unto THEE, *Jesus is talking to Simon *
That THOU art Peter (KEPHA, translated into Koine Greek as “petros” meaning “rock” and into English as “Peter”), He is still talking to Simon and now renames him “Kepha,” or “Rock.” He said “THOU art Rock,” not “I am Rock” or “your faith is rock”
AND UPON THIS ROCK I will build my church; and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it. *According to some, after just calling Simon blessed and renaming him “Rock,” Jesus is suddenly talking about another “rock” (Peter’s faith, or Jesus Himself) *
And I will give unto THEE the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever THOU shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever THOU shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. *Now they say He just as suddenly is talking to/about Peter again – as He gives him the keys to Heaven! *
Reading the verse honestly, especially in context and without anti-Catholic prejudice, shows the above sort of rendering to be – well, quite absurd.
H
hlgomez
Guest
Orthodoc,
The fact of the matter is: the Catholic Church is a universal church. Orthodox church? naa… it’s ethnical and all different orthodox churches want “fences” in every property they have. They all cry out “mine, mine, mine!”
Pio
The fact of the matter is: the Catholic Church is a universal church. Orthodox church? naa… it’s ethnical and all different orthodox churches want “fences” in every property they have. They all cry out “mine, mine, mine!”
Pio
C
Carl
Guest
The simple and frozen truth of the matter is that the headquarters of the early Church was Jerusalem, where most of the apostles continued to reside after the resurrection of Jesus. But with the movement of Peter and Paul to Rome, and the destruction of Jersalem by the Romans, the early Christian headquarters is clearly moved to Rome. Surely the ancient headquarters of the Christian Church would have to be viewed as the diocese of Rome, and the Catholic Church has carried on that tradition to the present. No other Christian church even pretends to be headquartered in the diocese of Peter, the Rock upon which Christ said he would build his Church.
O
Orthodoc
Guest
[No other Christian church even pretends to be headquartered in the diocese of Peter, the Rock upon which Christ said he would build his Church.]
It was in Antioch they were first called Christians which was the FIRST diocese of Peter!
Orthodoc
It was in Antioch they were first called Christians which was the FIRST diocese of Peter!
Orthodoc
F
Fr_Ambrose
Guest
Hello Orthodoc and *Welcome * to the Forum! What country are you in? I’m in New Zealand.
You are so right, and there are a number of lines of succession in the Orthodox world which go right back to Peter and the other Apostles. Antioch, Jerusalem, Athens, Cyprus, Thessalonica… etc., etc.
Antioch is a very clear example of a succession from the Apostle Peter…
People might like to check this article about Peter’s other succesors, from a Catholic source.
melkitecathedral.org/melkite/history3.htm
Peter’s First See
The evolution of the Patriarchate of Antioch
The article features a fascinating photograph of three bishops with the apostolic succession of Saint Peter, photographed all together in Damascus in 2001.
- Syriac Orthodox Patriarch Ignatius Zakka I,
- Pope John Paul II,
- Antiochian Orthodox Patriarch Ignatius IV
The oldest lineage of bishops which comes down to us in the 21st century who is a successor to St Peter is not actually the bishop (Pope) of the Church of Rome, but the bishop (Patriarch) of the Church of Antioch. I realise that this will be a surprise to some Catholics
Peter founded the Church of Antioch in 34 AD, and he remained there for 5-7 years. Paul (and Barnabas) came to Antioch to see Peter there and it was in Antioch that the dispute between Peter and Paul flared up about whether converts had to be circumcised. In order to resolve this Peter and Paul took the dispute to James in Jerusalem and James called all the Apostles to a Council in Jerusalem to make a determination.
Early than this, Antioch had received a large number of Christian refugees who fled Jerusalem after the martyrdom of Saint Stephen the deacon, a period of martyrdom in Jerusalem which Paul himself had initiated while he was still the uncoverted Saul!
To succeed him in Antioch Saint Peter consecrated Euodius (Evodius) as bishop of that city. Euodius was succeeded as bishop in Antioch by the great Saint and holy martyr Ignatius who was himself consecrated by either Saint Peter or Saint Paul. The Patriarch of Antioch is the 170th successor of Saint Peter. Here is a complete list of his apostolic succession from the holy Apostle Peter
web.archive.org/web/20040209…/patriarchs.htm
Tinyurl: tinyurl.com/6s6q2
So the Church of Antioch founded by Saint Peter is a little bit older than Rome, and like Rome it has an unbroken apostolic succession going back to Saint Peter.
“I have perfumed my bed with myrrh, aloes and cinnamon.” ~Proverbs 7:17
O
Orthodoc
Guest
[Hello Orthodoc and *Welcome to the Forum! What country are you in? I’m in New Zealand.]
Hello Father Ambrose. Thank you for your welcome. I’m from the U.S. Philadelphia. Pennsylania.
Orthodoc
Hello Father Ambrose. Thank you for your welcome. I’m from the U.S. Philadelphia. Pennsylania.
Orthodoc
- Status