M
mikelionheart
Guest
When did this phrase first come about?
Is it from the pre-schism Church or has it been invented since?
Is it from the pre-schism Church or has it been invented since?
- Status
1
1AugustSon7
Guest
The idea has always existed and is often a legitimate one in the practical order.
But if you are referring to it in the sense that in the East there was a trend to rationalise that the Pope held only a primacy of honour, and not also a primacy of jurisdiction, then it seems likely that, at least historically, this idea was circulating - in one form or another - since the time of Photius.
M
mikelionheart
Guest
What about the actual phrase, not the idea.
Does the phrase itself pre date the schism or has it been adopted/invented since as an argument against Rome’s claims?
Does the phrase itself pre date the schism or has it been adopted/invented since as an argument against Rome’s claims?
L
L_piperatus
Guest
I did a google search for the Early Church using the expression “first among equals”, but I found nothing. Of course, that doesn’t necessarily mean that the Early Church (Early Church Fathers, Early Church documents) didn’t use the expression, it only means that my search failed to turn up a positive example.
I hope those more educated in Early Church history will chime in - was this expression used by the ECF, or Early Church documents? Can someone provide citations, maybe?
Apparently the expression is used today by both the Eastern Orthodox Churches and some Protestant (e.g. Anglican) communions. It was also used in the ancient Roman Empire - see en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primus_inter_pares .
But how about the Early Church - can anyone provide citations of this expression being used in the Early Church, in reference to the Bishop of Rome/Pope?
OK folks
excuse me for this but here it goes:Jesus said to him in reply, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah. For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my heavenly Father.
And so I say to you, you are** first among equals**, and upon this first among equals I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it.
I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. Because you are first among equals."
Just kidding, of course.
G
GFRDHa1
Guest
The idea has always existed and is often a legitimate one in the practical order. http://www.50centloseweight.com
M
mikelionheart
Guest
Thanks for your replies 1AugustSon7 and L piperatus.
I have also done an internet search and cannot find any reference to when it was first applied to the Pope which is why I posted this thread.
I think if the phrase did not come about until after the schism then it shows the Orthodox argument to be rather revisionist.
I have also done an internet search and cannot find any reference to when it was first applied to the Pope which is why I posted this thread.
I think if the phrase did not come about until after the schism then it shows the Orthodox argument to be rather revisionist.
L
L_piperatus
Guest
Some people could argue the appearance of the expression “first among equals” shows a phenomenon similar to the evolution of dogma.
E.g., the words and expressions “Holy Trinity”, 'purgatory", “papal infallibility”, and “Immaculate Conception” cannot be found as such in the Bible, and some of these expressions (e.g. “papal infallibility” and “Immaculate Conception”) cannot be found in the Early Church Fathers.
Yet, I will point out that the ECF (e.g. St. Ephrem of Syria, 4th century) did write about Mary’s sinlessness, and St. John Chrysostom’s Divine Liturgy (composed in early 5th c.) does contain one of these hymns praising Mary as being incomparably more glorious than the Cherubim, infinitely more exalted than the Seraphim. So, if someone would try to say, “the ECF do not use the expression ‘Immaculate Conception’”, we could immediately send that person to patristic writings that form the foundation of the dogma, and more than that, show that the Book of Genesis prophesies about a Woman whose seed will crush the serpent’s head, and there’s the Woman clothed with the sun and 12 stars in the Book of Revelation. In short, the whole idea of “Immaculate conception” is based on certain passages in the Old Testament, New Testament, and the writings of the ECF.
We can make a similar argument regarding “papal infallibility” - there’s a historical parallel here of God leading Israel through Moses in the Old Testament, there are the famous Petrine passages (Mt 16:18, Lk 22:31, Jn 21:15) in the New Testament, and a bunch of patristic writings starting with St. Clement in the 1st century, St. Ignatius of Antioch and St. Irenaeus in the second c., and going on and on and on, forming the basis of the idea of “papal infallibility” and “papal universal and ordinary jurisdiction”.
But someone who believes that the Pope is “first among equals”, please show me the basis of your idea. Because, if the idea existed in the ancient Roman Empire as applied to the emperor, that doesn’t cut it. That’s a secular idea. You must rather show me where in the Old Testament do we have a governing body without a single leader. Show me where in the New Testament does Jesus Christ give an equal authority to the rest of the Apostles as he gives to Peter. And, if you can’t find the exact expression “first among equals” in the ECF’s writings, show me where did the ECF teach that Peter did not have a real leader’s authority, only some sort of primacy of honor.
In my mind, the case against “first among equals” is even stronger when we try to search for Old Testament foundations, New Testament foundations, and patristic writings, Early Church documents supporting the idea. What I’ve read so far does not support this concept of the Pope being a “first among equals”.
E.g., the words and expressions “Holy Trinity”, 'purgatory", “papal infallibility”, and “Immaculate Conception” cannot be found as such in the Bible, and some of these expressions (e.g. “papal infallibility” and “Immaculate Conception”) cannot be found in the Early Church Fathers.
Yet, I will point out that the ECF (e.g. St. Ephrem of Syria, 4th century) did write about Mary’s sinlessness, and St. John Chrysostom’s Divine Liturgy (composed in early 5th c.) does contain one of these hymns praising Mary as being incomparably more glorious than the Cherubim, infinitely more exalted than the Seraphim. So, if someone would try to say, “the ECF do not use the expression ‘Immaculate Conception’”, we could immediately send that person to patristic writings that form the foundation of the dogma, and more than that, show that the Book of Genesis prophesies about a Woman whose seed will crush the serpent’s head, and there’s the Woman clothed with the sun and 12 stars in the Book of Revelation. In short, the whole idea of “Immaculate conception” is based on certain passages in the Old Testament, New Testament, and the writings of the ECF.
We can make a similar argument regarding “papal infallibility” - there’s a historical parallel here of God leading Israel through Moses in the Old Testament, there are the famous Petrine passages (Mt 16:18, Lk 22:31, Jn 21:15) in the New Testament, and a bunch of patristic writings starting with St. Clement in the 1st century, St. Ignatius of Antioch and St. Irenaeus in the second c., and going on and on and on, forming the basis of the idea of “papal infallibility” and “papal universal and ordinary jurisdiction”.
But someone who believes that the Pope is “first among equals”, please show me the basis of your idea. Because, if the idea existed in the ancient Roman Empire as applied to the emperor, that doesn’t cut it. That’s a secular idea. You must rather show me where in the Old Testament do we have a governing body without a single leader. Show me where in the New Testament does Jesus Christ give an equal authority to the rest of the Apostles as he gives to Peter. And, if you can’t find the exact expression “first among equals” in the ECF’s writings, show me where did the ECF teach that Peter did not have a real leader’s authority, only some sort of primacy of honor.
In my mind, the case against “first among equals” is even stronger when we try to search for Old Testament foundations, New Testament foundations, and patristic writings, Early Church documents supporting the idea. What I’ve read so far does not support this concept of the Pope being a “first among equals”.
L
L_piperatus
Guest
It might be worth to also post this question in the Non-Catholic Religions section, where we could hopefully receive more (name removed by moderator)ut from our Eastern Orthodox and Anglican brethren. According to Wikipedia, the Archbishop of Canterbury is also regarded as a “first among equals” within the Church of England.
M
mikelionheart
Guest
Good idea.
Will do.
Will do.
J
joshua_b
Guest
Let us not be so quick to forget about the Eastern Churches still in communion with Rome. It is my understanding that the Maronite, Melkite, Byzantine and other Eastern Churches hold to a “first among equals” view of the Bishop of Rome. I do not know how they term it or when they started using “whatever” phraseology, but they stand out to me as the most prominent example of this attitude in practical application.
Rome has no jurisdiction over them except in disputes of doctrine. With the exception of this single influence, they remain completely autonomous yet in full communion. They maintain their own liturgies, their own codes of canon law, their own disciplines and if I am not mistaken, even their own liturgical calendar.
The Catholic Church is not a monolith under the umbrella of the Roman Church, and for me at least, some of these things only really made sense when I started to realize that there truly are other Churches outside of the west.
Rome has no jurisdiction over them except in disputes of doctrine. With the exception of this single influence, they remain completely autonomous yet in full communion. They maintain their own liturgies, their own codes of canon law, their own disciplines and if I am not mistaken, even their own liturgical calendar.
The Catholic Church is not a monolith under the umbrella of the Roman Church, and for me at least, some of these things only really made sense when I started to realize that there truly are other Churches outside of the west.
M
mikelionheart
Guest
Josh
Thanks for that.
That is a very, very interesting post.
Thanks for that.
That is a very, very interesting post.
S
steve_b
Guest
first came about in the 5th century
*3. In Christian literature, the expression begins to be used in the East when, from the fifth century, the idea of the Pentarchy gained ground, according to which there are five Patriarchs at the head of the Church, with the Church of Rome having the first place among these patriarchal sister Churches. In this connection, however, it needs to be noted that no Roman Pontiff ever recognized this equalization of the sees or accepted that only a primacy of honour be accorded to the See of Rome.It should be noted too thatthis patriarchal structure typical of the East never developed in the West. *
4. The expression appears again in two letters of the Metropolitan Nicetas of Nicodemia (in the year 1136) and the Patriarch John X Camaterus (in office from 1198 to 1206), in which they protested that Rome, by presenting herself as mother and teacher, would annul their authority.In their view, Rome is only the first among sisters of equal dignity.
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/c...on_cfaith_doc_20000630_chiese-sorelle_en.html
Fr Ambrose an EO priest in the ROCOR, used to post here. This is what he said about the term
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=1587677&postcount=129
- Status