Dearest Josie,
Reading Acts 15 - who was it that said, “Therefore, I have reached the decision…” in verse 19 - it was St. James, not St. Peter.
Why would I be disparaging Saint Paul when all I’m asking is if he too had a visible see known as the chair of Paul? And the point I’m trying to make is this, if St. John spoke of St. Paul as a teacher of the world, what does this infer except that he thought St. Paul was a teacher of the world, i.e., this would have more significance if for example through apostolic succession this would mean some sort of primacy and/or belief that whoever held his see would be the (primary) teacher of the world, right? But this is not what Saint John is alluding to therefore why is it important to quote St. John on this when we are speaking of the primacy of St. Peter (as understood in Scripture and Tradition) and his successors?
He didn’t reach the decision all by himself SingleMomMonica, and of course, he would have the right to be the one to say it, they were afterall in Jerusalem when the council convened. This doesn’t take away the fact that Saint Peter has primacy over the other bishops (do take into consideration that even before the council, no apostle who would actually deny what Saint Peter had revealed), in fact, there is an example of this when yet again Saint Peter is singled out to reveal to everyone else that the gentiles would be baptized as well and they accepted (without a council).
My dog in this fight is that I do believe in Petrine primacy. I simply don’t believe the Bishop of Rome should be the supreme bishop. Primer inter pares is not what we have going on here. We have someone who appoints all the other bishops, and they could never be considered his equals. I want to have a situation more akin to the church in the early centuries when there were patriarchs all around the Christian world.
But do these chairs portend anything like the chair of Peter do? There are enough quotes from the early church fathers that demonstrate the fact that the successors of St. Peter are or do hold primacy, can we say the same of the other chairs of which you speak? Does for example anyone state that St. John of Chrysostom hold primacy because he is the bishop of Antioch? And what does it matter if St. John of Chrysostom said St. Paul was the teacher of the world if that statement does not extend itself to the successors of Saint Paul? Furthermore, even if St. Paul was glorified as a teacher of the world was he the only one?
I don’t know Josie L, I’ve read that passage time and time again. Each time I read it, St. Peter continues to be one of several people named that spoke. He was not the first to speak and he was not the last to speak at that Council. And each time I read it, it continues to be not St. Peter who made the final decision, it was St. James who made the final decision - based on what everyone said at the Council. It seems that St. James was particularly moved by what St. Peter said, but again it was St. James who made the decision and gave the decree, not St. Peter.
St. James was only voicing what was already agreed upon by the other bishops, so he did not make the final decision, he stated the final decision on behalf of the other council members (he was given this right because the council was convened in Jerusalem). And St. Peter was the first to realize the truth of the matter because it was to him that God had revealed it to so in a sense he was the one to make the first and final decision of the council.
That’s very interesting.
] …Thank you for your positive wishes Guyonthestreet!
I wanted to point out some errors I believe you are making, the first is that this does not describe the Orthodox understanding of how the Church operates because as I understand it all bishops are equal in power and authority (which confuses me because many recognize St. Peter as holding primacy of honor), therefore singling out St. James has being the one to make (try to understand that to make the final decision is to be the last to decide on the matter) the final decision is contrary to what the Orthodox believe. The second is that you assume he is given the final say because the council is covened in Jerusalem, well then, if that’s the case does every council in church history result in the local bishop of whence that council took place has having the final say in decision making? The answer is no. One prime example of this (and that of the authority of the see of Rome) is the council that took place on the issue of rebaptism which was covened by St. Cyprian and the Eastern bishops (can’t remember where exactly but it wasn’t in Rome) who unanimously decided that heretics needed to be rebaptized into the church. Pope St. Stephen who was not even at the council denied this ruling and/or understanding of baptism (he believed that as long as the baptism was said in the trinitarian form and with water it was valid) and as a result the bishops as well as St. Cyprian came to see the error of their ways and reconciled their views with that of the Pope’s.
]? No …It’s been requested of me to provide the quote of St. John Chrysostom that caused me to believe that the Catholic Church is correct and to receive the Sacraments in the Catholic Church even though I am a Chrismated Greek Orthodox Christian - according to the Catholic Code of Canon Law 844 §3. “Catholic ministers administer the sacraments of penance, Eucharist, and anointing of the sick licitly to members of Eastern Churches which do not have full communion with the Catholic Church if they seek such on their own accord and are properly disposed. This is also valid for members of other Churches which in the judgment of the Apostolic See are in the same condition in regard to the sacraments as these Eastern Churches.” and according to the Orthodox Church, it ex-communicates me meaning I can no longer receive the Mysteries of the Orthodox Church prior to Confession to an Orthodox Priest. Though, the Greek Orthodox Church does say that the Catholic Church has valid Sacraments, so in their eyes I’m still receiving Jesus in the Most Holy Eucharist. (Though some Orthodox Churches do not believe/teach that.)
Here it is:
“**Peter, that Leader of the choir, that Mouth of the rest of the Apostles, that Head of the brotherhood, that One set over the entire universe, that Foundation of the Church.” **Chrysostom, In illud, hoc Scitote, n. 4, p. 282. I read this in the book called Jesus, Peter & the Keys A Scriptural Handbook on the Papacy by Scott Butler, Norman Dahlgren & Rev. Mr. David Hess
I miss the Divine Liturgy of the Orthodox Church and I miss the practice of full Orthodox Spirituality. Please prove this quote of St. John’s wrong so I can come home. I don’t want people to list their emotions or personal opinions, but actual hard facts which disprove it.
Of course there is more than 1 quote of St. John Chrysostom’s that supports the Papacy, so I suppose, if it is possible for someone to prove this one wrong, then I will need to list the others.
Oh and if those also were disproved then I suppose, I’d also need a strong explanation of why “the Keys” were only given to St. Peter by Christ (and not to the rest of the Apostles) & how one can possibly discern from Christ’s action in that matter that the St. Peter and his Successors do not have higher authority than the rest of the Apostles and their Successors.
That should about do it.Who’s up for the challenge?
Thank you for telling the truth. I have no doubt that the poster who maligned the missionary activities of the Orthodox Church did so out of ignorance, not maliciousness.