How Do Orthodox Christians View the Pope?

[dzheremi]

The technical reason other bishops (in the RCC) can’t claim the title of Pope is because after Rome stole that title from Alexandria, Rome reserved that title for himself.

I don’t know if “steal” is the right word here. Rome may have taken it and used it herself, but Alexandria definitely still has it.

 

[Wisely]

I don’t know if “steal” is the right word here. Rome may have taken it and used it herself, but Alexandria definitely still has it.

Well, Rome borrowed the title withour asking permission :s
Of course, the Greek and Coptic Patriarchs still have that title. But in the RCC not even the Coptic Catholic Patriarch nor the Melkite Patriach (Who holds the title of Patriach of Alexandria) can have their traditional title. Its madness.

 

[dzheremi]

I agree, but I also think that use or loss of a title is among the least of their problems. Lord protect the Christians of Egypt (Copt, Greek, and otherwise).

 

[Nine_Two]

The West developed distorted ecclesiology? This sounds like a mere opinion, pleae back it up with sound documents. And where is the notion of “first among of equals” in the early church? Rome stole the title from Alexandria? Documents please…

Are you for real?

I thought you were a catechist?

One of the major disputes between the East and West is ecclesiology, you should know that by now. If we believe our own to be correct than the only alternatives are that either you made it up on the spot (unlikely, someone would have noticed right away), or it was distorted.

Wisely was arguing with a Roman Catholic who was arguing your church was correct on the basis of its ecclesiology. Of course the only counter to that is to go after the Roman ecclesiology.

You keep pushing on a point that has already been answered for you, and making out that because the exact term isn’t used in council the position around it must be wrong (even though the term actually is used in your church, as has been pointed out to you, and as such the concept exists in your own church.)

So here is the counter for you.

Show me in Patristics where an Orthodox Bishop was commanded on a major issue, by the pope, in a way he disagreed with, and listened on the basis of the Pope’s command alone.

 

[ByzCathCantor]

Well listen I’m sticking up for my Orthodox brothers.

Fact is the Apostle Andrew was FIRST chosen by Christ.

Are you suggesting that Andrew should have been the leader because he was first chosen?

How about some other theories then? Why not John, who was the only one brave enough to stand with Mary at the foot of the Cross as Christ endured the Passion?

 

[GaryTaylor]

Are you suggesting that Andrew should have been the leader because he was first chosen?

How about some other theories then? Why not John, who was the only one brave enough to stand with Mary at the foot of the Cross as Christ endured the Passion?

As tradition has it, the Apostle Andrew always sought God, and God first appeared to Andrew whom was with Peter. St Peter became the spokesman, thus of the Apostles.

You never heard that?

 

[ByzCathCantor]

As tradition has it, the Apostle Andrew always sought God, and God first appeared to Andrew whom was with Peter. St Peter became the spokesman, thus of the Apostles.

You never heard that?

Sure, and St. Andrew holds a special place in my heart and the hearts of many.

St. Andrew was indeed the first called, yet St. Peter was called in other unique and significant ways.

 

[Nicea325]

Are you for real?

I thought you were a catechist?

One of the major disputes between the East and West is ecclesiology, you should know that by now. If we believe our own to be correct than the only alternatives are that either you made it up on the spot (unlikely, someone would have noticed right away), or it was distorted.

Wisely was arguing with a Roman Catholic who was arguing your church was correct on the basis of its ecclesiology. Of course the only counter to that is to go after the Roman ecclesiology.

You keep pushing on a point that has already been answered for you, and making out that because the exact term isn’t used in council the position around it must be wrong (even though the term actually is used in your church, as has been pointed out to you, and as such the concept exists in your own church.)

So here is the counter for you.

Show me in Patristics where an Orthodox Bishop was commanded on a major issue, by the pope, in a way he disagreed with, and listened on the basis of the Pope’s command alone.

As opposed to being fake? No…just as the East pushes the issue with primacy, I am returning the favor with the “first among equals” Orthodox claim the church taught the first 1,000 years. Key word: concept…not the standard.

Yet you ask me if I am for real? You mean to me tell there exist NO such incidents or cases where NO eastern bishop EVER wanted the Bishop of Rome to settle a grave issue? Seriously?

 

[rinnie]

The Pope is the only one that claims that title because the West developed a dissorted ecclesiology.

Take it as you may, but I think Rome developed that sense of superiority among other Churches (that doesn’t exist) based on this:

-Capital of the Empire
-Founded by Blessed Peter and Paul
-Was the beloved Church (“presides in Love”)
-The only Apostolic Throne in the West

Mix that with a bad understanding of ecclesiology and you get what the Bishop of Rome is today, a super bishop or bishop of bishops.

The technical reason other bishops (in the RCC) can’t claim the title of Pope is because after Rome stole that title from Alexandria, Rome reserved that title for himself.

You can contnue to bare false witness against my Church and my Pope if you would like. I am not here to fight or argue with you only spread the gospel as it was taught by Christ.

If you disagree with the Vatican Council that is your choice, but also the VC also has the duty to show the truth with the word of God. If you disagree with the word of God or the VC you have free will to do so. But please think of the dissorted word of God that is taught in the VC.

Eph. 4:12 show us the Lord sent his aposltes whom he sanctified by conferring on the the Holy Spirit to glority the Father and earth and building up the Body of Christ which is the Church,

In this Church of Christ the Roman Ponfiff as the successor of Peter to whom Chirst entrusted the care of his Sheep and his lambs has been granted by God supreme, full immediate and universal power in the care of souls.

The Lord appointed 12 Apostles at the head of which he placed Peter chosen from their number John 21:15-17

Why would St John acknowledge that Peter has some title of precedence if he does not? What would be the reason for this. Why would scripture not state we were ALL called to Feed my lambs, Look after my sheep.

Why did Peter love Jesus more then the other Apostles did? Could it be that God knew who loved him the most. Would it not be fitting to choose the one who loved you most? Scripture sure would imply such.

Please pray and when you have some time truly read and pray on that scripture. I will also pray that you will see that our Pope and Church does not have a dissorted ecclesiolgy but the true word of God.

Ironically it is St John who testify’s that this is true.

Quote. The disciple is the one who vouches for these things and has written them down, and we know that his testimony is true. There was much else Jesus did if it were written down in detail I do not suppose the world itself would hold all the books that would be written.

It is also written in Matt. 16:18 the care of the sheep. It is also written in Luke 22:31

The 3 Apostles has showed a triple testimony to this truth.

Why did God pray that Peter’s faith would not fail, and why is he asked to strengthen his brothers?

God knew Peters loves and faith, he also knew his weakness.He knew the devil was after Peter because the devil is always after anyone who loves God. But it was the faith of Peter and the Grace given to Peter by the Prayers of our Lord, that gave him the power to beat the devil, and turn back to God, and do what God asked of him.

The same thing that is asked of our Pope today. Strengthen your brothers.

May we all join God in the prayers of yesterday, the same prayers of today, to take time out and pray for our Pope that he can do what is asked, and strengthen the other Bishops and Priests.

 

[Cavaradossi]

You can contnue to bare false witness against my Church and my Pope if you would like. I am not here to fight or argue with you only spread the gospel as it was taught by Christ.

If you disagree with the Vatican Council that is your choice, but also the VC also has the duty to show the truth with the word of God. If you disagree with the word of God or the VC you have free will to do so. But please think of the dissorted word of God that is taught in the VC.

Eph. 4:12 show us the Lord sent his aposltes whom he sanctified by conferring on the the Holy Spirit to glority the Father and earth and building up the Body of Christ which is the Church,

In this Church of Christ the Roman Ponfiff as the successor of Peter to whom Chirst entrusted the care of his Sheep and his lambs has been granted by God supreme, full immediate and universal power in the care of souls.

The Lord appointed 12 Apostles at the head of which he placed Peter chosen from their number John 21:15-17

Why would St John acknowledge that Peter has some title of precedence if he does not? What would be the reason for this. Why would scripture not state we were ALL called to Feed my lambs, Look after my sheep.

Why did Peter love Jesus more then the other Apostles did? Could it be that God knew who loved him the most. Would it not be fitting to choose the one who loved you most? Scripture sure would imply such.

Please pray and when you have some time truly read and pray on that scripture. I will also pray that you will see that our Pope and Church does not have a dissorted ecclesiolgy but the true word of God.

Ironically it is St John who testify’s that this is true.

Quote. The disciple is the one who vouches for these things and has written them down, and we know that his testimony is true. There was much else Jesus did if it were written down in detail I do not suppose the world itself would hold all the books that would be written.

It is also written in Matt. 16:18 the care of the sheep. It is also written in Luke 22:31

The 3 Apostles has showed a triple testimony to this truth.

Why did God pray that Peter’s faith would not fail, and why is he asked to strengthen his brothers?

God knew Peters loves and faith, he also knew his weakness.He knew the devil was after Peter because the devil is always after anyone who loves God. But it was the faith of Peter and the Grace given to Peter by the Prayers of our Lord, that gave him the power to beat the devil, and turn back to God, and do what God asked of him.

The same thing that is asked of our Pope today. Strengthen your brothers.

May we all join God in the prayers of yesterday, the same prayers of today, to take time out and pray for our Pope that he can do what is asked, and strengthen the other Bishops and Priests.

Calm down for a second. Aside from the slightly polemical use of the words ‘stole’ (copied might be more correct) and ‘distorted’, his post is simply listing reasons why the Orthodox did not and still do not find the papacy to be an essential part of the Church. Bearing false witness is a rather unfair assessment of his post.

 

[Hesychios]

You mean to me tell there exist NO such incidents or cases where NO eastern bishop EVER wanted the Bishop of Rome to settle a grave issue? Seriously?

The point is that Orthodox bishops would ask a lot of different hierarchs to help adjudicate matters. This still happens to this very day, and if the bishop of Rome (bishop of Milan, bishop of Seville …) was Orthodox he could be one of those occasionally asked.

In every case it is a request, an invitation to help. This does not imply a right to interfere when or where not requested.

Now it is quite obvious that the western church evolved a long history of the bishop of Rome intervening and interfering all over western Europe, but it is not a universal practice of the Apostolic churches and was not so from the beginning.

kind regards

 

[Wisely]

I apologize if my words might have offended you. I was trying to prove my point.
Sorry.

 

[Nine_Two]

You mean to me tell there exist NO such incidents or cases where NO eastern bishop EVER wanted the Bishop of Rome to settle a grave issue? Seriously?

Good job with misquoting. That isn’t what I asked you to show me. It also demonstrates how hopelessly the point wizzed over your head there.

You ask for the exact words “First Among Equals” in patristics, so I ask you for an exact demonstration of the Pope’s supreme power in the early church.

Since you can’t come up with that you reform my question into something that obviously did happen, and that most every individual who knows much about the early Church would agree with - including in this thread.

So I ask again, are you for real?

 

[rinnie]

I apologize if my words might have offended you. I was trying to prove my point.
Sorry.

I forgive you

 

[rinnie]

Good job with misquoting. That isn’t what I asked you to show me. It also demonstrates how hopelessly the point wizzed over your head there.

You ask for the exact words “First Among Equals” in patristics, so I ask you for an exact demonstration of the Pope’s supreme power in the early church.

Since you can’t come up with that you reform my question into something that obviously did happen, and that most every individual who knows much about the early Church would agree with - including in this thread.

So I ask again, are you for real?

I think if you want an exact demonstration of the Popes supreme power in the early Church there are many many of them to choose from.

Take acts for instance Peter address to the people. Why did Peter address them, John was there with him. Why did Peter address the people? Even when the Sanhedrin wanted them arrested. Peter again addressed them. Why, Why Peter again? Why did Peter address the crowd at Pentecost? There were 12 Apostles. but why Peter again.

Also what do you make of the words Peter I prayed for you that your faith will not fail and you will strengthen your brothers. Are you trying to say God was not talking about the Apostles in that scripture?

If Peter was not called to be the leader why was he asked to strengthen the other Apostles? Why did God say you in turn MUST STRENGTHEN your brothers. Why?

Why did God tell Peter to feed the sheep? Strengthen the Apostles? hand over to him the keys to the kingdom? WHY?

How could anyone other than a leader strengthen anyone else? Is strengthen not to teach, help, assist? What do you feel strengthen means in that scripture?

 

[Nine_Two]

I think if you want an exact demonstration of the Popes supreme power in the early Church there are many many of them to choose from.

Take acts for instance Peter address to the people. Why did Peter address them, John was there with him. Why did Peter address the people? Even when the Sanhedrin wanted them arrested. Peter again addressed them. Why, Why Peter again? Why did Peter address the crowd at Pentecost? There were 12 Apostles. but why Peter again.

Also what do you make of the words Peter I prayed for you that your faith will not fail and you will strengthen your brothers. Are you trying to say God was not talking about the Apostles in that scripture?

If Peter was not called to be the leader why was he asked to strengthen the other Apostles? Why did God say you in turn MUST STRENGTHEN your brothers. Why?

Why did God tell Peter to feed the sheep? Strengthen the Apostles? hand over to him the keys to the kingdom? WHY?

How could anyone other than a leader strengthen anyone else? Is strengthen not to teach, help, assist? What do you feel strengthen means in that scripture?

While Peter is considered the founder of the Church of Rome, he was not properly speaking, a Pope. In addition none of those actually show him doing what I asked to see, and finally, even if he had, you’d still have to establish that the ability to do it followed from him through to the Bishop of Rome.

If there are plenty of examples, please do share.

 

[Trebor135]

I think if you want an exact demonstration of the Popes supreme power in the early Church there are many many of them to choose from.

I’m interested to see more obscure such examples: let’s go beyond the now-clichéd incidents such as those involving St. Clement of Rome or St. Augustine.

 

[Nicea325]

Good job with misquoting. That isn’t what I asked you to show me. It also demonstrates how hopelessly the point wizzed over your head there.

You ask for the exact words “First Among Equals” in patristics, so I ask you for an exact demonstration of the Pope’s supreme power in the early church.

Since you can’t come up with that you reform my question into something that obviously did happen, and that most every individual who knows much about the early Church would agree with - including in this thread.

So I ask again, are you for real?

Am I for real? So it is impossible for God Himself to have chosen one man to be head over others? SERIOUSLY? Are you for real?

 

[Nicea325]

While Peter is considered the founder of the Church of Rome, he was not properly speaking, a Pope. In addition none of those actually show him doing what I asked to see, and finally, even if he had, you’d still have to establish that the ability to do it followed from him through to the Bishop of Rome.

If there are plenty of examples, please do share.

And please do share the “first” among equals? First means first,so do share how all are equal?

 

[Cavaradossi]

Am I for real? So it is impossible for God Himself to have chosen one man to be head over others? SERIOUSLY? Are you for real?

Victor? You mean the guy who tried to tell Polycrates when to celebrate Easter? That is definitely not a good example to support your case.