Orthodox View of the Primacy of Peter

  • Thread starter Thread starter God_Seeker_1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
joe371 said:
I just did that…I didn’t realize how powerful I was…LOL…Totally misrepresented what I said…“all other bishops are superfluous” - so silly…🤷
Click to expand...
I agree that that ecclesiology is objectionable, but that is the logical conclusion of your argument. You argued that just as the Patriach of Constantinople is able to remove anyone in his diocese, so the Pope should be able to remove anyone in his “church”. And we were talking about parishes ll overe the world, e.g. in Indiana as I said. Therefore you believe the Pope’s “church” is the whole world. Sorry I’m just taking your argument seriously.
 
Schism_hater said:
I agree that that ecclesiology is objectionable, but that is the logical conclusion of your argument. You argued that just as the Patriach of Constantinople is able to remove anyone in his diocese, so the Pope should be able to remove anyone in his “church”. And we were talking about parishes ll overe the world, e.g. in Indiana as I said. Therefore you believe the Pope’s “church” is the whole world. Sorry I’m just taking your argument seriously.
Click to expand...
I understand that you do not acknowledge one leader + an ecumenical council, of an entire church. Each Catholic Bishop, regardless of location, is certainly allocated the requisite authority to handle matters on their own, and therefore the Bishop of Rome stays out of unless he must exercises his authority. Agreed. 🙂

What happens if two self-governing Orthodox churches have a problem agreeing on something regarding doctrine( not that that has happened); who settles the matter, if they cannot resolve it on their own? Ecumenical council with representatives from each self-governing church perhaps?
 
joe371 said:
That is what I was asking, and you answered my question. Why should he have that authority over his diocese, and the bishop of Rome cannot over his church? We as Catholics embrace the idea…👍
Click to expand...
Schism_hater said:
See what you just did? You made the universal church into one huge diocese presided over by one bishop, the Bishop of Rome. So, in effect, all other bishops are superfluous. Thye are just administrators of the one Super Bishop.
Click to expand...
I suppose in a way Joe is right. What I mean is, in theory the church *could *be reduced to only one bishop – not that I in any way expect such a situation.
 
joe371 said:
I understand that you do not acknowledge one leader + an ecumenical council, of an entire church. Each Catholic Bishop, regardless of location, is certainly allocated the requisite authority to handle matters on their own, and therefore the Bishop of Rome stays out of unless he must exercises his authority. Agreed. 🙂
Click to expand...
I’m glad we’re agreed, but that is not what has been dogmatically defined in the west. Vatican I declares that the Pope has full, immediate and universal jurisdiction over the whole Church. Immediate means that he is free to intervene anytime, anywhere, on any matter. So, in theory, if Pope Francis decides that he doesn’t like the music at the morning mass at St. Philomena’s Catholic Church in Kalamazoo, Michigan (fictional, as far as I know), he can fire the music director and replace him or her with someone else, no matter what the parish priest or local bishop think about it. Now of course I understand this doesn’t commonly happen, but under Rome’s ecclesiology, it could.
 
joe371 said:
What happens if two self-governing Orthodox churches have a problem agreeing on something regarding doctrine( not that that has happened); who settles the matter, if they cannot resolve it on their own? Ecumenical council with representatives from each self-governing church perhaps?
Click to expand...
That’s a perfectly legitimate question and you have the answer, an ecumenical council.
 
joe371 said:
I don’t think anyone is infallible, except God. When it comes to doctrinal truth does the Orthodox church claim to teach inerrantly via the guidance of the HS?
Click to expand...
Define what you mean by “teach inerrantly”.
 
joe371 said:
My sister asked me to ask you that same question, regarding your church leaders? Is the Holy Spirit upon them different from the one upon the rest of us? if not then why do you need their guidance?
Click to expand...
The Holy Spirit is upon all the faithful. While it is primarily the bishop’s job to figure these things out, everyone within the Church can be involved. Again, I point to St. Maximos the Confessor who is a lay monk, yet he defended true doctrine against bishops who held heretical positions. And they included Patriarchs.
joe371 said:
The pope never unilaterally defines doctrine. it is always done via the collaboration of the Bishop of Rome and the ecumenical councils. The Pope didn’t unilaterally define the IC or the AOM…
Click to expand...
Yet Pastor Aeternus teaches that infallible statements of the Pope are irreformable by themselves and not by the consent of anyone.
 
ConstantineTG;10911365]The Holy Spirit is upon all the faithful. While it is primarily the bishop’s job to figure these things out, everyone within the Church can be involved. Again, I point to St. Maximos the Confessor who is a lay monk, yet he defended true doctrine against bishops who held heretical positions. And they included Patriarchs.
Click to expand...
My sister was here when I asked. I will tell her what you said. I have a feeling she is simply going to say: I don’t need some bishop; I have the word of God, and the Holy Spirit moves me to understand it. :shrug:She thinks my soul is in jeopardy because I am catholic. If I had not joined the CC I would definitely be where you are now. The CC and the OC have so much in common, and a history together that goes all the way back to the apostles. Pretty cool.
 
joe371 said:
Free from error regarding church doctrines.
Click to expand...
The truth is independent of people, and anyone can commit errors. So bishops do not have some power to teach free from error. As history has proven time and time again, many commit errors, many are corrected by others.

Look, even St. Paul himself never claim to teach infallibly. He used Old Testament Scripture to prove all his teaching to be true. He made a mention only once of his vision of Christ when he was called and converted, but he never used that to claim any sort of teaching authority.
 
Schism_hater said:
I’m glad we’re agreed, but that is not what has been dogmatically defined in the west. Vatican I declares that the Pope has full, immediate and universal jurisdiction over the whole Church. Immediate means that he is free to intervene anytime, anywhere, on any matter. So, in theory, if Pope Francis decides that he doesn’t like the music at the morning mass at St. Philomena’s Catholic Church in Kalamazoo, Michigan (fictional, as far as I know), he can fire the music director and replace him or her with someone else, no matter what the parish priest or local bishop think about it. Now of course I understand this doesn’t commonly happen, but under Rome’s ecclesiology, it could.
Click to expand...
👍 Just curious: does each self-governing Bishop have the same authority over his autocephalous church i.e. Patriarchate of Alexandria has the same authority, but only over his autocephalous church?

orthodoxwiki.org/Church_of_Constantinople
 
ConstantineTG said:
The truth is independent of people, and anyone can commit errors. So bishops do not have some power to teach free from error. As history has proven time and time again, many commit errors, many are corrected by others.

Look, even St. Paul himself never claim to teach infallibly. He used Old Testament Scripture to prove all his teaching to be true. He made a mention only once of his vision of Christ when he was called and converted, but he never used that to claim any sort of teaching authority.
Click to expand...
So, if what you are saying is true, regarding church doctrines, then maybe my sisters understanding of the Eucharist (way different than ours) is the correct one. Her and I read the same bible and come away from it with different interpretations…She often tries to correct me…
 
joe371 said:
My sister was here when I asked. I will tell her what you said. I have a feeling she is simply going to say: I don’t need some bishop; I have the word of God, and the Holy Spirit moves me to understand it. :shrug:She thinks my soul is in jeopardy because I am catholic. If I had not joined the CC I would definitely be where you are now. The CC and the OC have so much in common, and a history together that goes all the way back to the apostles. Pretty cool.
Click to expand...
Well, I will say that Protestants have a faulty understanding of how the Holy Spirit actually works within us. Actually the Orthodox understanding of truth and the Holy Spirit is the complete opposite of Sola Scriptura, that is we believe that the truth is consistent across all people. So if I interpret scripture and you interpret scripture and we do not agree, then there are only three possible outcomes. You are right and I am wrong, I am right and you are wrong, or we both are wrong. We can’t both be right. The greater the majority in agreement, the more we are confident of the truth. We don’t think the truth is inherent in one person.

This is really not a foreign concept even to non-Christians. We see this with our academics today. Some smart guy writes a paper on something new, and it is critiqued by other academics. One guy can’t just say he has 5 doctorates, so everyone else should just take his word on it. When there are no objections to what has been put forth, then people accept that is the truth. It is similar in Orthodoxy. All people are free to critique a teaching because we all have the Holy Spirit. But we cannot be by ourselves, we always need each other.
 
ConstantineTG said:
Well, I will say that Protestants have a faulty understanding of how the Holy Spirit actually works within us. Actually the Orthodox understanding of truth and the Holy Spirit is the complete opposite of Sola Scriptura, that is we believe that the truth is consistent across all people. So if I interpret scripture and you interpret scripture and we do not agree, then there are only three possible outcomes. You are right and I am wrong, I am right and you are wrong, or we both are wrong. We can’t both be right. The greater the majority in agreement, the more we are confident of the truth. We don’t think the truth is inherent in one person.

👍
This is really not a foreign concept even to non-Christians. We see this with our academics today. Some smart guy writes a paper on something new, and it is critiqued by other academics. One guy can’t just say he has 5 doctorates, so everyone else should just take his word on it. When there are no objections to what has been put forth, then people accept that is the truth. It is similar in Orthodoxy. All people are free to critique a teaching because we all have the Holy Spirit. But we cannot be by ourselves, we always need each other.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Schism_hater said:
That’s a perfectly legitimate question and you have the answer, an ecumenical council.
Click to expand...
Or if they agree, the EP could be called in. Although more likely, there would be consensus among the Churches about doctrine, and the party in the wrong would have to move to conform to that doctrine.
 
Nine_Two said:
Ultimately all primates answer to their Holy Synods and thus only have whatever power the Synod grants them. So responsibilities can vary greatly.
Click to expand...
Well, there are some differences. We know the Patriarch of Moscow has move influence over his bishops that most other primates. Though it is still not like what the Pope of Rome has, but the accusations that the Patriarch has a Papal ambition has not ceased.
 
joe371 said:
👍

Intellect is important but all men are fallible, which is why the HS was sent to Jesus’ church. I believe (have faith) that God ineffably transmits and preserves truth within the church established by Jesus. Of course that does not mean that God does not inspire everyone; of course God does. Jesus said to His apostles that the HS would be sent to guide them into all truth. He wasn’t talking to me, my sister or anyone else today. Jesus was talking to his chosen fledgling church leaders, who passed on that treasure trove of truth to successors. This is what the OC believes - right?
Click to expand...
Not just Church leaders, He is talking to all. Remember, you don’t receive the Holy Spirit at ordination, you receive the Holy Spirit at baptism and chrismation. So If the Holy Spirit is the one that reveals all truth to us, then all baptized and chrismated Christians possess that ability. But again this ability it not something individualistic. So Protestants claiming they can do it by themselves separate from anyone else is wrong.
 
ConstantineTG said:
Not just Church leaders, He is talking to all. Remember, you don’t receive the Holy Spirit at ordination, you receive the Holy Spirit at baptism and chrismation. So If the Holy Spirit is the one that reveals all truth to us, then all baptized and chrismated Christians possess that ability. But again this ability it not something individualistic. So Protestants claiming they can do it by themselves separate from anyone else is wrong.
Click to expand...
You say all but then say: this ability it not something individualistic. Are you talking about church leaders? You are confusing me.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top