Orthodoxy and Bishop Eulogius

[Eaglejet23]

Questions: Does Eulogius Bishop of Alexandria say he sits on the Throne of Peter? Does Pope Gregory believe that three bishops take up the Apostolic See? Okay, I came across a quote from Pope Gregory I. I’ll paraphrase the quote to make my question easier to understand and respond to.

“Your most sweet Holiness[Eulogius Bishop of Alexandria] has spoken much in your letter to me about the chair of Saint Peter, Prince of the apostles, saying that he himself now sits on it in the persons of his successors.”

Here I notice that Eulogius says he sits on the throne of people, and Pope Gregory doesn’t correct him.

“But I gladly accepted all that has been said, in that he has spoken to me about Peter’s chair who occupies Peter’s chair.”

Here we see Pope Gregory saying he sits on Peter’s throne, but fails to address Eulogius’ comment directly.

“Since then it is the See of one, and one See, over which by Divine authority three bishops now preside, whatever good I hear of you, this I impute to myself.”

Here Pope Gregory says three bishops sit on the throne of the Apostolic See doesn’t this point as evidence for Eastern Orthodoxy.

 

[Vico]

…

Here Pope Gregory says three bishops sit on the throne of the Apostolic See doesn’t this point as evidence for Eastern Orthodoxy.

Directory for the Ad Limina Visit , Bernardin Card. Gantin, Prefect, Congregation for Bishops, 1988
Theological Notes, 1. The “perichoresis” (mutual indwelling) betwen the Church Universal and the local Church and its Petrine Center in the Eucharistic Liturgy:

The theological nucleus of this model was the Petrine idea, here interpreted in the tradition of the three Petrine Sees (Jerusalem, Antioch and Rome), of the See of St. Mark (Alexandria), inserted into the Petrine tradition by way of the connection between St. Peter and his interpreter in the Greek world, and of the See of the brother of St. Peter, Andrew (Constantinople). It is evident that the historical basis of this construction is very weak as far as Alexandria and Constantinople are concerned. What is important is that with this structure the East too has maintained the idea of a Petrine foundation of unity and of the concreteness of the unity and universality of the Church in the succession of St. Peter.

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/c...bishops_doc_19880629_visita-ad-limina_en.html

 

[Genesis315]

If anything this goes against the EO error that all bishops are equal and Petrine origin doesn’t provide additional real authority. On the contrary, this shows they are clearly not equal, and Petrine origin is a very important basis for authority.

St. Gregory talks of the three places in this letter to the Bishop of Alexandria:

Book VII, Letter 40

What St. Gregory is referring to here by “three places” is the principle of the three original patriarchates of Rome, Alexandria, and Antioch, in that order of primacy, which directly governed the three regions of the universal Church (the three regions of the known world: Europe, Africa, and Asia, respectively), with Rome being the final court of appeal (which is why these Patriarchs were turning to Rome, why Rome was telling them what to do in this case, and why they later submitted to Rome certain synodical acts and patriarchal judgments—see Book VII, Letter 34 and Book VIII, Letter 30 for examples; also see Book IX Letter 59 where St. Gregory says all bishops are subject to his See but they should be treated as equals when there is no cause not to).

This whole structure of authority flowed from Peter’s authority at Rome, with Alexandria and Antioch participating in that Petrine authority via their ties of discipleship to Petrine Rome.

This order was threatened early on by the imperial See of Constantinople trying to insert itself, first at Constantinople I and of course again by the infamous canon 28 of Chalcedon, which was denied by St. Leo the Great, who cited this same tradition of the three Petrine patriarchates. This original, Apostolic order was consistently disturbed by the government at Constantinople, which intruded into the Apostolic rights of the native bishops. In fact, the context in which the letter from St. Gregory linked above referencing the “universal bishop” was written was yet another example of Constantinople trying to do this very thing (the universal bishop controversy, often falsely attributed to the Catholic understanding of primacy, made the “universal bishop” the only one with ordinary authority, with all other bishops being his vicars–St. Gregory denied this to John the Faster in Constantinople and denied others to claim it for himself).

Again, Rome is always considered first and Alexandria and Antioch second and third in all the acts of Councils, etc. The three are never considered tied for first and no other See was numbered with them until politics won out later.

 

[Eaglejet23]

I see. This goes along with what other popes and church fathers have stated. Thank you. Though why does Eulogius Bishop of Alexandria say "he himself now sits on it in the persons of his successors.” Why doesn’t Pope Gregory correct him? Can’t an Eastern Orthodox say because Pope Gregory says he sits on the throne of Peter and doesn’t correct his fellow bishop Eulogius who says a similar statement it implies they are equal?

 

[Genesis315]

I think you are misreading that line. The “he” is Peter not Eulogius. In other words:

“Your most sweet Holiness has spoken much in your letter to me about the chair of Saint Peter, Prince of the apostles, saying that [St. Peter] himself now sits on it in the persons of his successors.”

Eulogius had been singing the praises of the Roman See and St. Gregory and St. Gregory affirms it all and adds the special participation of the other two Patriarchates sharing in it as I described above.

 

[Eaglejet23]

Oh okay, so Peter or at least his office and gifts sit in his successors. Thank you. I’ll have to continue to look more into Catholicism.