Orthodoxy, Petrine Doctrine

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jordan_Francis
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

Jordan_Francis

Guest
A few quick questions to those who know…

Do the Orthodox accept the apostolic primacy of Peter? Do they believe he had some form of leadership? Do they believe that being handed the keys to heaven were of any significance?

I already know that the Orthodox tend to think the “rock” of Matthew 16 is Peter confession.

Also, do they accept that the bishop of Rome is the successor of Peter, regardless of what role they think Peter had?

…just trying to understand the differences in approach to the Petrine question…

thanks!
 
What does primacy mean if there’s no power behind it?

That’s an honest question, not an attack against the Orthodox.
 
The nature of the Petrine Ministry has been at the heart of nine and a half centuries of broken communion between Roman Catholics and Orthodox. It’s not likely to get solved here.

This statement, quoted by an Assyrian clergyman that was part of the recent union of Mar Bawai and his faithful with the Chaldean Catholic church might give food for thought:

++++++++++++++++++
’
And here’s another regarding the Pope… “And as the patriarch has authority to do all he wishes in a fitting manner in such things as are beneath his authority, SO THE PATRIARCH OF ROME HAS AUTHORITY OVER ALL PATRIARCHS, like the blessed Peter over all the community, for he who is in Rome also keeps the office of Peter in all the church. He who transgresses against these things the ecumenical synod places under anathema.”
Now you may ask, “Who wrote this? Surely he was a Chaldean or some other Catholic!” No, my brothers and sisters. Long before there was a “Chaldean Church” there was Mar Odisho of Sauwa, the author of Marganitha. Those were his words from his Nomencanon. For him, there was the Church in the West and the Church in the East, divided by hostile kingdoms, united in belief, one apostolic catholic church. He was with us this Saturday, I’m sure.
 
bpbasilphx,

That’s very interesting. Do you happen to know when Mar Odisho lived?
 
Jordan_Francis said:
What does primacy mean if there’s no power behind it?

That’s an honest question, not an attack against the Orthodox.
Click to expand...
Being a leader in the Church is not about power, so right from the outset you are asking the wrong questions.

John
 
**bpbasilphx,

That’s very interesting. Do you happen to know when Mar Odisho lived?**

**No, Peter J, I sure don’t.

But if you were to ask HailMary or Chaldean Rite (both of whom post to the Eastern Catholic forum), perhaps they sould help.**
 
Prodromos,

Could you possibly explain then what “primacy” means in terms of its practicality?
 
Peter_J said:
That’s a good question, especially in regard to those Orthodox who speak “primacy of honor”.
Click to expand...
This is one of the things I believe the EO need to change before reunion with the Catholic Churches, and even the Oriental Orthodox Churches, can occur.

From what I’ve read from the EO, primates have no authority over bishops in his province, except for administrative formalities. This is in clear contradiction to the canons of the Ecumenical Councils which constantly speak of the jurisdiction and authority of primates (patriarchs and metropolitans) over other bishops in their particular provinces.

When the Ecumenical Patriarchate seeks to enforce his rightful patriarchal authority over his brother bishops, he is condemned for being too “papal.” In fact, the EP is only trying to recover what he possessed from the earliest centuries of the Church. He is trying to be patristic, and his detractors are the ones violating ancient canonical Tradition, replacing it with modern, democratic conceptions of hierarchcial ecclesiology.

Blessings,
Marduk
 
Jordan_Francis said:
Prodromos,

Could you possibly explain then what “primacy” means in terms of its practicality?
Click to expand...
I cannot speak for brother John, but when there was an Eastern Christianity forum, there were several EO who claimed that a “head bishop” is not even necessary for the governance of the Church (in dramatic violation of Apostolic Canon 34). PRACTICALLY speaking, primacy is of no value - according to those particular EO. Like I said, I do not know brother John’s own position, but I have met EO who have a more Traditional conception of Church hierarchy than those other EO that I mentioned earlier (interestingly, those EO that I mentioned were Protestant converts to EO’xy).

Blessings,
Marduk
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top