Petrine?

  • Thread starter Thread starter bmullins
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

bmullins

Guest
I have a very general idea about the difference but am new to the concept. Could someone give me a general laymans definition for each of the Petrine views?

High Petrine, Low Petrine and Absolutist?

Also are there others that are common in Orthodox and Catholic circles?

Which one does scripture seem to indicate?
 
Hi Bmullins,

The Absolutist Petrine view is a position that states the Pope is an absolute monarch who possesses absolute, ordinary, proper, unilateral and universal power throughout the whole Church. The Pope is not bound to other Bishops and can and does override their ordinary judgements. Infallibility derives from the Pope, as it is his own personal and unique gift. The view places the authority of the Pope above that of an Ecumenical Council. In this case, the head can function without the body. The proponents of this view are the Traditional Catholics and Ultramontanists.

The High Petrine view advocates that the Pope is head of the Episcopal College, the same way that St Peter was head of the Apostlic college. He enjoys certain prerogatives within the College and always acts with the body of Bishops and never without them. This position recognises the Episcopal Office as being equal to the Petrine office and is of Divine origin. This is the most faithful definition of the Petrine Office.

The Low view states that the Pope has no unique prerogatives within the college of Bishops outside of a primacy of honor which translates to “first amongst equals”. It basically states that the Body can act without the head. This position is held by the Eastern Orthodox Churches.
 
LumenGent said:
Hi Bmullins,

…

The High Petrine view advocates that the Pope is head of the Episcopal College, the same way that St Peter was head of the Apostlic college. He enjoys certain prerogatives within the College and always acts with the body of Bishops and never without them. This position recognises the Episcopal Office as being equal to the Petrine office and is of Divine origin. This is the most faithful definition of the Petrine Office.
…
Click to expand...
That is not the teaching of the Catholic Church - See the Catechism of the Catholic Church
834 Particular Churches are fully catholic through their communion with one of them, the Church of Rome "which presides in charity."315 "For with this church, by reason of its pre-eminence, the whole Church, that is the faithful everywhere, must necessarily be in accord."316 Indeed, "from the incarnate Word’s descent to us, all Christian churches everywhere have held and hold the great Church that is here [at Rome] to be their only basis and foundation since, according to the Savior’s promise, the gates of hell have never prevailed against her."317
835 "Let us be very careful not to conceive of the universal Church as the simple sum, or . . . the more or less anomalous federation of essentially different particular churches. In the mind of the Lord the Church is universal by vocation and mission, but when she put down her roots in a variety of cultural, social, and human terrains, she takes on different external expressions and appearances in each part of the world."318 The rich variety of ecclesiastical disciplines, liturgical rites, and theological and spiritual heritages proper to the local churches "unified in a common effort, shows all the more resplendently the catholicity of the undivided Church."319
Click to expand...
882 The Pope, Bishop of Rome and Peter’s successor, "is the perpetual and visible source and foundation of the unity both of the bishops and of the whole company of the faithful."402 "For the Roman Pontiff, by reason of his office as Vicar of Christ, and as pastor of the entire Church has full, supreme, and universal power over the whole Church, a power which he can always exercise unhindered."403
Click to expand...
For more see The Dogmatic Constitution of the Church Lumen Gentium] and The Decree on the Bishop’s Pastoral Office in the Church [Christus Dominus] from Vatican II.
 
LumenGent
A misrepresentation helps no one.

Any Catholic who does not assent to the doctrine taught by the Magisterium is in dissent.
The facts have already been given and here is the relevant dogma:

**Pastor Aeternus ** (Ecumenical Council Vatican I)
“Chapter 3.
On the power and character of the primacy of the Roman Pontiff
8. Since the Roman Pontiff, by the divine right of the apostolic primacy, governs the whole Church, we likewise teach and declare that he is the supreme judge of the faithful [52], and that in all cases which fall under ecclesiastical jurisdiction recourse may be had to his judgment [53]. The sentence of the Apostolic See (than which there is no higher authority) is not subject to revision by anyone, nor may anyone lawfully pass judgment thereupon [54]. And so they stray from the genuine path of truth who maintain that it is lawful to appeal from the judgments of the Roman pontiffs to an ecumenical council as if this were an authority superior to the Roman Pontiff.
  1. So, then, if anyone says that the Roman Pontiff has merely an office of supervision and guidance, and not the full and supreme power of jurisdiction over the whole Church, and this not only in matters of faith and morals, but also in those which concern the discipline and government of the Church dispersed throughout the whole world; or that he has only the principal part, but not the absolute fullness, of this supreme power; or that this power of his is not ordinary and immediate both over all and each of the Churches and over all and each of the pastors and faithful: let him be anathema.”
Ecumenical Council Vatican II teaches:
“But the college or body of bishops has no authority unless it is understood together with the Roman Pontiff, the successor of Peter as its head….The pope’s power of primacy over all, both pastors and faithful, remains whole and intact……The supreme power in the universal Church, which this college enjoys, is exercised in a solemn way in an ecumenical council. A council is never ecumenical unless it is confirmed or at least accepted as such by the successor of Peter; and it is prerogative of the Roman Pontiff to convoke these councils, to preside over them and to confirm them.(29*)” [Vatican II, *Dogmatic Constitution on the Church (Lumen Gentium) #22].
 
So if I am understanding those quotes, the Roman Catholic church holds the “High Petrine” view?
 
Bmullins #8
So if I am understanding those quotes, the Roman Catholic church holds the “High Petrine” view?
Click to expand...
No – you won’t find any one of those three “views” (assumptions) as such, in Catholic dogma or doctrine.

fisheaters.com/pastoraeternus.html
**The Dogmatic Constitution from Vatican I Pastor Aeternus Session 4 : 18 July 1870
Chapter 1
On the institution of the apostolic primacy in blessed Peter
  1. And it was to Peter alone that Jesus, after his resurrection, confided the jurisdiction of Supreme Pastor and ruler of his whole fold, saying: Feed my lambs, feed my sheep [44].
  2. To this absolutely manifest teaching of the Sacred Scriptures, as it has always been understood by the Catholic Church, are clearly opposed the distorted opinions of those who misrepresent the form of government which Christ the lord established in his Church and deny that Peter, in preference to the rest of the apostles, taken singly or collectively, was endowed by Christ with a true and proper primacy of jurisdiction.
  3. The same may be said of those who assert that this primacy was not conferred immediately and directly on blessed Peter himself, but rather on the Church, and that it was through the Church that it was transmitted to him in his capacity as her minister.
  4. Therefore, if anyone says that blessed Peter the apostle was not appointed by Christ the lord as prince of all the apostles and visible head of the whole Church militant; or that it was a primacy of honor only and not one of true and proper jurisdiction that he directly and immediately received from our lord Jesus Christ himself: let him be anathema.
 
Abu,

Thanks for the quotes, but I have read them and seen them many times. I have read every document on the matter issued by an EC. Pastor Aeternus has been debated back and forth time and time again, so has LG. I will not debate any of them, other than to say that the explanations and references provided in the threads I linked, clearly indicate that the high Petrine view is the aunthentic Petrine model. If you haven’t or didn’t read any of them, may I suggest that you do?, at least see what the Fathers of Vatican I had to say in the Official Relatio about the topic, and balance that with the Collegial emphasis that was taught in Vatican II.

FYI, the Pope is not worse off according to the High Petrine model anymore than humans are without wings. The mere fact of the matter, is that the Pope is not an absolute monarch, never was and never will be, regarrdless of how proponents of such a view go about structuring it. It just aint that way. Catholic history has proven that in the past and continues to do so today.

Just so you know, the Magesterium has never declared a doctrine the Absolutist view. Neither has it done the same with regards to the high view, however, tradition and history demonstrate that the high Petrine view is the authentic model.
So if I am understanding those quotes, the Roman Catholic church holds the “High Petrine” view?
Click to expand...
The Church has never and probably will never formally declare anything of this topic, however the Church is aware and can not contradict her tradition which as you suggest, speaks of the high Petrine view. Noice the theme of Pastor Aeternus which is centered upon St Peter being “Prince of the Apostles” which narurally translates also to “Head of the Apostles” from where we receive the “head of the college of Bishops”. That is exactly what the high Petrine view holds.
 
LumenGent
The High Petrine view advocates that the Pope is head of the Episcopal College, the same way that St Peter was head of the Apostlic college. He enjoys certain prerogatives within the College and always acts with the body of Bishops and never without them. This position recognises the Episcopal Office as being equal to the Petrine office and is of Divine origin. This is the most faithful definition of the Petrine Office.
Click to expand...
There are several errors here:
  1. There is no “view” (= opinion/position/a personal belief not founded on certainty), and no advocacy (= recommends/urges). The installation of Peter as Christ’s Supreme Vicar by Him is a dogma of Vatican I in Pastor Aeternus. A dogma must be believed with divine and Catholic faith.
  2. It is false to try to limit the Pope to one who “always acts with the body of Bishops and never without them” and to concoct the canard of “the Episcopal Office as being equal to the Petrine Office”.
  3. Thus this concocted “most faithful definition” is a construction outside of Christ’s Church that confuses the real dogma as defined by Vatican I.
These truths may be seen in Post #9 below, and which Vatican II in Lumen Gentium, 22, affirmed:
“But the college or body of bishops has no authority unless it is understood together with the Roman Pontiff, the successor of Peter as its head. The pope’s power of primacy over all, both pastors and faithful, remains whole and intact. In virtue of his office, that is as Vicar of Christ and pastor of the whole Church, the Roman Pontiff has full, supreme and universal power over the Church. And he is always free to exercise this power. The order of bishops, which succeeds to the college of apostles and gives this apostolic body continued existence, is also the subject of supreme and full power over the universal Church, provided we understand this body together with its head the Roman Pontiff and never without this head.(27*) This power can be exercised only with the consent of the Roman Pontiff.”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top