Anybody have any answers or sources to point me to? Thanks in advance.
SoM, the title “universal bishop” that Gregory rejected did not even refer to the Pope of Rome; it was in reference to the Bishop of Constantinople who was trying to adopt the title “Ecumenical Patriarch,” which is a title that he eventually did acquire (after the split from Rome) and one that he holds to this day. What this title (which was a political title given to him by the Empire) originally meant was that the Bishop of Constantinople would alone have the right to call Ecumenical Councils and the sole authority to ratify them. This made him “universal bishop” for the empire, and this is what St. Gregory and a great many Eastern bishops were objecting to at the time.
What the charge you cite has missed in this is that while Gregory recognized his own Roman primacy to have universal authority (universal authority which was legally recognized by the Empire through the Council of Chalcedon), he did not believe, as did the promoters of the Ecumenical Patriarch title, that this detracted from the local and regional authority of individual bishops or make them pawns of a higher, legal authority. This is not the true position of the Catholic Church today, or ever, for, unlike the original, medieval claim of the Ecumenical Patriarch title (a political title which was designed to centralize all Church authority in the imperial capital of Constantinople), Gregory and all other bishops of Rome did not see their universal authority in the sense of a “universal bishop,” but in the sense of a final court of appeal **if ** there was a crisis that could not be settled locally or regionally by the bishops involved. For example, writing to Bishop John of Syracuse (in Sicily - a Byzantine province at the time) and discussing the crisis connected to the Bishop of Constantinople’s claim of the Ecumenical Patriarch title, Pope Gregory clearly says:
So, despite claims to the contrary, Gregory clearly did not deny his own Roman primacy.
For Gregory, unity with the church of Rome was unity with the Catholic Church.
He is.
The pope does have immediate and universal jurisdiction and so this is a correct title for him, but not in the manner that Gregory was speaking against. He rightly saw the use of it by the patriarch of Constantinople as a denial of the authority of local bishops, making them mere figureheads under the See of Constantinople to the effect that other bishops would not be seen as successors of the Apostles and would not have authority in their own right within their own dioceses.
The dangers of the web! Where are you getting all of this, um, “stuff”? Even if he said these words, in what context were they spoken? The evil one uses words, even inspired words, out of context in order to tempt. He tried and failed with Jesus. He tries and succeeds with man.
Not sure what the rule is about this, but it is a website called Contender Ministries. I know that people can use scripture for anything. But I want to always be ready and able to give a defense, so when someone makes a point I haven’t considered before, this site is where I turn to get my Catholic Answers.
Okay, so it is okay to acknowledge that the Pope is a universal bishop, and may exercise legitimate Petrine authority in any jurisdiction alongside the ordinary of that particular jurisdiction, as long as we don’t carry that to the extent that all other bishops derive their authority from and through the Pope? What is the practical difference?He is.
Correct; their authority is derived directly from their succession by the laying-on of hands. One of the practical differences can be seen when looking at such “recent” teachings from the See of Rome regarding artificicial contraception, in-vitro fertilization, and the male-only priesthood. Local bishops on their own authority did then and do now teach the Catholic Faith on these issues, but when the Bishop of Rome speaks, knowing that he is the universal shepherd there can be no doubt among the faithful as to the universal teaching on these matters - they can’t put it down to their local bishop being out of the mainstream of cultural mores.
For the most part, I simply ignore such websites, which are “usually” well-meaning, but always afflicted with some degree of ignorance of history. Since the Lutheran rebellion, it has become necessary for those outside of the Catholic Church to justify their existence. This need has been filled with all manner of “evidence” and personal opinions, ranging from good-hearted to the vile and venomous. As you can see, Pope Saint Gregory’s quote was taken out of context. This can occur either of two ways: ignorance of malice. As FCEGM has pointed out, this statement was addressed to a particular problem that we all thought was long past.Not sure what the rule is about this, but it is a website called Contender Ministries. I know that people can use scripture for anything. But I want to always be ready and able to give a defense, so when someone makes a point I haven’t considered before, this site is where I turn to get my Catholic Answers.
CentralFLJames likes to call it the “Protestant Uprising.”
I guess my question was, what is the practical difference between the sort of authority Patriarchate of Constantinople wanted, and the authority the Papacy of Rome has?
Reformation, or deformation?CentralFLJames likes to call it the “Protestant Uprising.”
We can see it practically in that bishops are free to teach the Faith, ordain priests and deacons for their own dioceses; these men act as the local voice of their bishops in teaching and in conferring the Sacraments to lead the members of the Church to sanctity. To be “sole bishop” (John the Faster’s intent) would negate this authority and aggregate to himself alone the authority to teach the Faith and ordain priests for the sacramental life of the Church, and be the lone voice in the daily jurisdiction of each and every diocese.
Why are you giving credence to all of these ridiculous and outlandish claims? I would take the stance that it is up to them to provide primary sources and prove their contentions to me!
Well, I admit that I don’t know much about the Councils at all beyond some basic information like the Council of Nicea producing the Nicene Creed. It was just posted on a website (i.e., not directed at me personally), and I didn’t know the place to go look for the Catholic Answer to such a charge, so I posted it here and asked you guys.
I will try to answer this question with St. Gregory’s own words:
The non-Catholic sources that cite all of these “proofs” either: