The Pope as ground of Church unity

  • Thread starter Thread starter Expatreprocedit
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Per_Crucem said:
How are we defining successor? If it is anyone who succeeds him in his diocese, wouldn’t that be his successor? I mean, where in Matthew 16 does Jesus lay out which apostolic throne is going to be the one that has all these papal powers?
Click to expand...
Successor in the sense that the new Bishop will serve the role St Peter did.
 
Per_Crucem said:
Who determined this to be the criteria?
Click to expand...
In one word, God, i.e., God sent St. Peter to Rome to establish a successive office in perpetuity which would entail primacy. Moreover, the link between Rome, Peter and the primacy has always been a part of Church Tradition, in fact, the ecumenical council of Ephesus spoke of this link in such absolute terms that there is no wiggle room to oppose or deny the claims made by Philip, the legate of the Apostolic See in the presence of hundreds of bishops:
Philip, presbyter and legate of the Apostolic See said: We offer our thanks to the holy and venerable Synod, that when the writings of our holy and blessed pope had been read to you, the holy members by our [or your] holy voices,(1) ye joined yourselves to the holy head also by your holy acclamations. For your blessedness is not ignorant that the head of the whole faith, the head of the Apostles, is blessed Peter the Apostle. And since now our mediocrity, after having been tempest-tossed and much vexed, has arrived, we ask that ye give order that there be laid before us what things were done in this holy Synod before our arrival; in order that according to the opinion of our blessed pope and of this present holy assembly, we likewise may ratify their determination.
Click to expand...
Philip the presbyter and legate of the Apostolic See said: There is no doubt, and in fact it has been known in all ages, that the holy and most blessed Peter, prince ( exarkos ) and head of the Apostles, pillar of the faith, and foundation ( qemelios ) of the Catholic Church, received the keys of the kingdom from our Lord Jesus Christ, the Saviour and Redeemer of the human race, and that to him was given the power of loosing and binding sins: who down even to to-day and forever both lives and judges in his successors. The holy and most blessed pope Coelestine, according to due order, is his successor and holds his place, and us he sent to supply his place m this holy synod, which the most humane and Christian Emperors have commanded to assemble, bearing in mind and continually watching over the Catholic faith. For they both have kept and are now keeping intact the apostolic doctrine handed down to them from their most pious and humane grandfathers and fathers of holy memory down to the present time, etc.
Click to expand...
fordham.edu/halsall/basis/ephesus.asp
 
Denise1957 said:
St. Evodius was supposedly ordained by St. Peter, and St. Evodius was the first Bishop of Antioch, presumably one of the seventy who were originally ordained. St. Evodius was a bishop, not a Pope.
Click to expand...
Your most sweet Holiness 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… Wherefore though there are many apostles, yet with regard to the principality itself the See of the Prince of the apostles alone has grown strong in authority, which in three places is the See of one… He himself stablished the See in which, though he was to leave it, he sat for seven years. 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.

“To Eulogius, Bishop of Alexandria,” Pope St. Gregory, Book VII, Epistle XL
 
Per_Crucem said:
Where did God say this?
Click to expand...
I never said He said it, i.e., you’re previous question asked “who” made it so, and I responded with God. And I think you missed a huge portion of my post delineating how sacred Tradition linked the primacy to Peter in Rome since the very beginning by quoting the council of Ephesus in 463 AD as evidence.
 
Per Crucem,

Are you trying to argue that Pope St. Gregory the Great didn’t believe that one of his prerogatives, as the Bishop of Rome, didn’t include universal jurisdiction in the Catholic Church?
 
Per_Crucem said:
Your most sweet Holiness 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… Wherefore though there are many apostles, yet with regard to the principality itself the See of the Prince of the apostles alone has grown strong in authority, which in three places is the See of one… He himself stablished the See in which, though he was to leave it, he sat for seven years. 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.

“To Eulogius, Bishop of Alexandria,” Pope St. Gregory, Book VII, Epistle XL
Click to expand...
Here’s the entire letter:

newadvent.org/fathers/360207040.htm

Notice that The Pope has addressed Eulogius as “Bishop.”
 
Per_Crucem said:
Your most sweet Holiness 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… Wherefore though there are many apostles, yet with regard to the principality itself the See of the Prince of the apostles alone has grown strong in authority, which in three places is the See of one… He himself stablished the See in which, though he was to leave it, he sat for seven years. 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.

“To Eulogius, Bishop of Alexandria,” Pope St. Gregory, Book VII, Epistle XL
Click to expand...
Oh how convenient that you forget to mention that Gregory’s threefold primacy, he still Gregory of Rome as the one with the special charism of governing the church of God. Further Gregory himself was a HUGE proponent of papal claims and especially universal jurisdiction 🙂

And if you have as much credibility as I give you, I trust you won’t try use the “universal bishop” controversy involving Ecumenical Patriarch John and Pope Gregory as in that very instance Gregory claims authority over Constantinople. That controversy is not even concerning what we understand today as “universal jurisdiction” but something entirely different.
 
Per_Crucem said:
Your most sweet Holiness 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… Wherefore though there are many apostles, yet with regard to the principality itself the See of the Prince of the apostles alone has grown strong in authority, which in three places is the See of one… He himself stablished the See in which, though he was to leave it, he sat for seven years. 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.

“To Eulogius, Bishop of Alexandria,” Pope St. Gregory, Book VII, Epistle XL
Click to expand...
Rome, Alexandria and Antioch were/are Petrine sees, but there can only be one Petrine office as there was only one Peter to which to succeed from, i.e., the primacy could only belong to one person.
 
According to the Byzantine scholar, the later Father Dvornik, Rome had always preferred the Apostolic view, as opposed to the East who generally preferred or worked off of the premise that that the prestige of a See was due to its place in the Empire. Rome had preferred the older Nicene ranking of the Patriarchates Rome, Alexandria, Antioch to the raising of Constantinople which took a while for Rome to recognize. Rome had to warm up to the idea of the Pentarchy, which was so treasured in the East. This is all you re seeing in Pope St. Gregory’s letter along with his humility. He is cited in Vatican I’s “Pastor Aeternus” in order to quell the complaint of some that the definition given would essentially make all Bishops the Popes suffragens (sp?); this is to misunderstand the Primacy.

I learned a lot from Fr. Dvornik’s Byzantium and the Roman Primacy as well as the Photian Schism: History and Legend, the latter being quite a task to read though.
 
josie_L said:
Rome, Alexandria and Antioch were/are Petrine sees, but there can only be one Petrine office as there was only one Peter to which to succeed from, i.e., the primacy could only belong to one person.
Click to expand...
Hi Josie: I agree with you . I would like to add this Peter’s first see would I think be Jerusalem, then after having to leave went to Antioch where he stayed till the Council of Jerusalem. Peter then went to Rome where he set up residence and lived till he was martyred. Tradition has it that Peter sent John Mark to Alexandria, but so far as I know of early Church history peter did not live in Alexandria so it was not a Petrine see in that sense but a see he started by sending John Mark who wrote his Gospel according to what peter preached and taught. It was only when Peter was to be martyred that he passed the keys given to him by Christ to Linus, who in turn gave them to Clement and so on and so forth. This is my understanding.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top