H
- Status
P
Pravoslavac
Guest
WOW…of the Pentarchy, only Rome wound up in schism.
Again, I don’t know why you mentioned Mormon, JW and Islam topics.
G
Gamera
Guest
Hmmm. One can only speculate that it’s a set-up — that these people are anti-Catholics pretending to be Catholics. Certainly no Catholic would worship the pope – that would be a grave sin. And I doubt any Catholic in the history of the world has called a pope “invincible.” That title is reserved for Tony Stark / Iron Man. Yeah, definitely sounds like these “friends” aren’t Catholics at all.
H
Hellisreal
Guest
Post that one on this side of the forums in a thread and see how long you will last.
S
Semper_Fi_1
Guest
They refer to magistrates as “My Lord” and “Your Worship” in writing. Guess all the Protestant Britains are heretics and blasphemers afterall.
S
Semper_Fi_1
Guest
Just as “His Most Divine All Holiness The Ecumenical Patriarch”. Who gave the Patriarch of Constantinople the title “Ecumenical” or “Most Divine All-Holy” if not himself?WOW…you never her the title VICAR OF CHRIST ON EARTH???
It’s up there with Supreme Pontiff…Pontifex Maximus
All titles given to the popes by the popes…all man created titles.
BTW the Councils do refer to the Pope as the Supreme Pontiff and as Pontifex Maximus, therefore it’s approved in both Churches.
P
Pravoslavac
Guest
Ummmm… there is a huge difference between VICAR OF CHRIST ON EARTH and the use of MOST DIVINE ALL HOLY…use of latter that is like saying YOUR EMINENCE, etc.Just as “His Most Divine All Holiness The Ecumenical Patriarch”. Who gave the Patriarch of Constantinople the title “Ecumenical” or “Most Divine All-Holy” if not himself?
BTW the Councils do refer to the Pope as the Supreme Pontiff and as Pontifex Maximus, therefore it’s approved in both Churches.
ECUMENICAL is his title because he’s the first among equals. With Rome in schism, he is now the next in line of the original Pentarchy.
Regarding “approved by both Churches”…which other Church? Surely you can’t speak of the Eastern Orthodox as they believe the pope is nothing more than a bishop, the Patriarch of Rome. The titles of Supreme Pontiff, Vicar of Christ, etc were creation by Rome and her popes.
P
Pravoslavac
Guest
UMMM…I just did.
Besides nothing I said is false…isn’t Rome the only one of the Pentarchy out of communion from the other Patriarchates? Due to it’s theological errs and continuous changes. I mean we’re still trying to decide which mass we should use right?
These reforms do not exist in the ancient EO. We have remained steadfast since the beginning of the Church.
M
mlchance
Guest
Only if you don’t count such serious distortions as the Inconoclast Controversy, centuries of caeseropapism (including in the 20th century active cooperation by the Russian Orthodox hierarchy with the likes of the KGB), et cetera.
– Mark L. Chance.
P
Pravoslavac
Guest
You should be careful with where you take this… Cardinal Stepinac had backed the Nazi regime during WWII and was behind forced conversions of Serbian Orthodox and exuded intolerance to Eastern Orthodox and Jews in the region.Only if you don’t count such serious distortions as the Inconoclast Controversy, centuries of caeseropapism (including in the 20th century active cooperation by the Russian Orthodox hierarchy with the likes of the KGB), et cetera.
– Mark L. Chance.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aloysius_Stepinac
Besides, the Church of Russia in the US (ROCOR) had broken ties with the Moscow Patriarchate because it believed the MP was tainted by government influence. The same occured with the Serbian Orthodox Church in the US. They too had brokend ties.
However since the fall of Communism, all breaks have been healed and they are all one with each other.
T
Teflon93
Guest
It surely is—by those who read Peter’s faith into it.Tim, the quote says it all…Christ said YOU ARE PETER (KEPHA) AND ON THIS ROCK I (notice he says I not you) WILL BUILD MY CHURCH…He does not say on this rock you will build my church. The reference is that Christ said upon Peter’s Faith, His Church will be built.
That quote is the most taken out of context quote…
The whole point of the passage was that God revealed to Peter who Christ was. Christ and the apostles were staring at a big rock at the time, and Christ indicated that as God had founded Israel on Abraham, and as buildings which stand the test of time are founded upon rock, so too would that Church be founded upon Peter.
It is not incidental that in so stating Christ changed Simon to Peter (Rock).
The fact that people came along 1,000 to 1,500 years later who wanted to be Pope in their own right and so needed to get around the fact that they lacked authority to be so invented the notion hitherto unseen that it was Peter’s faith that was the rock, not Peter.
But there is nothing so common in Protestantism as anachronistic readings of Scripture. Televangelists wouldn’t bring in a buck without 'em.
As to why our Orthodox brethren would persist in undermining the Church we shared for a millennium, perhaps the pride for which the patriarchs are famous might play a role?
P
Pier
Guest
Maybe you heard wrong… or in this case, herd wrong (pardon the pun 
)
We know the Pope is not God - but that he is the appointed head shepherd of the Church Christ founded on earth. And the site where Peter was killed (& his bones were found,) is where the Church was built, as Jesus said it would be.
)We know the Pope is not God - but that he is the appointed head shepherd of the Church Christ founded on earth. And the site where Peter was killed (& his bones were found,) is where the Church was built, as Jesus said it would be.
M
mlchance
Guest
This sins of Catholics do not negate the fact that this statement is, at best, hyperbole:
Or is it seriously your contention that all sins of my Orthodox brethren are excusable while the same courtesy isn’t to be extended to others?
And, to stay on-topic, yes, the Pope isn’t God. Duh.
– Mark L. Chance.
P
Pixie_Dust
Guest
If you are the unchanged, true ancient Church why do you deny the primacy of Peter?
My point in asking about the Trinity was because it seemed that you were denying the Papacy because the word itself isn’t found in Scripture, in which case we would have to throw out the word Trinity as well. But, if I recall correctly, Eastern Orthodox also do not hold to Sola Scriptura so I’m wondering now why you would need the word Papacy in the Bible.
T
Teflon93
Guest
While it is certainly remarkable (and virtually a miracle) that our Orthodox brethren have remained as true as they have to the faith despite the immense pressure brought upon them by secular authorities, we should not go so far as to say accommodation has not occurred at the expense of faith throughout the past millennium. Some 20 million Russians died to preserve their faith in the wake of unrelenting Communist efforts to warp it completely or stamp it out altogether. To maintain that it emerged unscathed is to at some level deny the need for their sacrifice. After all, could they not simply have collaborated as so many others did and arrive at the same place?
The Orthodox have been very faithful, but their faith has changed—how could it not? They were not hermetically sealed off from history or sin. No institution is. They have worked diligently to heal what schisms within have arisen and to restore that which was taken away from time to time. There is no need to go to extremes in their defense; the blood of their martyrs down through the ages speaks for itself.
There is likewise no need to rewrite history or Scripture on their behalf nor to demean Peter in the supposed favor of other apostles. The Orthodox faith is not (it seems to me) dependent upon preserving one interpretation of history at all costs, as other faiths are.
The Orthodox have been very faithful, but their faith has changed—how could it not? They were not hermetically sealed off from history or sin. No institution is. They have worked diligently to heal what schisms within have arisen and to restore that which was taken away from time to time. There is no need to go to extremes in their defense; the blood of their martyrs down through the ages speaks for itself.
There is likewise no need to rewrite history or Scripture on their behalf nor to demean Peter in the supposed favor of other apostles. The Orthodox faith is not (it seems to me) dependent upon preserving one interpretation of history at all costs, as other faiths are.
J
JFonseka
Guest
You should treat the Pope the same as you would St. Peter, the very man that was living with Christ and knew him for many years. The Pope is the true successor of St. Peter, many denominations will come and go and there will be scattering of the Christian faith, but the pope symbolizes a lot for us Catholics, we look upto him and the college of cardinals on issues regarding morality and faith in this ever changing world that lives to contradict and sin.haha djgang, why’d you say forget it?
And to Tim, just because Peter is (supposedly) “the rock”, does not mean that he is Christ on earth, nor does it mean that the Pope is Christ on earth! And I believe it was the current pope himself that called himself christ on earth?!! That just sounds nutty to me.
No catholic thinks Pope is God, though some of us do get a little over enthusiastic about the Pope
but rightly so, he is a well learned man, wish I could meet him. To the enthusiastic Catholics, the Pope is like a rockstar, (just an analogy hehe)
H
Holly3278
Guest
Ummm nobody ever said that the Pope was God. Where you get that idea from I’d love to know. The Pope is simply the leader of the Church on earth!
M
Mannyfit75
Guest
He is rightly called, Servant of the Servants of God.
H
Hellisreal
Guest
S
Semper_Fi_1
Guest
If that’s true then the East was in schism a lot sooner than 1054, because the Patriarch appointed the title of himself, therefore provoking the West while in communion with her.
The title Pontifex Maximus has been in use by the Patriarch of Rome since before east & west were two separate churches. The councils (#1 - 7) which you accept, refer to His Holiness as Supreme Pontiff. Pope Leo the Great assumed the title Pontifex Maximus and by the time Pope Gregory I was appointed in the 6th century it was a regular title of the Roman Pope.
- Status