You see, you haven’t even bothered contesting the actual quote I posted (with context), and already you’re rejecting it out of hand, and by the way the quote does state that the pope “holds his place”, perhaps you conveniently forgot to read that part which states he is forever Peter’s successor. Moreover, my quote wasn’t meant to justify universal infallibility, but the unique place which Peter and his successor, the Pope (Bishop of Rome) holds in the Church, i.e., he represents the HEAD (of the earthly Church).
Your quotes themselves are not so much the problem, but rather your interpretation. For one thing, a Papal legate is meant to represent his boss and hence his boss’s position. If he didn’t speak of his boss in glowing terms and advance the Roman position,
he wouldn’t be doing his job. Also, nobody denies that St. Peter had this special role, but as far as “standing in his place”, even later Roman Popes from centuries after the quote you gave said that the See of St. Peter is in three places as one (see: Roman Pope Gregory, Letter to Eulogius, 6th century), referring to the fact that not just Rome but also Antioch and Alexandria (via St. Mark, who was taught by St. Peter) are also “Petrine Sees”. The error of modern Rome is in claiming that heir Pope is Peter’s unique and
exclusive successor because that fits with their modern and wrong ecclesiology that is meant to give seemingly apostolic precedence to the idea that their Pope has immediate and universal jurisdiction over all Christians via the special role of St. Peter (even though nobody outside of Rome recognizes or ever has recognized that as even
Peter’s right, much less the right of those you claim follow him to this day at Rome). .
No, Rawb is right: You see “Peter” and you think “Roman Pope” because that is the association you have been conditioned to make, in the same way that when I think of Peter’s successor in our times I think of HH Moran Mor Ignatius Zakka I Iwas, the Syriac Orthodox Patriarch of Antioch, and I’m sure EO think of HH Patriarch John X (Yazigi). But I think it would be wrong of any of us to say therefore that anything that is written championing the role of St. Peter among the apostles is therefore ‘transferable’ (for lack of a better way to put it) to his modern successors, as though nearly genetically passed down in the way that many RC defenders seem to think. Yes, HH Moran Mor Ignatius Zakka I Iwas
is St. Peter’s true successor and the earthly overseer of all who hold the Orthodox faith in the Syro-Antiochian tradition, but even as I believe that I recognize that we in the Coptic Orthodox are not referring to
him when we pray the fraction prayer of the Apostles Fast and Feast, which talks of the powers and glory given to St. Peter and St. Paul in carrying out their preaching, miracles, and martyrdom by the power of the Holy Spirit. To believe so would be unacceptably anachronistic. You do not assume what was given to others even if you function in the role that they once did, else there would be no need to remain vigilant that all leaders would keep the faith whole and unchanged (which I guess is the position of the modern RCC anyway, since your Pope is protected from all errors in faith according to your doctrine, but for the rest of us, keeping the faith is a more dynamic process). It would already be “in the bag”, so to speak, as our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ gave this or that to Peter and hence Francis (e.g., the
metaphorical keys, which were likewise given to all the apostles only a little while afterwards…
cough), and also said that the gates of hell would not prevail against the Church.
So that’s it. I guess we can all go home.
Nah…just kidding. We’re also told to work out our salvation with fear and trembling. I should hope that applies to Roman Popes just as much as to the rest of us. But honestly it is hard to take RCC claims seriously, as so much depends on particular interpretations not shared by any other church that you guys just say are shared by everybody. And the leap from “St. Peter” to “Pope Francis” is a huge one, not only chronologically, but we would say also in terms of faith. Of course you don’t agree any more than we agree with you, but still…it is one thing to honestly disagree, and another to be told by people who don’t even share your faith what it is your fathers must’ve believed based on the RC reading of this or that quote.
That, my friends, is cherry picking of the worst kind (what I have sometimes jokingly referred to as the “my quotes, let me show you them” method…Zzzzzz).
