the role of papacy was not a factor in the split. this should tell you something. the role of the papacy has been further defined as it has always been understood. it has not changed. read Vatican I. and there you go again, as is typical with most Orthodox, you claim the pope “lords over the churches” this is so disengenious. the pope safeguards the truth and maintains unity as a shepard. until the Orthodox get past the vision of the pope as an evil dictator they will never truly understand the papacy because they are blinded by predudice and hatred.
many church Fathers attest to the role of the papacy and Rome throughout the church’s history.
how can someone (such as yourself) that denies that Peter (previously named Simon) is what Christ build His church upon
preach to me about church structure?
what do Orthodox teach about the name change anyway? Jesus just thought it sounded cooler?
i still don’t buy the unity in Orthodox churches. are they truly all in unity? you claim they’ve preserved the faith yet they don’t all agree in certain areas of theology. so, you all profess the creed. so what. so do Catholics. so do Anglicans and Lutherans. are you in communion with them? they don’t submit to the evil pope!
the RCC also forms in councils to address problems. unfortunately bishops from the eastern “Orthodox” were not there because they prefer schism. when was the last time the east held an ecumenical council?
the One, Holy Catholic and Apostolic church is the Roman Catholic church with the pope as it’s visible shepard/head and Christ as the foundation and the invisible head.
the Church has always been the Catholic Church which can be found in early church Father’s writings. the Roman Church was the supreme Church, the mother church. the “Orthodox” Church was a term not known and came about after the split from Rome.
The role of the Papacy has not evolved… just further defined… than you ask me to look at Vat I.
Vat I is the same council that declared the Pope infallible right? While at the same time you claim that this in not an evolutionary process.
It was the Catholic church that needed an infallible council to decide which of the 3 anti-popes it would elect as the true pope. The coucil specifically sites itself s being above all popes, therefore it had the capacity to declare the true pope.
When it suite the RCC the councils were infallible and not the Popes. They later decided that this infallible council which they needed to figure out who was the real deal, was actually not infallible. The would derail too much of the already faulty teachings.
I have reviewed the Vat I council meeting, peraps you shold acquaint yourself with the Orthodox response to Vat I. Also, see how many of the Cadinals and Bishops lamented over the declaraton over infallibility. Just because you have convinced yourself that there has been no evolution in th papacy does not make your statement true.
As far as the Pope lording over the church: it is the Pope that set itself up as a King.
Please tone down your rhetoric " blinded by predudice and hatred"
I have no such prejudice, and certainly do not harbor hatred for the Catholics. Simply because you are confronted with points that you are unfamiliar with, and the obvious sparking of untaimed emotion ithin you… does not give you the right to speculate and label me as a hate filled Christian.
As far as you not buying into the claims of Orthodox unity, you don’t need to: it is the Orthodox church that has to be concerned with that.
As far as your labeling as as the orthodox church, and post schism names of the church: you obviously either didn’t read my post, or preferred to pass over it without so much a comment, just an attempt to repeat yourself to soothe your emotions.
As far as ecumenical councils are concerned: please learn what they where and who called them.
The councils were empirical by nature… meaning that the church did not convoke them, it was the cival authorities.
The ecumenical councils did not hold authority over local councils and vice versa. You really have to do a bit more homework. But it s ntresting to see that this is a comment that is generated so often by catholics, without even understanding what the purpose of these councils was.
Needless to say we continue to hold councils in the East, just as we have been doing for 2000 years. The nature of these councils has never changed in the East. The west however believes that the Pope always had authority to over-rule these councils. It’s revisionism at it’s best.
