Why I Cannot in Good Conscience be a Roman Catholic: The Papal Dogmas

  • Thread starter Thread starter YHWH_Christ
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Y

YHWH_Christ

Guest
Hello. I invite all my RC brothers and sisters to listen to this lecture as to why Orthodox Christians, such as myself, cannot accept Papal Supremacy.

 
Last edited:
So you reject overwhelming evidence of papal supremacy from the earliest days of Christianity? Keep mind, this IS a Catholic site.
 
adamhovey1988 said:
So you reject overwhelming evidence of papal supremacy from the earliest days of Christianity? Keep mind, this IS a Catholic site.
Click to expand...
Um, yes, your faith tradition stands alone on that claim, nor does the Latin Western rite lay sole claim to the term catholic.
 
I forget, is it against the rules of the forum to proselytize for other religions? @camoderator?
 
Last edited:
Not proselytizing. I am giving you an explanation for why we reject your claims.
 
YHWH_Christ said:
If the evidence was so overwhelming I think I’d be an RC. Please watch the video and don’t give into cognitive dissonance, which I know hurts sometimes but it’s necessary if you want to know the truth. 🙂
Click to expand...
So… overwhelming evidence refuting overwhelming evidence, which leads to tail chasing.
 
YHWH_Christ said:
If the evidence was so overwhelming I think I’d be an RC. Please watch the video and don’t give into cognitive dissonance, which I know hurts sometimes but it’s necessary if you want to know the truth. 🙂
Click to expand...
:roll_eyes: I’m sorry, dear, but this is absolutely proselytizing.
 
I couldn’t listen to the whole lot but was he essentially saying that there is no legitimate place for the extraordinary magisterium with an authoritative head who has the final say over the universal Church? He said that the ordinary magisterium is what the Orthodox relate to Tradition in your church but I was wondering, how are doctrines made without an authoritative ‘stamp’ of divine ratification in that system?
 
As a practicing Catholic who accepts the dogmas of Vatican I on faith, I think it’s a stretch to say there’s “overwhelming” evidence of papal “supremacy” in the first millennium. At least not in a practical sense. The Pope did not routinely involve himself in Eastern matters… for example, Constantinople allowed for divorce and second marriage for centuries before the schism, a practice that remains a sticky point in our relations with the Orthodox to this day.

That said, there is plenty of evidence that the Bishop of Rome enjoyed a unique primacy, that was believed to be of divine institution, and that Rome acted as a court of final appeal.
 
Last edited:
So I gave it a listen. Lots of rambling in the hour long lecture but when he gives a pointed edge to his argument, in my humble opinion, its either something the Roman Catholic’s position has long had a sufficient response for, or its a misunderstanding on the speaker’s part of the Roman Catholic’s position.

Since you posted the video, the floor is yours. What is the most convincing point made in the link you provided in favor of Eastern Orthodoxy? We can start from there.
 
First of all, kudos to the moderators for allowing debate on a debate forum.

Being neither Catholic nor Eastern Orthodox I listened more out of intellectual curiosity as opposed to reconfirming my belief. What struck me was a justification based on relatively obscure discrepancies of recent Catholic councils vs an ecumenical council from the 6th Century. When Jesus says in John 7:17 “Whoever chooses to do his will shall know whether my teaching is from God or whether I speak on my own.”, His invitation is accessible to all to find out for oneself whether he/she is on the pathway of truth by sincerely doing God’s will. Thorough scrutinizing of ancient Council events is only accessible to an elite few. Are we really ultimately dependent on becoming history and language scholars to know whether we’re on God’s chosen path for us?
 
YHWH_Christ said:
I think I just did in the OP. 😉
Click to expand...
The linked source surmises the reason as the: extraordinary magisterium - not in tradition, sometime in union, sometimes, with the college of bishops, however that is not precisely what extraordinary magisterium means in the Catholic Church. As bishop Gasser related at Vatican I, in his relatio before the vote, the Pope does not speak independently:
“It is true that the consent of the present preaching of the whole Magisterium of the Church, united with its head, is the rule of faith even for pontifical definitions. But from that it can in no way be deduced that there is a strict and absolute necessity of seeking that consent from the rulers of the Churches or from the bishops. I say this because the consent is very frequently able to be deduced from the clear and manifest testimonies of Sacred Scripture, from the opinion of theologians and from other private means, all of which suffice for full informaton about the fact of the Church’s consent. Finally it must never be overlooked that there is present to the Pope the tradition of the Church of Rome, that is of the Church to which faithlessness has no access, and with which, because of its more powerful primacy, every Church must agree.”
Click to expand...
Bishop Gasser noted that Papal authority:
1. is not personal: not as the person, but as the role of Supreme Pontiff, not because of the authority of the Supreme Pontiff, but due to the assistance of the Holy Spirit when acting in that role as supreme judge in matters of faith and morals.
2. is not separate: not apart from, or opposed to, or set over against the entire Church, even though the promise of Christ of the aid of the Holy Spirit to the role of sucessor of Peter in matters of faith and morals is, in a sense , different than that of the indefectability and infallibility in truth promised to the entire Church.
3. is not absolute since absolute authority belongs to God alone and it is restricted by the subject: what must be accepted or rejected of faith or morals.
Click to expand...
See The Gift of Infallibility, Gasser, O’Connor, pages 44-50. This is the book on the relatio of Vatican I.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top