Peter, RCC...

[graceandpeace]

...yea, I want to revisit this. How do the Orthodox interpret these quotes?

.
Arabic Canons of the Council of Nicaea (325 A.D.)
“[CANON XXXIX] Of the care and power which a Patriarch has over the bishops and archbishops of his patriarchate; and of the primacy of the Bishop of Rome over all.
Let the patriarch consider what things are done by the archbishops and bishops in their provinces; and if he shall find anything done by them otherwise than it should be, let him change it, and order it, as seemeth him fit; for he is the father of all, and they are his sons. And although the archbishop be among the Bishop as an elder brother, who hath the care of his brethren, and to whom they owe obedience because he is over them; yet the patriarch is to all those who are under his power, just as he who holds the seat of Rome, is the head and prince of all patriarchs; inasmuch as he is first, as was Peter, to whom power is given over all Christian princes, and over all their peoples, as he who is the Vicar of Christ our Lord over all people and over the whole Christian Church, and whoever shall contradict this, is excommunicated by the Synod.”

Other quotes I've seen talk about primacy of Peter & his chair being part of unity & the like, but nothing suggesting Rome has universal jurisdiction. But the above quote does seem to challenge the Orthodox view some. Help would be appreciated

 

[buzuxi02]

There frauds. As I've written through the years there are only 20 Nicene canons. The word patriarchate was not even in use in the 4th century. That term was coined after 500 AD.

Now you know why we cant stand Rome with her lies and forgeries.

 

[Lukaris]

These are not authentic canons; there were only 20 in Nicaea in 325.


All Holy Spirit Greek Orthodox Church | EXCURSUS ON THE NUMBER OF THE NICENE CANONS -- THE CAPTIONS OF THE ARABIC CANONS ATTRIBUTED TO THE COUNCIL OF NICE

 

[graceandpeace]

Ok, I didn't know, thanks for the help!

 

[Tallguy88]

Where did you find these "canons"?

 

[truefiction1]

As I've been taught, the Church of the earliest centuries always considered itself to be a sisterhood of local Churches. There were five major centers, or patriarchates (sisterhoods). There was an order defined in the ecumenical councils concerning where each of these patriarchal Churches ranked in terms of honor (prestige). But there is a distinct difference between the early Church's conception of itself and the absolutist monarchy that we see in the Roman Catholic Church today. This latter conception developed slowly over the course of many centuries and appeared in full strength only much later than the council of Nicea (sometime after the ninth century).

So, it only makes sense that the referenced Canon is a fraud. It's a shame, I feel, what lengths we will go to in order to try to get others to agree with us.

 

[Lukaris]

Where did you find these "canons"?

See the link I pasted above. The Vatican did NOT concoct these,;these seem to be various rules of some sort that were collected & attributed (by some opportunists?) to Nicaea 325 for clout & later obtained by Rome. Apparently there were opportunists everywhere seeking to exploit these for some reason or another.


I had a typo earlier that said the Vatican concocted these; they DID NOT. I am sorry for my unintended error.

 

[prodromos]

Did these 'canons' appear around the same time as the "Donation of Constantine"?

This is perhaps the most famous forgery in history. For centuries, until Lorenzo Valla proved it was forgery during the Renaissance it provied the basis for papal territorial and jurisdictional claims in Italy. Probably at least a first draft of it was made shortly after the middle of the eighth century in order to assist Pope Stephen II in his negotiations with the Frankish Mayor of the Palace, Pepin the Short.​

Internet History Sourcebooks Project

 

[Euthymios]

Yes, there are only 20 Nicene canons. And St. Peter's primacy (among equals) does not equate to the Vatican 1 understanding of papal primacy. Read, "Papalism," by Denny. He refutes the claims made at Vatican 1.

 

[ArmyMatt]

And St. Peter's primacy (among equals) does not equate to the Vatican 1 understanding of papal primacy.

yep, it has more to do with Rome as the capital of the empire than some kinda special grace and authoritative headship unique to that See.