The supremacy of the popes (of Rome).

[WilliamC]

We are off topic, in a little side-issue that you brought up as a part of the "master critique" of the papacy, "pope" apparently being a word too far (like a bridge too far) for your theology to cope. So I do not especially mind the diversion, for a little while. I am, I confess, a little surprised about how few passages relating to fatherhood your posts use. And even more surprised at how scant the exegetical information in your posts is.

I'm not here for a measuring contest between big I's and little U's. Go ahead, shock and awe everyone with your judgmental sharp tones and display of superiority. A legend in your own mind. Not interested in doing exegetical comparisons. Done four years of it at University. Not much interested in extra biblical fodder with all its antedating, forgeries, etc. I have come to realize that only the Scriptures are what we can count on. Oh, occasionally i may respond to other sources ,but typically to show their shortcomings. I will use the Scriptures every time to show the falsehoods against them.
Its nice to be reminded that I have indeed come a long way from my previous complexes, but who doesn't like to sling a little mud once and a while. I thank you for that. Blessings

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

We are off topic, in a little side-issue that you brought up as a part of the "master critique" of the papacy, "pope" apparently being a word too far (like a bridge too far) for your theology to cope. So I do not especially mind the diversion, for a little while. I am, I confess, a little surprised about how few passages relating to fatherhood your posts use. And even more surprised at how scant the exegetical information in your posts is.

I'm not here for a measuring contest between big I's and little U's. Go ahead, shock and awe everyone with your judgmental sharp tones and display of superiority. A legend in your own mind. Not interested in doing exegetical comparisons. Done four years of it at University. Not much interested in extra biblical fodder with all its antedating, forgeries, etc. I have come to realize that only the Scriptures are what we can count on. Oh, occasionally i may respond to other sources ,but typically to show their shortcomings. I will use the Scriptures every time to show the falsehoods against them.
Its nice to be reminded that I have indeed come a long way from my previous complexes, but who doesn't like to sling a little mud once and a while. I thank you for that. Blessings

So, what has upset you so much in my post, which is both polite and forthright. I am surprised at how few passages you have cited or quoted to forbid the use of "father" for any human being. In fact, you used only one. And your posts gave it no exegesis.

Your posts contain no analysis of what Christ said in the passage, nor any indication of what Christ taught in it, except to claim that it forbids the use of the word "father" for any man. Yet we all use "father" of our natural fathers, and saint Paul speaks of himself as father, the spiritual begetter of his spiritual children, specifically the Christians in Corinth. And Saint John speaks of those to whom he writes as "little children" and of himself, by implication, as their father, and who can deny that he was in truth their spiritual father having been their bishop and apostles for many decades. And he writes to the "fathers" among his readers without blushing at the use of the word "fathers", why? because he did not understand the Lord Jesus to have forbidden the word "father" for the elders among the people of God. And elders, that is presbyters, are none other than those who Catholic call father.

And as for the pope, a word meaning father, he is in truth the spiritual father of the whole Church, as Christ himself indicated in John 21:15-19. All of the above I have said in my posts before, and it is testified to in many commentaries and in the writings of the early Church Fathers, and in holy tradition.

So, what is upsetting about me saying that?

 

[WilliamC]

So, what has upset you so much in my post, which is both polite and forthright. I am surprised at how few passages you have cited or quoted to forbid the use of "father" for any human being. In fact, you used only one. And your posts gave it no exegesis.

Your posts contain no analysis of what Christ said in the passage, nor any indication of what Christ taught in it, except to claim that it forbids the use of the word "father" for any man. Yet we all use "father" of our natural fathers, and saint Paul speaks of himself as father, the spiritual begetter of his spiritual children, specifically the Christians in Corinth. And Saint John speaks of those to whom he writes as "little children" and of himself, by implication, as their father, and who can deny that he was in truth their spiritual father having been their bishop and apostles for many decades. And he writes to the "fathers" among his readers without blushing at the use of the word "fathers", why? because he did not understand the Lord Jesus to have forbidden the word "father" for the elders among the people of God. And elders, that is presbyters, are none other than those who Catholic call father.

And as for the pope, a word meaning father, he is in truth the spiritual father of the whole Church, as Christ himself indicated in John 21:15-19. All of the above I have said in my posts before, and it is testified to in many commentaries and in the writings of the early Church Fathers, and in holy tradition.

So, what is upsetting about me saying that?

I would rather put stock in one passage spoken by our Lord, than 100,000 pages of commentaries, the tainted ECFs and especially tradition.
Oh, and your passage John21:15-19 says nothing by Christ to the effect that Peter was to be a spiritual father of the whole Church. To stretch Feed my Lambs into something it does not say...is to add to the Scriptures. All His followers are commissioned to teach (feed).
That is indeed upsetting. Sorry, but we may have to agree to disagree. Blessings.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

We can return to the thread's topic now that the excursion into "father" is finished.

 

[Dan Perez]

We are off topic, in a little side-issue that you brought up as a part of the "master critique" of the papacy, "pope" apparently being a word too far (like a bridge too far) for your theology to cope. So I do not especially mind the diversion, for a little while. I am, I confess, a little surprised about how few passages relating to fatherhood your posts use. And even more surprised at how scant the exegetical information in your posts is.

It could be because there is not a Greek word for POPE ?

dan p

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

It could be because there is not a Greek word for POPE ?

dan p

πατήρ

 

[prodromos]

πατήρ

That is "father".

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

That is "father".

The term “pope” originates from the Latin word “papa”, which itself is derived from the Ancient Greek word “πάππας” (pronounced as “páppas”). In its essence, “pope” signifies “father”. Historically, this title was applied to all bishops and senior clergy, especially in the East. However, in the Western context, it became reserved for the bishop of Rome. The pope serves as the head of the worldwide Catholic Church, and since the eighth century, has also held the position of the head of state or sovereign of the Papal States and later the Vatican City State 1,2,3.
In summary, the pope is the Bishop of Rome, based in the Vatican City, and holds a significant role as the spiritual leader of the Roman Catholic Church. The adjective associated with the pope is "papal" 2.

1en.wikipedia.org, 2bbc.co.uk, 3britannica.com

 

[prodromos]

Any Divine Liturgy where the bishop is present, takes the form known as "papadiko"

 

[FenderTL5]

the pope is the Bishop of Rome, based in the Vatican City, and holds a significant role as the spiritual leader of the Roman Catholic Church.

1en.wikipedia.org, 2bbc.co.uk, 3britannica.com

This much is true.
The Bishop of Rome is the head of the Patrichate in Rome and leader of the Latin Church. Most, perhaps not all, would agree with that.

Suggesting it goes further is where you run afoul with history, Ecclesiology and into objection(s).

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

Suggesting it goes further is where you run afoul with history, Ecclesiology and into objection(s).

Agreed, from some. Not from within the hierarchy of the Catholic Church. And since my comments are from the perspective of the hierarchy of the Catholic Church and myself, that is sufficient. What others think, say, or do is not of concern to me in this discussion.

 

[Dan Perez]

That is good, then you will be familiar with the passage where St Paul refers to himself as the father of the church in Corinth.

I write not these things to confound you: but I admonish you as my dearest children. For if you have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet not many fathers. For in Christ Jesus, by the gospel, I have begotten you.​

[1Co 4:14-15]

In Matt 23:9 reads , Call no MAN FATHER

Then in Gal 2:13 Paul calls Peter using HYPOCRISY .

And in verse Since 14 , Paul said to Peter in FRONT of all , SINCE you , being a Jew , live like a GENTILE and not after the manner of the Jews , Why do you COMPEL the Gentiles to Adopt Jewish custom and RITES .

dan p

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

In Matt 23:9 reads , Call no MAN FATHER

"Call none your father ... Neither be ye called masters, &c. The meaning is, that our Father in heaven is incomparably more to be regarded, than any father upon earth: and no master is to be followed, who would lead us away from Christ. But this does not hinder but that we are by the law of God to have a due respect both for our parents and spiritual fathers, (1Co 4:15,) and for our masters and teachers. (Challoner) ---

This name was a title of dignity: the presidents of the assembly of twenty-three judges where so called; the second judge of the sanhedrim, &c. (Bible de Vence) ---

Nothing is here forbidden but the contentious divisions, and self-assumed authority, of such as make themselves leaders and favourers of schisms and sects; as Donatus, Arius, Luther, Calvin, and innumerable other of very modern date. But by no means the title of father, attributed by the faith, piety, and confidence of good people, to their directors; for, St. Paul tells the Corinthians, that he is their only spiritual Father: If you have 10,000 instructors in Christ, yet not many Fathers. (1Co 4:15)" [Haydock's bible commentary]