The Early Church is the Catholic Church

[Thursday]

The answer is that the Catholic Church teaches that some popes have been heretics and excommunicated, thereby in its teaching, the Catholic Church has not at times had Peters successor.

The Church teaches, and it is true, that no pope has ever taught heresy.

The Church cannot teach heresy because it is protected by the Holy Spirit from doing so.

All popes are sinners, however, and are capable of violating Church teaching. In fact, one of our popes denied Jesus three times!

 

[Thursday]

But it does. Just because you don't like it doesn't change the fact that the Patriarch of Antioch sits in the chair of St. Peter.

-CryptoLutheran

Please point out an early Christian writing that states that the successor of Peter with his authority is the Bishop of Antioch.

 

[rakovsky]

And that somehow eliminates their claim of the church being the early church?

No, that was a different question Ticking Clock.
I am not objecting to the claim that they are both traced to the early church?

 

[ViaCrucis]

Please point out an early Christian writing that states that the successor of Peter with his authority is the Bishop of Antioch.

Just so we're clear, is your position that the See of Antioch is not occupied by the successor of St. Peter, and that therefore St. Evodius wasn't ordained by the Apostle as is accepted by both your church and the Orthodox? If that's your position then all that is necessary is to show that Evodius was ordained by Peter,

"You have been the disciples of Paul and Peter; do not lose what was committed to your trust. Keep in remembrance Euodias, your deservedly-blessed pastor, into whose hands the government over you was first entrusted by the apostles." - Pseudo-Ignatius to the Antiochians

"Peter the Apostle, by nation a Galilean, first high priest of the Christians, after he had been the first to found a church at Antioch, proceeded to Rome, where as bishop of the same city he remains, preaching the gospel for 25 years." - St. Jerome, Chronicle

"Now concerning those bishops which have been ordained in our lifetime, we let you know that they are these:— James the bishop of Jerusalem, the brother of our Lord; upon whose death the second was Simeon the son of Cleopas; after whom the third was Judas the son of James. Of Cæsarea of Palestine, the first was Zacchæus, who was once a publican; after whom was Cornelius, and the third Theophilus. Of Antioch, Euodius, ordained by me Peter; and Ignatius by Paul. Of Alexandria, Annianus was the first, ordained by Mark the evangelist; the second Avilius by Luke, who was also an evangelist. Of the church of Rome, Linus the son of Claudia was the first, ordained by Paul; and Clemens, after Linus' death, the second, ordained by me Peter. Of Ephesus, Timotheus, ordained by Paul; and John, by me John. Of Smyrna, Aristo the first; after whom Stratæas the son of Lois; and the third Aristo. Of Pergamus, Gaius. Of Philadelphia, Demetrius, by me. Of Cenchrea, Lucius, by Paul. Of Crete, Titus. Of Athens, Dionysius. Of Tripoli in Phœnicia, Marathones. Of Laodicea in Phrygia, Archippus. Of Colossæ;, Philemon. Of Borea in Macedonia, Onesimus, once the servant of Philemon. Of the churches of Galatia, Crescens. Of the parishes of Asia, Aquila and Nicetas. Of the church of Æginæ, Crispus. These are the bishops who are entrusted by us with the parishes in the Lord; whose doctrine keep always in mind, and observe our words. And may the Lord be with you now, and to endless ages, as Himself said to us when He was about to be taken up to His own God and Father. For says He, 'Lo, I am with you all the days, until the end of the world. Amen.'" - Apostolic Constitutions, Book VII, XLVI

Evodius was ordained by Peter, and through Evodius the Patriarch of Antioch sits in St. Peter's chair.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Thursday]

Just so we're clear, is your position that the See of Antioch is not occupied by the successor of St. Peter, and that therefore St. Evodius wasn't ordained by the Apostle as is accepted by both your church and the Orthodox? If that's your position then all that is necessary is to show that Evodius was ordained by Peter,

"You have been the disciples of Paul and Peter; do not lose what was committed to your trust. Keep in remembrance Euodias, your deservedly-blessed pastor, into whose hands the government over you was first entrusted by the apostles." - Pseudo-Ignatius to the Antiochians

"Peter the Apostle, by nation a Galilean, first high priest of the Christians, after he had been the first to found a church at Antioch, proceeded to Rome, where as bishop of the same city he remains, preaching the gospel for 25 years." - St. Jerome, Chronicle

"Now concerning those bishops which have been ordained in our lifetime, we let you know that they are these:— James the bishop of Jerusalem, the brother of our Lord; upon whose death the second was Simeon the son of Cleopas; after whom the third was Judas the son of James. Of Cæsarea of Palestine, the first was Zacchæus, who was once a publican; after whom was Cornelius, and the third Theophilus. Of Antioch, Euodius, ordained by me Peter; and Ignatius by Paul. Of Alexandria, Annianus was the first, ordained by Mark the evangelist; the second Avilius by Luke, who was also an evangelist. Of the church of Rome, Linus the son of Claudia was the first, ordained by Paul; and Clemens, after Linus' death, the second, ordained by me Peter. Of Ephesus, Timotheus, ordained by Paul; and John, by me John. Of Smyrna, Aristo the first; after whom Stratæas the son of Lois; and the third Aristo. Of Pergamus, Gaius. Of Philadelphia, Demetrius, by me. Of Cenchrea, Lucius, by Paul. Of Crete, Titus. Of Athens, Dionysius. Of Tripoli in Phœnicia, Marathones. Of Laodicea in Phrygia, Archippus. Of Colossæ;, Philemon. Of Borea in Macedonia, Onesimus, once the servant of Philemon. Of the churches of Galatia, Crescens. Of the parishes of Asia, Aquila and Nicetas. Of the church of Æginæ, Crispus. These are the bishops who are entrusted by us with the parishes in the Lord; whose doctrine keep always in mind, and observe our words. And may the Lord be with you now, and to endless ages, as Himself said to us when He was about to be taken up to His own God and Father. For says He, 'Lo, I am with you all the days, until the end of the world. Amen.'" - Apostolic Constitutions, Book VII, XLVI

Evodius was ordained by Peter, and through Evodius the Patriarch of Antioch sits in St. Peter's chair.

-CryptoLutheran

I'm sure Peter ordained many priests who later became bishops, including Clement of Rome.


My position is that the Bishop of Rome was always considered the official successor of Peter when it comes to authority in the Church.

Nothing here addresses that issue.

 

[rakovsky]

The Church teaches, and it is true, that no pope has ever taught heresy.

According to both Orthodox and Roman Catholic teaching, some Popes have been heretics and excommunicated. See the website below for some cases.

Some Popes Who Were Heretics​

Pope Honorius
6a) The Sixth Œcumenical Council of the Catholic Church formally excommunicated Pope Honorius I: “We decide that [Pope] Honorius also, who was Pope of Old Rome, be with them cast out of the Holy Church of God and be anathematized [i.e. excommunicated] with them, because We have found in his letter to Sergius that he followed his [i.e. Sergius’] opinion in all things and confirmed his pernicious [i.e. heretical] teachings” (Third Council of Constantinople [Sunday, November 7, 680 A.D. - Friday, September 16, 681 A.D.], Decree of Formal Excommunication of Pope Honorius I.)

6d) Pope Adrian II [Wednesday, December 14, 867 - Wednesday December 14, 872] also confirmed and sanctioned the minutes of the Sixth Œcumenical Council, the Third Council of Constantinople [Sunday, November 7, 680 A.D. - Friday, September 16, 681 A.D.], of the Catholic Church. This Pope also condemned Honorius I as a heretic. He is quoted as saying that the throne of Rome is decided by nothing except in regard to questions of heresy that fall under the jurisdiction of the Œcumenical Councils. As an example of this he mentions the heresy of Pope Honorius I.

6e) The Seventh Œcumenical Council, the Second Council of Nicæa [Thursday, September 24, 787 A.D. - Friday, October 23, 787 A.D.], also condemned Pope Honorius I as a heretic.
SOURCE: http://www.traditionalcatholicmass.com/home-m240.html (others listed on the site)​

 

[rakovsky]

Can the Church Depose an Heretical Pope?
Written by Robert J. Siscoe
http://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/articles/item/1284-can-the-church-depose-an-heretical-pope

This is a Catholic site.

 

[Thursday]

According to both Orthodox and Roman Catholic teaching, some Popes have been heretics and excommunicated. See the website below for some cases.

​

That doesn't mean that they taught heresy in their role as successor of Peter.

Peter himself was reprimanded by Paul for acting in contrast to Church teaching when he separated himself from gentile converts.

You are confusing two issues.

 

[Quid est Veritas?]

Yes, the papacy is infallible unless the Pope is a heretic. Doublethink at its finest.

 

[rakovsky]

That doesn't mean that they taught heresy in their role as successor of Peter.

Peter himself was reprimanded by Paul for acting in contrast to Church teaching when he separated himself from gentile converts.

You are confusing two issues.

It's the same issue, THursday
The Pope can be a heretic according to the church. At that point the see is vacant.
Why did the Pope expel 1/2 the church in 1054 AD?
If he lacked a good enough reason, EOs are not the schismatics.
Let me know if you can find the reason, please.

 

[rakovsky]

Yes, the papacy is infallible unless the Pope is a heretic. Doublethink at its finest.

It seems like circular reasoning. Not sure it's doublethink if you get the full idea about how it only counts when the church confirms it.

"I can't be wrong whenever everyone agrees with me." That kind of thing.

Too much power for one person who is known as personally fallible IMO.

 

[ViaCrucis]

I'm sure Peter ordained many priests who later became bishops, including Clement of Rome.


My position is that the Bishop of Rome was always considered the official successor of Peter when it comes to authority in the Church.

Nothing here addresses that issue.

It addresses the issue of there being a successor of Peter in Antioch, which quite adequately addresses the issue you raised about a successor of Peter and Orthodoxy.

Yet you have yet to substantiate your claims concerning the papacy; the material you've provided from the ancient Church simply doesn't do what you want it to do. If your argument were that the apostles ordained bishops, or that the bishop of Rome enjoyed special honors, well that'd be different. But your argument has been that Peter, and Peter's successor in Rome, is the temporal head of the entire Church catholic--which you haven't substantiated, you've merely asserted.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Thursday]

Yes, the papacy is infallible unless the Pope is a heretic. Doublethink at its finest.

The papacy is infallible, but popes are not. Clear enough to me.

People are sinners but the Church is protected from teaching error.

 

[rakovsky]

The papacy is infallible, but popes are not. Clear enough to me.

People are sinners but the Church is protected from teaching error.

The papacy goes vacant if the Pope is a heretic though

 

[Thursday]

It addresses the issue of there being a successor of Peter in Antioch, which quite adequately addresses the issue you raised about a successor of Peter and Orthodoxy.

Actually, it doesn't. The role of Peter was performed by Peter while he lived. His successor assumed this role once Peter died.

You did not demonstrate any proof that anyone other than the Bishop of Rome performed the role of Peter in the early Church.

 

[Thursday]

The papacy goes vacant if the Pope is a heretic though

Honorius was retroactively declared a heretic for some personal writings.

Regardless, the Holy See is often vacant while a new pope is selected.

 

[Thursday]

It seems like circular reasoning. Not sure it's doublethink if you get the full idea about how it only counts when the church confirms it.

"I can't be wrong whenever everyone agrees with me." That kind of thing.

Too much power for one person who is known as personally fallible IMO.

The power is not in the person, it is in the body of Christ.

Just as the power of Mary as Mother of God comes from Christ, so does the authority of the Church.

Without a single leader, there can be no unity in the Church.

That's why there are thousands of denominations outside the Church each claiming to believe that the bible is the World of God but still teaching contradictory messages.

 

[rakovsky]

The power is not in the person, it is in the body of Christ.

Just as the power of Mary as Mother of God comes from Christ, so does the authority of the Church.

Without a single leader, there can be no unity in the Church.

That's why there are thousands of denominations outside the Church each claiming to believe that the bible is the World of God but still teaching contradictory messages.

They came out of Rome BTW. Just a coincidence?

 

[Thursday]

They came out of Rome BTW. Just a coincidence?

So did the Orthodox Churches. Once you leave the fold you are bound to wander.

How is the Church at Constantinople doing today?

 

[rakovsky]

Regardless, the Holy See is often vacant while a new pope is selected.

And it's always vacant when he is schismatic or heretic.

If his rejection of the other patriarchs was wrong, then what?