Missing pages from one's bible

[Always in His Presence]

The earliest Christians were not at one time referred to as Christians either, the first usage of the word is mentioned in the Bible--it is what the pagans called the followers of Christ. That does not mean that the Apostles and those others who followed the teachings of Jesus were not Christians before the word was first used. Although the title "pope" was not used in the early Church I would bet that many of your fellow seminarians of the Catholic Church would disagree with your views about the existence of the earliest popes.

Your reasoning doesn't make sense -

Christians were called Christians from Antioch forward First Century Roman Emperors wrote of the Christians.

The first 3 centuries titles of Elder - Bishop - Overseer - Apostle - Prophet - Pastor - Teacher were written and referred to en masse - the title Pope as head of the Roman Catholic Church did not exist until the church became Westernized and placed in Rome.

the word pappas in Greek and papa in Latin meant 'father and were used as terms of affection for Bishops and some patriarchs. It's demonstrate in it's use from Dionysius of Alexandra in referring to his mentor Heraclas of Alexandria.

It was not until the late 4th Century that the word was reserved solely for the Bishop of Rome, which then became the papacy.

That is historically correct -

 

[prodromos]

That is historically correct

Not quite. The title of Pope belonged first to the Patriarch of Alexandria and continues to be used today.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Not quite. The title of Pope belonged first to the Patriarch of Alexandria and continues to be used today.

Although that is absolutely correct, I really doubt that the Patriarch of Alexandria claims the enormous powers and attributes that the chap in Rome does. Please enlighten me if I am mistaken.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

The initial question I asked remains unanswered - Do Roman Catholics believe that their Bible is missing pages because the Orthodox has more?

If not, why not. I would ask my great and learned friend @Xeno.of.athens to answer, because this is his thread and I am curious of his response. Thank you.

The Catholic Church regards the Orthodox canon of Scripture with deep respect, acknowledging its ancient roots, liturgical richness, and fidelity to apostolic tradition. While the Catholic canon was definitively affirmed at the Council of Trent and includes certain deuterocanonical books not universally recognised in the same way by all Orthodox Churches, the Catholic Church appreciates the shared reverence for the inspired texts and the profound spiritual heritage preserved in the Orthodox biblical tradition. This mutual esteem fosters ecumenical dialogue and highlights the common theological foundation that both Churches uphold in their veneration of the Word of God.

 

[prodromos]

Although that is absolutely correct, I really doubt that the Patriarch of Alexandria claims the enormous powers and attributes that the chap in Rome does.

It was never implied that he did.

 

[bbbbbbb]

It was never implied that he did.

Precisely. Therefore, I think that there is a very significant difference in the definition of the office of Pope between our Roman friends and you Eastern Orthodox, to the point that although both share the same etymological source, they are no more similar than a grenade and Granada.

 

[prodromos]

Precisely. Therefore, I think that there is a very significant difference in the definition of the office of Pope between our Roman friends and you Eastern Orthodox, to the point that although both share the same etymological source, they are no more similar than a grenade and Granada.

View attachment 371649 View attachment 371650

Again, no one has suggested otherwise

 

[bbbbbbb]

Again, no one has suggested otherwise

The initial point had been made that the office of the (Catholic) Papacy did not exist prior to the fourth century. More accurately, the post stated, "It was not until the late 4th Century that the word was reserved solely for the Bishop of Rome, which then became the papacy."

Your rejoinder to this was "The title of Pope belonged first to the Patriarch of Alexandria and continues to be used today."

I guess my question to you is whether or not the title of Pope as applied to the Patriarch of Alexandria was, and is, solely for him alone?

 

[prodromos]

The initial point had been made that the office of the (Catholic) Papacy did not exist prior to the fourth century. More accurately, the post stated, "It was not until the late 4th Century that the word was reserved solely for the Bishop of Rome, which then became the papacy."

To which I pointed out the the Patriarch of Alexandria is also called "Pope", and has been for longer than the Patriarch of Rome, so the expression, "solely reserved for the Bishop of Rome" was inaccurate as the title was also being used in Alexandria prior to the schism. One can argue that since the schism, within the Catholic Church it is solely reserved for the Bishop of Rome, but that isn't what was claimed. That is all I was pointing out. I was not claiming that Alexandria also has a "papacy".

Your rejoinder to this was "The title of Pope belonged first to the Patriarch of Alexandria and continues to be used today."

And that should have been the end of it, but some people like to pick fights.

I guess my question to you is whether or not the title of Pope as applied to the Patriarch of Alexandria was, and is, solely for him alone?

No one else in the Church claims the title in either the Eastern Orthodox Church or the Oriental Orthodox Church, however, both the Coptic and the Greek Patriarchs of Alexandria are termed "Pope" in their respective Churches.

 

[bbbbbbb]

To which I pointed out the the Patriarch of Alexandria is also called "Pope", and has been for longer than the Patriarch of Rome, so the expression, "solely reserved for the Bishop of Rome" was inaccurate as the title was also being used in Alexandria prior to the schism. One can argue that since the schism, within the Catholic Church it is solely reserved for the Bishop of Rome, but that isn't what was claimed. That is all I was pointing out. I was not claiming that Alexandria also has a "papacy".

And that should have been the end of it, but some people like to pick fights.

No one else in the Church claims the title in either the Eastern Orthodox Church or the Oriental Orthodox Church, however, both the Coptic and the Greek Patriarchs of Alexandria are termed "Pope" in their respective Churches.

Thank you for the clarification.

 

[Always in His Presence]

The Catholic Church regards the Orthodox canon of Scripture with deep respect, acknowledging its ancient roots, liturgical richness, and fidelity to apostolic tradition. While the Catholic canon was definitively affirmed at the Council of Trent and includes certain deuterocanonical books not universally recognised in the same way by all Orthodox Churches, the Catholic Church appreciates the shared reverence for the inspired texts and the profound spiritual heritage preserved in the Orthodox biblical tradition. This mutual esteem fosters ecumenical dialogue and highlights the common theological foundation that both Churches uphold in their veneration of the Word of God.

Are you missing pages or not?

 

[prodromos]

Are you missing pages or not?

Canon simply refers to what is read in Church during the Liturgy. Although the deutercanonical books are not read within the context of the Liturgy, they are still considered valuable.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

Are you missing pages or not?

I have all the pages I need.

 

[Always in His Presence]

I have all the pages I need.

Same with Protestants

Glad we are on the same page.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

Same with Protestants

Glad we are on the same page.

nope, not so.

 

[Always in His Presence]

nope, not so.

Yup - it is so and just as valid as your response.

See the Roman Catholic Church is the authority over Roman Catholics - no one else.

The Orthodox has pages that you are missing and your opinion is:

I have all the pages I need.

Protestant churches are similar in that we have books not including the Apocryphal - it isn't that we have pages missing - just do not have pages we do not need.

Just as viable a point of view.

 

[Always in His Presence]

the word pappas in Greek and papa in Latin meant 'father and were used as terms of affection for Bishops and some patriarchs. It's demonstrate in it's use from Dionysius of Alexandra in referring to his mentor Heraclas of Alexandria.

Not quite. The title of Pope belonged first to the Patriarch of Alexandria and continues to be used today.

You seem to have missed the reference above - pappas indeed was used towards Heaclas of Alexandrea (the Patriarch of Alexandria) - but it was a common term of endearment - not the Title of an office and certainly not for the ruler of the church because he was one of a number of patriarchs, not overall head.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

Yup - it is so and just as valid as your response.

See the Roman Catholic Church is the authority over Roman Catholics - no one else.

The Orthodox has pages that you are missing and your opinion is:



Protestant churches are similar in that we have books not including the Apocryphal - it isn't that we have pages missing - just do not have pages we do not need.

Just as viable a point of view.

well, as engaging as your illusions are I have other things to do.

 

[Always in His Presence]

well, as engaging as your illusions are I have other things to do.

Why does it always come down to condescending quips?

Sad

 

[The Liturgist]

The Orthodox has pages that you are missing and your opinion is:

The Catholics have all the pages we Eastern Orthodox have, in the Bibles of the sui juris Eastern Catholics, also historically known as Uniates (although this term is now regarded as offensive by many Eastern Catholics), for example the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church, the Italo-Albanian Greek Catholic Church, the Hungarian Greek Catholic Church, the Ruthenian Greek Catholic Church, and several others, thus, as i said before; thus this line of argument is entirely flawed, because it ignores the existence of these large, historically important churches that are under the authority of the Pope of Rome but worship using the same liturgical rite as the Eastern Orthodox and use the same Bibles, in many cases literally the same editions.