Eastern Orthodox is the bishop of Rome the successor to Apostle Peter?

ArmyMatt

Regular Member
Supporter
Jan 26, 2007
41,468
20,025
41
Earth
✟1,455,670.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Of course I understand the differences between Orthodox and Catholic authority are irreconcilable, certainly that much is clear. When it comes to how a person comes to Christ the gospel is clear, God decides who is called and who is chosen and this is based on faith. Indeed, James did preside over the Council of Jerusalem. James would have been considered royalty because he to was from the House of David, the brother of Jesus. It makes sense given the cultural context but let's remember, he wasn't an Apostle. His role in this proceeding was no less vital, just as the council at Antioch of Syria was vital.

well, no. he was an Apostle being one of the 70. and if it were merely a cultural thing the Pope would have presided over at least one Ecumenical Council, but he never did, nor his delegation, and the only time he was present he was excommunicated.
 
Upvote 0

mark kennedy

Natura non facit saltum
Supporter
Mar 16, 2004
22,024
7,364
60
Indianapolis, IN
✟549,630.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
well, no. he was an Apostle being one of the 70. and if it were merely a cultural thing the Pope would have presided over at least one Ecumenical Council, but he never did, nor his delegation, and the only time he was present he was excommunicated.
You lost me some how, obviously James was the brother of Jesus and not one of the twelve Apostles. Yes of course he can be considered an apostle, with regards to the nature of his ministry, as were all of the 70, that's not the point I was making. In fact it wasn't even a point, I said in passing he was considered royalty because of him being from the house of David. Jesus was and is the rightful heir to the throne, Jesus being absent they would have naturally saw James as being from the royal line. I don't think this reflects on apostolic or ecclesiastical authority but I guess I never really thought about it. In church authority no one out ranks the 12 Apostles, except Christ himself.
 
Upvote 0

ArmyMatt

Regular Member
Supporter
Jan 26, 2007
41,468
20,025
41
Earth
✟1,455,670.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
You lost me some how, obviously James was the brother of Jesus and not one of the twelve Apostles. Yes of course he can be considered an apostle, with regards to the nature of his ministry, as were all of the 70, that's not the point I was making. In fact it wasn't even a point, I said in passing he was considered royalty because of him being from the house of David. Jesus was and is the rightful heir to the throne, Jesus being absent they would have naturally saw James as being from the royal line. I don't think this reflects on apostolic or ecclesiastical authority but I guess I never really thought about it. In church authority no one out ranks the 12 Apostles, except Christ himself.

well he is not simply considered one, he was one. and his royal blood had nothing really to do with his role in the Council. I guess I didn't follow your actual points about James.

and for us, Mary and John the Baptist I think are higher on the totem pole than the Apostles.
 
Upvote 0

mark kennedy

Natura non facit saltum
Supporter
Mar 16, 2004
22,024
7,364
60
Indianapolis, IN
✟549,630.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
well he is not simply considered one, he was one. and his royal blood had nothing really to do with his role in the Council
Well there were 70 of the original evangelists, does it seem significant to you they chose James? Really not a point of contention for me, just curious how you figure.
 
Upvote 0

ArmyMatt

Regular Member
Supporter
Jan 26, 2007
41,468
20,025
41
Earth
✟1,455,670.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Well there were 70 of the original evangelists, does it seem significant to you they chose James? Really not a point of contention for me, just curious how you figure.

I dunno why they chose him, only that there is no evidence of his being of the house of David as a reason.
 
Upvote 0

mark kennedy

Natura non facit saltum
Supporter
Mar 16, 2004
22,024
7,364
60
Indianapolis, IN
✟549,630.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
I dunno why they chose him, only that there is no evidence of his being of the house of David as a reason.
I suppose your right, haven't given it a great deal of thought to be honest. That's just how it seems to me, not that it's of any real significance beyond an interpretive inference.

well he is not simply considered one, he was one. and his royal blood had nothing really to do with his role in the Council. I guess I didn't follow your actual points about James.

and for us, Mary and John the Baptist I think are higher on the totem pole than the Apostles.
Women had long held a leading role without every having an office. John belonged to the spiritual lineage of the prophets, the sackcloth is a dead give away. The most important part of the Apostolic legacy is the New Testament witness. One of the reasons we even have the New Testament is because the early church was losing Apostles. We have Paul's letters to the Corinthians but we don't have the letter from the Corinthians that prompted it. The obvious reason is the the early church wanted to preserve the Apostolic witness. Like the Old Testament it's a living witness, in that it's been a part of a living community it's entire history, the Hebrew and Christian communities respectively. Mary was a wonderful lady and John was perhaps the greatest of the prophets from the Old Testament prophetic era. Still, the Apostolic witness is the very foundation of our faith, of incalculable worth, nothing is more important to our traditions and religion then what the Apostles learned from Christ.

Grace and peace,
Mark
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

ArmyMatt

Regular Member
Supporter
Jan 26, 2007
41,468
20,025
41
Earth
✟1,455,670.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Women had long held a leading role without every having an office. John belonged to the spiritual lineage of the prophets, the sackcloth is a dead give away. The most important part of the Apostolic legacy is the New Testament witness. One of the reasons we even have the New Testament is because the early church was losing Apostles. We have Paul's letters to the Corinthians but we don't have the letter from the Corinthians that prompted it. The obvious reason is the the early church wanted to preserve the Apostolic witness. Like the Old Testament it's a living witness, in that it's been a part of a living community it's entire history, the Hebrew and Christian communities respectively. Mary was a wonderful lady and John was perhaps the greatest of the prophets from the Old Testament prophetic era. Still, the Apostolic witness is the very foundation of our faith, of incalculable worth, nothing is more important to our traditions and religion then what the Apostles learned from Christ.

Grace and peace,
Mark

I would disagree only with the foundation of the Christian faith being the Apostolic witness. the foundation is the Incarnation. Mary's role in God's plan for our salvation is far greater than anything any other mere human has had.
 
Upvote 0