-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Thou art Peter...
- Thread starter Job_38
- Start date
- Status
I do not believe the Primacy of Honor moved at all. If you read just a little further in the 28th Canon of the Council of Chalcedon, you will find that Constantinople was still not considered to be equal to Rome in every respect, which I believe the third canon from Constantinople I makes clear, as well.
Canon 36 from Trullo says the same thing, which was not included in your original quote. Though it doesn't carry the weight of an Ecumenical Council, it does bear witness to the intent of the fathers of Chalcedon.
Here is Justinians testimony on the Canon, included in the Sessions.
I cannot faithfully respond to the last passage regarding Alexandria until I have a source. I probably should know it, but don't.
May the Lord bless you richly, as well. It is truly a pleasure to have you here. I feel I have been blessed because of the recent influx of so many of our Orthodox brothers and sisters. It does my heart good to see us here together, discussing our faith.
Christ is Risen.
Neal
Upvote
0
Thank you.
When compared to every source I can find, I believe your original quote is in error. Every text of the Canons I could find excluded the phrase "complete control and," which yours includes. I do not believe that the statement excludes the universal jurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome, rather it canonically established Alexandria as a Patriarchate, giving it canonical jurisdiction over the other Metropolitans, which Rome already had in its region.
God Bless,
Neal
Upvote
0
Today at 06:49 AM isshinwhat said this in Post #24
Thank you.
When compared to every source I can find, I believe your original quote is in error. Every text of the Canons I could find excluded the phrase "complete control and," which yours includes. I do not believe that the statement excludes the universal jurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome, rather it canonically established Alexandria as a Patriarchate, giving it canonical jurisdiction over the other Metropolitans, which Rome already had in its region.
God Bless,
Neal
It does not "establish" Alexandria, St. Mark did. It is easy to become confussed when looking through the catholic looking glass into history.
Out of the 5 traditional Patriachs (Antioch, Jersualem, Alexandria, Constaninople and Rome) I find it hard to believe 4 have become herectical and Rome who is teaching a different Gospel to be the only one right. It just doesn't make any sense to say "Rome is the only Church and the others have gone astray."
A list of false documents easly displays this:
The Decretals, the donation of Constantine, Sixth Conon of Nicea (Rome has a different copy compared to the 4 Orthodox Patriachs), the forged Liber Pontificals, Egyptian Church Ordinances, Works of Duns Scotus, Apostolic Canons, donation of Pepin, false decretals of Isidore Mercator, forged Apostolic Constitutions, Clementine Recognitions, etc., etc.
The above list is used by catholic to build the dogma of "papalism" and have been proved fake/false. Their exists copies with the Orthodox Patriachs (not all) and secular sources that declare anything and everything but "papalism."
Jesus is the head of the Church not the pope of Rome.
Upvote
0
Amen. I did not say it established the Church, I said it established it as being canonically over the other Metropolitans, making it a Patriarchate.
They all have before... Every one of the other four Patriarchs have officially and dogmatically supported what they or their Church later admitted to be a heresy. And in every case, it was Rome who they turned to for Orthodoxy; Tome of Leo...
I pray that we may all again give thanks together.
God Bless,
Neal
Upvote
0
Neal it's been good going back and forth on this issue, all I can say is we have to agree to disagree andl leave Pope St. Gregory the Great's response to being call Universal...
To Emperor Maurice:
"Now I confidently say that whosoever calls himself, or desires to be called, Universal Priest, is in his elation the precursor of Antichrist, because he proudly puts himself above all others." (Book VII: Epistle XXXIII)
In the Faith we both contend,
Gideon
To Emperor Maurice:
"Now I confidently say that whosoever calls himself, or desires to be called, Universal Priest, is in his elation the precursor of Antichrist, because he proudly puts himself above all others." (Book VII: Epistle XXXIII)
In the Faith we both contend,
Gideon
Upvote
0
May the Good Lord bless you all the days of your life. I, too, will end with a quote from Pope St. Leo the Great.
Upvote
0
Job_38 said:
Hi there!
I would want to take a stab at what this passage meant when Christ said it.
If I were there with the disciples when Christ led them along the shores of Caesarea Philipi, I would know we were walking in an area where rocky craigs cropped out of the earth and that there were niches in the rock where, when the ships passed, they could see the rock idols placed in the niches to the worship of pagan Gods. Walking along the rocky shore, I can see Christ waving his hand as He speaks moving my attention to the temple built there to the worship of Pan. When Christ spoke of the "gates of Hell", I would know from the local tradition taught that somewhere in the caves of Caesarea Philipi, there was a cave that was identified as the gates of hell, and when the water level was lowered, the demons would come forth through the gates of hell and roam the earth.
Knowing that, I would know that Christ asserted the truth... that no demonic force would prevail against His church. The rock is Jesus. It is only through His name that the gates of hell cannot prevail.
And... the other disciples were given the authority to "bind" also in other text...
~malaka~
Upvote
0
geocajun
Priest of the holy smackrament
Luchnia said:
Clement of Alexandria
"[T]he blessed Peter, the chosen, the preeminent, the first among the disciples, for whom alone with himself the Savior paid the tribute [Matt. 17:27], quickly grasped and understood their meaning. And what does he say? Behold, we have left all and have followed you [Matt. 19:27; Mark 10:28]" (Who Is the Rich Man That Is Saved? 21:35 [A.D. 200]).
Tertullian
"For though you think that heaven is still shut up, remember that the Lord left the keys of it to Peter here, and through him to the Church, which keys everyone will carry with him if he has been questioned and made a confession [of faith]" (Antidote Against the Scorpion 10 [A.D. 211]).
"[T]he Lord said to Peter, On this rock I will build my Church, I have given you the keys of the kingdom of heaven [and] whatever you shall have bound or loosed on earth will be bound or loosed in heaven [Matt. 16:1819]. . . . Upon you, he says, I will build my Church; and I will give to you the keys, not to the Church; and whatever you shall have bound or you shall have loosed, not what they shall have bound or they shall have loosed" (Modesty 21:910 [A.D. 220]).
The Letter of Clement to James
"Be it known to you, my lord, that Simon [Peter], who, for the sake of the true faith, and the most sure foundation of his doctrine, was set apart to be the foundation of the Church, and for this end was by Jesus himself, with his truthful mouth, named Peter, the first fruits of our Lord, the first of the apostles; to whom first the Father revealed the Son; whom the Christ, with good reason, blessed; the called, and elect" (Letter of Clement to James 2 [A.D. 221]).
Origen
"f we were to attend carefully to the Gospels, we should also find, in relation to those things which seem to be common to Peter . . . a great difference and a preeminence in the things [Jesus] said to Peter, compared with the second class [of apostles]. For it is no small difference that Peter received the keys not of one heaven but of more, and in order that whatsoever things he binds on earth may be bound not in one heaven but in them all, as compared with the many who bind on earth and loose on earth, so that these things are bound and loosed not in [all] the heavens, as in the case of Peter, but in one only; for they do not reach so high a stage with power as Peter to bind and loose in all the heavens" (Commentary on Matthew 13:31 [A.D. 248]).
Cyprian of Carthage
"The Lord says to Peter: I say to you, he says, that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church. . . . On him [Peter] he builds the Church, and to him he gives the command to feed the sheep [John 21:17], and although he assigns a like power to all the apostles, yet he founded a single chair [cathedra], and he established by his own authority a source and an intrinsic reason for that unity. Indeed, the others were that also which Peter was [i.e., apostles], but a primacy is given to Peter, whereby it is made clear that there is but one Church and one chair. So too, all [the apostles] are shepherds, and the flock is shown to be one, fed by all the apostles in single-minded accord. If someone does not hold fast to this unity of Peter, can he imagine that he still holds the faith? If he [should] desert the chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built, can he still be confident that he is in the Church?" (The Unity of the Catholic Church 4; 1st edition [A.D. 251]).
Cyril of Jerusalem
"The Lord is loving toward men, swift to pardon but slow to punish. Let no man despair of his own salvation. Peter, the first and foremost of the apostles, denied the Lord three times before a little servant girl, but he repented and wept bitterly" (Catechetical Lectures 2:19 [A.D. 350]).
"[Simon Magus] so deceived the city of Rome that Claudius erected a statue of him. . . . While the error was extending itself, Peter and Paul arrived, a noble pair and the rulers of the Church, and they set the error aright. . . . [T]hey launched the weapon of their like-mindedness in prayer against the Magus, and struck him down to earth. It was marvelous enough, and yet no marvel at all, for Peter was therehe that carries about the keys of heaven [Matt. 16:19]" (ibid., 6:14).
"In the power of the same Holy Spirit, Peter, both the chief of the apostles and the keeper of the keys of the kingdom of heaven, in the name of Christ healed Aeneas the paralytic at Lydda, which is now called Diospolis [Acts 9:3234]" (ibid., 17:27).
Ephraim the Syrian
"[Jesus said:] Simon, my follower, I have made you the foundation of the holy Church. I betimes called you Peter, because you will support all its buildings. You are the inspector of those who will build on Earth a Church for me. If they should wish to build what is false, you, the foundation, will condemn them. You are the head of the fountain from which my teaching flows; you are the chief of my disciples. Through you I will give drink to all peoples. Yours is that life-giving sweetness which I dispense. I have chosen you to be, as it were, the firstborn in my institution so that, as the heir, you may be executor of my treasures. I have given you the keys of my kingdom. Behold, I have given you authority over all my treasures" (Homilies 4:1 [A.D. 351]).
Ambrose of Milan
"[Christ] made answer: You are Peter, and upon this rock will I build my Church. . . . Could he not, then, strengthen the faith of the man to whom, acting on his own authority, he gave the kingdom, whom he called the rock, thereby declaring him to be the foundation of the Church [Matt. 16:18]?" (The Faith 4:5 [A.D. 379]).
Pope Damasus I
"Likewise it is decreed . . . that it ought to be announced that . . . the holy Roman Church has been placed at the forefront not by the conciliar decisions of other churches, but has received the primacy by the evangelic voice of our Lord and Savior, who says: You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it; and I will give to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven . . . [Matt. 16:1819]. The first see, therefore, is that of Peter the apostle, that of the Roman Church, which has neither stain nor blemish nor anything like it" (Decree of Damasus 3 [A.D. 382]).
Jerome
"But, you [Jovinian] will say, it was on Peter that the Church was founded [Matt. 16:18]. Well . . . one among the twelve is chosen to be their head in order to remove any occasion for division" (Against Jovinian 1:26 [A.D. 393]).
"Simon Peter, the son of John, from the village of Bethsaida in the province of Galilee, brother of Andrew the apostle, and himself chief of the apostles, after having been bishop of the church of Antioch and having preached to the Dispersion . . . pushed on to Rome in the second year of Claudius to overthrow Simon Magus, and held the sacerdotal chair there for twenty-five years until the last, that is the fourteenth, year of Nero. At his hands he received the crown of martyrdom being nailed to the cross with his head towards the ground and his feet raised on high, asserting that he was unworthy to be crucified in the same manner as his Lord" (Lives of Illustrious Men 1 [A.D. 396]).
Pope Innocent I
"In seeking the things of God . . . you have acknowledged that judgment is to be referred to us [the pope], and have shown that you know that is owed to the Apostolic See [Rome], if all of us placed in this position are to desire to follow the apostle himself [Peter] from whom the episcopate itself and the total authority of this name have emerged" (Letters 29:1 [A.D. 408]).
Augustine
"Among these [apostles] Peter alone almost everywhere deserved to represent the whole Church. Because of that representation of the Church, which only he bore, he deserved to hear I will give to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven" (Sermons 295:2 [A.D. 411]).
"Some things are said which seem to relate especially to the apostle Peter, and yet are not clear in their meaning unless referred to the Church, which he is acknowledged to have represented in a figure on account of the primacy which he bore among the disciples. Such is I will give unto you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and other similar passages. In the same way, Judas represents those Jews who were Christs enemies" (Commentary on Psalm 108 1 [A.D. 415]).
"Who is ignorant that the first of the apostles is the most blessed Peter?" (Commentary on John 56:1 [A.D. 416]).
Upvote
0
I think you misunderstand what I type. I do not recognize or put any trust into the clips of writings of men that you use for your belief.
Jesus said, "call no man your father upon the earth..." (Mt 23:9) For the Christian this would be an idolatrous practice to call another man his father and was not to be practiced among Christians as we see by the above reference.
There were no Church fathers that said peter was pope, unless they were idolators as the Pharicees that would call men their fathers and miss the very Jesus that was refuting them. The term is used of idolatrous priest as well (Judges 17:10).
As far as Peter is concerned, no one acknowledged peter as pope, not even Paul the one that probably knew him best outside of Jesus. Even Jesus, Himself would not acknowledge Peter as a pope. If there could have been a father to peter in the gospel, it would have been Paul and he did not acknowledge Peter as pope, nor for that matter, none of the great men of God gave such to Peter. As a matter of fact, Paul had to reprove Peter for his ignorance. Jesus condemned such practices as we see in Matthew 23. A man is not even to be called master, only Christ is the Master! Peter even made no such claim of himself, he only acknowledged himself as a "fellow elder" (1 Peter 5:1).
Word up!
Jesus said, "call no man your father upon the earth..." (Mt 23:9) For the Christian this would be an idolatrous practice to call another man his father and was not to be practiced among Christians as we see by the above reference.
There were no Church fathers that said peter was pope, unless they were idolators as the Pharicees that would call men their fathers and miss the very Jesus that was refuting them. The term is used of idolatrous priest as well (Judges 17:10).
As far as Peter is concerned, no one acknowledged peter as pope, not even Paul the one that probably knew him best outside of Jesus. Even Jesus, Himself would not acknowledge Peter as a pope. If there could have been a father to peter in the gospel, it would have been Paul and he did not acknowledge Peter as pope, nor for that matter, none of the great men of God gave such to Peter. As a matter of fact, Paul had to reprove Peter for his ignorance. Jesus condemned such practices as we see in Matthew 23. A man is not even to be called master, only Christ is the Master! Peter even made no such claim of himself, he only acknowledged himself as a "fellow elder" (1 Peter 5:1).
Word up!
Upvote
0
Philip
Orthodoxy: Old School, Hard Core Christianity
- Jun 23, 2003
- 5,619
- 241
- 52
- Faith
- Eastern Orthodox
- Marital Status
- Married
Luchnia said:
Christ's command must be taken in context. It was in reference to hypocritical religious leaders. Note that St Paul referred to himself as the spiritual father of the Corinthians:
1 Corinthians 4:15 (RSVA)
For though you have countless guides in Christ, you do not have many fathers. For I became your father in Christ Jesus through the gospel.
Upvote
0
geocajun
Priest of the holy smackrament
Luchnia said:
oh I see.. well perhaps if I provide a few scriptures you might understand better...
There is ample evidence in the New Testament that Peter was first in authority among the apostles. Whenever they were named, Peter headed the list (Matt. 10:1-4, Mark 3:16-19, Luke 6:14-16, Acts 1:13); sometimes the apostles were referred to as "Peter and those who were with him" (Luke 9:32). Peter was the one who generally spoke for the apostles (Matt. 18:21, Mark 8:29, Luke 12:41, John 6:68-69), and he figured in many of the most dramatic scenes (Matt. 14:28-32, Matt. 17:24-27, Mark 10:23-28). On Pentecost it was Peter who first preached to the crowds (Acts 2:14-40), and he worked the first healing in the Church age (Acts 3:6-7). It is Peters faith that will strengthen his brethren (Luke 22:32) and Peter is given Christs flock to shepherd (John 21:17). An angel was sent to announce the resurrection to Peter (Mark 16:7), and the risen Christ first appeared to Peter (Luke 24:34). He headed the meeting that elected Matthias to replace Judas (Acts 1:13-26), and he received the first converts (Acts 2:41). He inflicted the first punishment (Acts 5:1-11), and excommunicated the first heretic (Acts 8:18-23). He led the first council in Jerusalem (Acts 15), and announced the first dogmatic decision (Acts 15:7-11). It was to Peter that the revelation came that Gentiles were to be baptized and accepted as Christians (Acts 10:46-48).
http://www.catholic.com/library/Peter_and_the_Papacy.asp
Upvote
0
Luchnia said:
Realize first that the word "pope" wasn't used until later. The Pope is bishop of Rome. St. Peter established the Church in Rome and was martyred there so it is the "See of Peter." The bishop of Rome is the successor of St. Peter just as all bishops are successors of the Apostles. All of the above evidence provided by geocajun places Peter at the head of the college of apostles. His successor is at the head of the college of bishops. If you would like a list of every Pope since 33 AD I could post it.
Very few of the Fathers of the Church wouldn't have acknowleged Peter as bishop of Rome. Even the Orthodox Churches today do not recognize the primacy of the See of Peter, but they still believe that the Pope is his successor.
Jesus called Peter "rock" and said he would build his Church on him, I seriously think that would qualify as Our Lord giving him some authority (along with the whole, "I give you the keys to kingdom, whatsoever you bind on earth shall be bound in Heaven, whatsoever you loose on Earth shall be loosed in Heaven). Binding and loosing was given to the other Apostles but at a later time. With the other Apostles there is no mention of giving them the keys to the kingdom.
Upvote
0
pax said:
Hi there,
Yeah, well, Jesus also called Peter "satan". Did Jesus call any of the other disciples "satan"?
I guess your theory doesn't hold water.
De 32:31 For their rock is not as our Rock....
have a good day,
~malaka~
Upvote
0
Where did Jesus call Peter, rock, or where did Jesus rename Peter, rock? I have never seen any scripture that supports this view. Even so, it would seem that Peter was even worse than Judas except his repentance was real to God and Judas only repented to a bunch of priest. I am reminded of what the priest said, "What is that to us?"
There is no evidence that Peter was even in Rome and you simply cannot find anything that says Jesus called Peter, rock. I have heard this stated often, but have never found any scriptural authority to support this opinion. It is mere speculation and should be avoided as such, since there is no credibility in this view. You could easily speculate, "Stephen was the pope" and have as much substantiation for the view.
Word up!
There is no evidence that Peter was even in Rome and you simply cannot find anything that says Jesus called Peter, rock. I have heard this stated often, but have never found any scriptural authority to support this opinion. It is mere speculation and should be avoided as such, since there is no credibility in this view. You could easily speculate, "Stephen was the pope" and have as much substantiation for the view.
Word up!
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
- Poll
