Papal Supremacy

[Nine_Two]

Originally Posted by kalel76

As I was reading this I thought - Don't the Orthodox have a source of their own like Catholic Answers that can give patristic evidence of why Bishops must be autonomous and separated along nationalistic lines? I would love a link to read up.

Even if the quotes are cherry picked, that's okay....I'm from Michigan...we love cherries.

www.orthodoxinfo.com might be what you're looking for. It has a lot of patristics, but beware before hand that it is an extremely anti-ecumenical site, to the point that most Orthodox (myself included) distance themselves from it and don't use it when trying to make a point.

I'm not aware of anything more moderate.

I've always preferred to read the patristics myself directly. I'm always curious when I find a reference in a book to some point being made in some old document, I always want to know what else it says. I always want to know the complete context (which was my complaint above).

[Nine_Two]

Originally Posted by ThatOneGuy92

Careful what you wish for. The Orthodox do in fact have their "sources"- those sources being the 7 Ecumenical Councils. It all comes down to how one interprets the canons; though, to be quite honest, many of them are clear and to the point regarding such things as bishops and the like.

We use all the writings of the fathers, including the canons of the councils.

But you're right, how you read a quote can make a big difference. In past quote-wars I've seen quotes that the poster interpreted to strengthen their own position, yet I read them as being completely in line with my own. I can't think of an example right now.

[Hesychios]

Originally Posted by kalel76

As I was reading this I thought - Don't the Orthodox have a source of their own like Catholic Answers that can give patristic evidence of why Bishops must be autonomous and separated along nationalistic lines? I would love a link to read up.

All you have to do is read the canons of Nicea.

This was the first ecumenical Council after the persecutions and the fathers were keen to establish the church as they knew it from the underground period.

Every province in the Roman empire was organized along a 'nation'. Each such province had a synod of bishops. This synod of bishops named it's own membership, so it was self-sustaining. It policed itself and met twice per year to resolve conflicts.

It should be noted that the churches outside the empire were organized similarly. This seems to indicate that the Apostles set this system up and it spread this way.

When the patriarch of Antioch was attempting to assert it's authority over the church of Cyprus the Cypriot church appealed to the Council meeting at Ephesus, and the Council declared that because of it's ancient origin the church of Cyprus has alway been self-governing and shall remain so. Then it cautioned all other Metropolitans to take copies of the decree with them to protrect themselves from such encroachment in the future!

...since injuries affecting all require the more attention, as they cause the greater damage, and particularly when they are transgressions of an ancient custom; and since those excellent men, who have petitioned the Synod, have told us in writing and by word of mouth that the Bishop of Antioch has in this way held ordinations in Cyprus; therefore the Rulers of the holy churches in Cyprus shall enjoy, without dispute or injury, according to the Canons of the blessed Fathers and ancient custom, the right of performing for themselves the ordination of their excellent Bishops. The same rule shall be observed in the other dioceses and provinces everywhere, so that none of the God beloved Bishops shall assume control of any province which has not heretofore, from the very beginning, been under his own hand or that of his predecessors. But if any one has violently taken and subjected [a Province], he shall give it up; lest the Canons of the Fathers be transgressed; or the vanities of worldly honour be brought in under pretext of sacred office; or we lose, without knowing it, little by little, the liberty which Our Lord Jesus Christ, the Deliverer of all men, hath given us by his own Blood.

Wherefore, this holy and ecumenical Synod has decreed that in every province the rights which heretofore, from the beginning, have belonged to it, shall be preserved to it, according to the old prevailing custom, unchanged and uninjured: every Metropolitan having permission to take, for his own security, a copy of these acts. And if any one shall bring forward a rule contrary to what is here determined, this holy and ecumenical Synod unanimously decrees that it shall be of no effect.
Canon VIII Ephesus 431AD

Read the canons of the First Ecumenical Council.

[steve b]

Originally Posted by Hesychios

When the patriarch of Antioch was attempting to assert it's authority over the church of Cyprus the Cypriot church appealed to the Council meeting at Ephesus, and the Council declared that because of it's ancient origin the church of Cyprus has alway been self-governing and shall remain so. Then it cautioned all other Metropolitans to take copies of the decree with them to protrect themselves from such encroachment in the future!

Even going back to Ignatius of Antioch bishop from ~69 a.d. to ~107 a.d., before there were such a thing as patriarchs, he didn’t claim authority over any other Church but his. He never claimed presidency for his see or any see he wrote to, except for Rome holding the presidency.

Originally Posted by H

...since injuries affecting all require the more attention, as they cause the greater damage, and particularly when they are transgressions of an ancient custom; and since those excellent men, who have petitioned the Synod, have told us in writing and by word of mouth that the Bishop of Antioch has in this way held ordinations in Cyprus; therefore the Rulers of the holy churches in Cyprus shall enjoy, without dispute or injury, according to the Canons of the blessed Fathers and ancient custom, the right of performing for themselves the ordination of their excellent Bishops. The same rule shall be observed in the other dioceses and provinces everywhere, so that none of the God beloved Bishops shall assume control of any province which has not heretofore, from the very beginning, been under his own hand or that of his predecessors. But if any one has violently taken and subjected [a Province], he shall give it up; lest the Canons of the Fathers be transgressed; or the vanities of worldly honour be brought in under pretext of sacred office; or we lose, without knowing it, little by little, the liberty which Our Lord Jesus Christ, the Deliverer of all men, hath given us by his own Blood.

Wherefore, this holy and ecumenical Synod has decreed that in every province the rights which heretofore, from the beginning, have belonged to it, shall be preserved to it, according to the old prevailing custom, unchanged and uninjured: every Metropolitan having permission to take, for his own security, a copy of these acts. And if any one shall bring forward a rule contrary to what is here determined, this holy and ecumenical Synod unanimously decrees that it shall be of no effect.
Canon VIII Ephesus 431AD

Other quotes from the council of Ephesus

Philip the presbyter and legate of the Apostolic See said: There is no doubt, and in fact it has been known in all ages, that the holy and most blessed Peter, prince (ἔξαρχος) and head of the Apostles, pillar of the faith, and foundation (θεμέλιος) of the Catholic Church, received the keys of the kingdom from our Lord Jesus Christ, the Saviour and Redeemer of the human race, and that to him was given the power of loosing and binding sins: who down even to today and forever both lives and judges in his successors. The holy and most blessed pope Cœlestine, according to due order, is his successor and holds his place, and us he sent to supply his place in this holy synod, which the most humane and Christian Emperors have commanded to assemble, bearing in mind and continually watching over the Catholic faith. For they both have kept and are now keeping intact the apostolic doctrine handed down to them from their most pious and humane grandfathers and fathers of holy memory down to the present time,

Note: the pope & the emperors at this time, watch over the Catholic Church.

[dcointin]

Where in these quotes do we find that the Pope has jurisdiction over other sees?

[steve b]

Originally Posted by dcointin

Where in these quotes do we find that the Pope has jurisdiction over other sees?

What good is it to continually watch over i.e. oversee something, and have no authority to do anything with what you're overseeing?

[dcointin]

Originally Posted by steve b

What good is it to continually watch over i.e. oversee something, and have no authority to do anything with what you're overseeing?

So this would be an inference?

[Nine_Two]

Originally Posted by steve b

Even going back to Ignatius of Antioch bishop from ~69 a.d. to ~107 a.d., before there were such a thing as patriarchs, he didn’t claim authority over any other Church but his. He never claimed presidency for his see or any see he wrote to, except for Rome holding the presidency.



Other quotes from the council of Ephesus

Philip the presbyter and legate of the Apostolic See said: There is no doubt, and in fact it has been known in all ages, that the holy and most blessed Peter, prince (ἔξαρχος) and head of the Apostles, pillar of the faith, and foundation (θεμέλιος) of the Catholic Church, received the keys of the kingdom from our Lord Jesus Christ, the Saviour and Redeemer of the human race, and that to him was given the power of loosing and binding sins: who down even to today and forever both lives and judges in his successors. The holy and most blessed pope Cœlestine, according to due order, is his successor and holds his place, and us he sent to supply his place in this holy synod, which the most humane and Christian Emperors have commanded to assemble, bearing in mind and continually watching over the Catholic faith. For they both have kept and are now keeping intact the apostolic doctrine handed down to them from their most pious and humane grandfathers and fathers of holy memory down to the present time,

Note: the pope & the emperors at this time, watch over the Catholic Church.

Except that in Ignatius's letters to the various churches he takes a position of superiority, in spite of a recognition that there is already a bishop. This is most clearly seen in his Letter to the Smyrnaeans.

I just happened to read that one last night.

[dcointin]

Originally Posted by Nine_Two

Except that in Ignatius's letters to the various churches he takes a position of superiority, in spite of a recognition that there is already a bishop. This is most clearly seen in his Letter to the Smyrnaeans.

I just happened to read that one last night.

Could you explain what this would prove?

[Vico]

From the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (1998)

10. Together with the magisterial role of the primacy, the mission of Peter's Successor for the whole Church entails the right to perform acts of ecclesiastical governance necessary or suited to promoting and defending the unity of faith and communion; one of these, for example, is to give the mandate for the ordination of new Bishops, requiting that they make the profession of Catholic faith; to help everyone continue in the faith professed. Obviously, there are many other possible ways, more or less contingent, of carrying out this service of unity: to issue laws for the whole Church, to establish pastoral structures to serve various particular Churches, to give binding force to the decisions of Particular Councils, to approve supradiocesan religious institutes, etc. Since the power of the primacy is supreme, there is no other authority to which the Roman Pontiff must juridically answer for his exercise of the gift he has received: "prima sedes a nemine iudicatur".42 This does not mean, however, that the Pope has absolute power. listening to what the Churches are saying is, in fact, an earmark of the ministry of unity, a consequence also of the unity of the Episcopal Body and of the sensus fidei of the entire People of God; and this bond seems to enjoy considerably greater power and certainty than the juridical authorities - an inadmissible hypothesis, moreover, because it is groundless - to which the Roman Pontiff would supposedly have to answer. The ultimate and absolute responsibility of the Pope is best guaranteed, on the one hand, by its relationship to Tradition and fraternal communion and, on the other, by trust in the assistance of the Holy Spirit who governs the Church.

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/co...pietro_en.html

[Ignatios]

Originally Posted by steve b

Even going back to Ignatius of Antioch bishop from ~69 a.d. to ~107 a.d., before there were such a thing as patriarchs, he didn’t claim authority over any other Church but his. He never claimed presidency for his see or any see he wrote to, except for Rome holding the presidency.

" ...which also presides in the place of the report of the Romans...and which presides over love" there is none in there that would even suggest any kind of authority over the other Sees, however have you read the whole letter to the Romans, here is some ...


"Chapter IX(9).-Pray for the Church in Syria.
Remember in your prayers the Church in Syria, which now has God for its shepherd, instead of me. Jesus Christ alone will oversee it, and your love [will also regard it].

And below is from the "doctor" of the church history in the RCC, Eusebius:

Chapter 36. Ignatius and His Epistles.

1. At that time Polycarp, a disciple of the apostles, was a man of eminence in Asia, having been entrusted with the episcopate of the church of Smyrna by those who had seen and heard the Lord.
2. And at the same time Papias, bishop of the parish of Hierapolis, became well known, as did also Ignatius, who was chosen bishop of Antioch, second in succession to Peter, and whose fame is still celebrated by a great many.
5. So when he came to Smyrna, where Polycarp was, he wrote an epistle to the church of Ephesus, in which he mentions Onesimus, its pastor; and another to the church of Magnesia, situated upon the Mæander, in which he makes mention again of a bishop Damas; and finally one to the church of Tralles, whose bishop, he states, was at that time Polybius.
6. In addition to these he wrote also to the church of Rome, entreating them not to secure his release from martyrdom, and thus rob him of his earnest hope. In confirmation of what has been said it is proper to quote briefly from this epistle.

Notice he made no mention of the Bishop or the Pope in Rome hhhhmmmm have you ever wondered why?????????? study and search, you will find out why.



10. These things he wrote from the above-mentioned city to the churches referred to. And when he had left Smyrna he wrote again from Troas to the Philadelphians and to the church of Smyrna; and particularly to Polycarp, who presided over the latter church. And since he knew him well as an apostolic man, he commended to him, like a true and good shepherd, the flock at Antioch, and besought him to care diligently for it.


WOWWWWW what happened ???? what about the Pope?????wasn't that the duty of the Pope to appoint other Bishops especially where a vacancy exist? or how could Saint Ignatios encroach on the rights of the Pope? how could he appoint others to oversee a major Church such as Antioch????? could it be that the Pope didn't exist yet?????how come there was not even a mention of the Pope??????? ..........etc.......etc.

[steve b]

Originally Posted by Nine_Two

Except that in Ignatius's letters to the various churches he takes a position of superiority, in spite of a recognition that there is already a bishop.

Polycarp is the bishop of Smyrna. Both Polycarp and Ignatius were desciples of St John the apostle. Keep in mind he is saying his farewells. He is encouraging his readers, to maintain the course and stay faithful.

Originally Posted by N

This is most clearly seen in his Letter to the Smyrnaeans.

I just happened to read that one last night.

Ignatius is in chains on his way to be martyred in Rome when he writes his letters. I'm not seeing what you're seeing.

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0110.htm (Ignatius to Polycarp)
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0109.htm (to the Church of Smyrna)
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0107.htm (to the Church of Rome)

[Roy5]

Maybe I shouldn't response to this thread as I have different problems with papal supremacy.

It appears to me that events in Europe during the early A. D. centuries led power to became centered in the Vatican. The Roman Empire in the west fell apart and the Pope seems to have taken on many of the characteristic of the emperor. I was in Rome years ago - in my student days - and they were carrying the Pope around with crowds shouting Viva la Papa! (maybe I spelled that wrong). To me, it resembled the sort of homage the Romans gave to their emperor. I believe even the words echoed the shouts during the imperial days.

I also have been troubled by the entire hierarchal setup, the lack of democracy in any real sense within the church. Yes, it has improved a bit since Vatican II with Parish Councils and such, and perhaps I have been unduly influenced by American democracy, but I am troubled when I see a large line of mostly-older men dressed in dated ceremonial outfits filing in and out of special church events. It looks like a throwback to ancient times -Roman times. And not a woman in that line. That also echoes ancient times.

And I have read various books on the Papacy, recently Absolute Monarchs by Norwich. Wow! What an assortment of pious saints and outrageous sinners. So many scandals. So many political machinations. I have trouble believing that God guides these Pontiffs in faith and morals when some of them appear to have had little faith and no morals!

As for the words of Jesus to Peter, many interpret that to mean that Christ was building his Church on Peter's testimony, not on Peter the man. After all, only a few verses later Jesus condemned Peter: "Get behind me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to me." Curious episode.

But "think and let think" - my credo. Many are ready to believe what they are told. Fine. However, to me freedom to weigh, question, explore, and doubt are important. I don't think it makes me less of a Christian. Faith is the kmey to the Christian faith and not a list of doctrines that theologians developed over the centuries.

God bless everybody.

[Nine_Two]

Originally Posted by dcointin

Could you explain what this would prove?

It disproves the claim that Rome was the only church that ministered to other churches in the post-apostolic era.

[Nine_Two]

Originally Posted by steve b

Polycarp is the bishop of Smyrna. Both Polycarp and Ignatius were desciples of St John the apostle. Keep in mind he is saying his farewells. He is encouraging his readers, to maintain the course and stay faithful.

Of course, he's not ministering at all in the Letter to the Smyrnaeans. Just like St. Clement wasn't ministering in his epistles to Corinth.