The puzzling bit:
*]“Rome must not require more from the East with respect to the doctrine of primacy than had been formulated and was lived in the first millennium. When the Patriarch Athenagoras, on July 25, 1967, on the occasion of the Pope’s visit to Phanar, designated him as the successor of St. Peter, as the most esteemed among us, as one also presides in charity, this great Church leader was expressing the essential content of the doctrine of primacy as it was known in the first millennium. Rome need not ask for more. Reunion could take place in this context if, on the one hand, the East would cease to oppose as heretical the developments that took place in the West in the second millennium and would accept the Catholic Church as legitimate and orthodox in the form she had acquired in the course of that development, while, on the other hand, the West would recognize the Church of the East as orthodox and legitimate in the form she has always had.” – Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger[/LIST]my emphases]
The book it comes from is discussed identified here - lane.elcore.net/rqd2.htm
lane.elcore.net/rqd6.htm - for context & discussion of the quotation itself
Now that is out of the way - a question: How is that supposed to fit with what the CC has taught about Herself at Vatican I & Vatican II ?
Are we supposed to believe in the infallibility of the Roman Pontiff - or not ?
If we are - why is the same not required of all who wish to be in union with Rome ?
If Vatican I (& a lot of other councils) can be ignored by the Orthodox - why should we pay any attention to those Councils ?
Or is Vatican I’s definitions in Pastor Aeternus (say) infallible as long as they are read by a Roman-Rite Catholic, becoming uninfallible the moment they are read by an Orthodox Christian ? That, would be the very purest relativism: as well as being heresy in the very strictest sense
Those are a few of the problems with that quotation
IOW - the ideas in that quotation demolish, from the foundation upwards, everything we are called upon to believe as Divinely revealed & true. It is impossible to exaggerate the destructive power of the notions in that quotation: it utterly destroys the Papacy - IOW, it obliterates the very position its author now occupies.
Comments, anyone ?