Francis: “I’m open to discussing the Petrine Primacy”

vaticaninsider.lastampa.it/en/the-vatican/detail/articolo/francesco-terra-santa-34340/

Really? Where in the article does it say that?

This news seems huge to me. And sorry if there’s a thread on this topic already. I didn’t find one at first.

I’m a revert. When “on the way out,” I had critically evaluated some of the language published by the earliest Church Fathers to see what they said about Roman primacy. I found that prior to about 200-250 AD (a range starting around the time when Tertullian become a Donatist and finally after the persecution from Emperor Decius), it looked as though the Church Fathers mostly said that the primacy of Rome was based on the deaths of both Peter and Paul there. After 250 AD or so, most of the Church Fathers said that the primacy of Rome was based on Matthew 16:16-18. That seemed to me a change from “Roman primacy” to “Petrine primacy,” and to me that made me doubt.

I also compared how the Popes who heard about Quartodecimanism (celebrating easter on 14th day of Nisan in the Hebrew calendar) affected that. For example, Pope Anicetus (c. 157-168) didn’t agree with Quartodecimanism, but agreed to disagree with Bishop St. Polycarp of Smyrna. Later, in 193 AD, during the papacy of Victor I, there was a synod in Rome (among other synods) about it, and Pope Victor sent a letter to the eastern churches telling them to stop. Bishop Polycrates of Ephesus who held a synod in Ephesus to reject what the Pope had written. Pope Victor was going to excommunicate Polycrates, but St. Irenaeus and others intervened with him to follow a more peaceful path. Eventually, a group of Quartodecimanist bishops got together to review their tradition, which they said they’d received from the Apostles, and urged the all the churches to celebrate Easter on the same day as the rest of the Church. At that time, it suggested to me that Anicetus was less of a “micromanager” as was Victor, which I argued at the time was a result of changing ecclesiology.

However, I have since realized that my former reading was – shall we say – somewhat cherry picked. For example, Pope Anicetus himself got into the disagreement with St. Polycarp only because Polycarp had come to Rome to visit him… that suggests that St. Polycarp viewed the Bishop of Rome as his superior among bishops. I’ve also read the Bible a lot more, and to me, it now it’s clear that St. Peter was the head of the Church. There’s also the first letter of Clement I, which suggests that the Roman bishop was also the head of the Church.

To me, I think it would be useful to talk through all this history with our Orthodox brothers and sisters. They are sure to have arguments lined up, but so do we. But fundamentally, we need to have better relationships with them. Love and truth are both needed.

The title of the article.

Why does it call him “Pope Bergoglio” in the article? I don’t know if I trust the source.

The heading is misleading. It doesn’t mention “Petrine Primacy” anywhere in the article. I did a word search. :wink:

Methinks the headline writer got ahead of himself/herself. :slight_smile:

That’s a fairly typical practice of Italian journalists. I wouldn’t discount the source solely on that basis.

I’ve also noticed a propensity in Italian media towards exaggeration, though. :stuck_out_tongue:

They have fun trying to make something out of nothing. God Bless. Memaw

Pope Bergoglio expresses his desire to discuss the Petrine Primacy. “Divisions remain between the churches, even after the first embrace Christians continue to be persecuted, there is the ecumenicalism of sufferance. Like the stone of the sepulchre, we must cast aside the obstacles that stand between Christians.” (emphasis added)

Why would the author need to repeat the title quote in the body of the text?

What about the source do you not trust? Do you question the factual accuracy of the events depicted?

I am in the communications industry. #1 - Many times the headline writer is not the writer of the article. #2 - If the info in the headline is not repeated and expanded upon in the body of the article, you can be assured that the headline was made to “grab” the attention of the reader, otherwise its just more noise in a sea of web-noise. i.e. it’s simply the “view” of the headline writer or the “view” of the vehicle presenting the meat of the article, their interpretation so to speak.

#3 If you read the article carefully, what text found with the body supports the title in any reasonably specific way? I haven’t found it.

I think his “radar” went off with the use of the Holy Father’s surname instead of his correct papal name, Francis. While unusual in English speaking countries, it is perfectly normal in Italian. If memory serves, the practice spread in reaction to several men choose the name “Pope Pius” in a row.

If someone, anyone can point me to a spot IN the article that has our Pope coming even remotely close to discussing “Petrine Primacy”, I ask that they point it out to me. If you find it, then I need glasses.

More than just the silly headline is that it is in quotes, as if it is a quote, which it is not.

Me thinks if the Pope had actually said this—
it would be breaking news and we would see Catholic scholars and bishops and priests on all the news shows discussing
what the Pope is supposedly open to.

I quoted the passage that supports the title.

That’s not in a quote from our Pope, that’s simply a reiteration of the title. I will ask again:

If someone, anyone can point me to a spot IN the article that has our Pope coming even remotely close to discussing “Petrine Primacy”, I ask that they point it out to me. If you find it, then I need glasses.

I repeat the previous quote:

Pope Bergoglio expresses his desire to discuss the Petrine Primacy. “Divisions remain between the churches, even after the first embrace Christians continue to be persecuted, there is the ecumenicalism of sufferance. Like the stone of the sepulchre, we must cast aside the obstacles that stand between Christians.” (emphasis added)

The Petrine Ministry is the primary obstacle between Christians. :banghead:

“Discussing” does not imply that he he will make any changes, only that he is willing to address any concerns.

For example, Pope John Paul II promised to “consider” the issue of women’s ordination. He fulfilled his promise, and addressed the concerns people had regarding the issue. His address of the concerns resulted in a much stronger reiteration of the constant church teaching.

Please provide a quote where OUR POPE said the words “Petrine Primacy”. I don’t think you can.

Why is this still relevant? Another poster explained the rational for the headline. I explained why it is accurate.

Which poster?

Hey, your entitled to your opinion. Peace be with you.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.