Question on the Papacy


#1

Wikipedia’s article on the Pope states the following with respect to the early history of the Pope:
It was not until 440 when Leo the Great more clearly articulated the extension of papal authority as doctrine, promulgating in edicts and in council his right to exert “the full range of apostolic powers that Jesus had first bestowed on the apostle Peter”. This body of edicts and council rulings were later formally referred to as Petrine theory. Leo I is sometimes referred to as the “master builder of the Papacy”. It was under Leo I that the bishopric of Rome was first acclaimed in ecumenical council at the Council of Chalcedon in 451 as uniquely “speaking with the voice of Peter”. Nevertheless, at this same Council the bishops accorded both the bishops of Rome and of Constantinople the same degree of primacy.
(emphasis mine). There were no references there so I don’t know where to start, but can someone tell me, do we still have the official canons of the council of Chalcedon? And can somebody please point out exactly what was said, with respect to the primacy? Thanks in advance!


#2

Atreyu,

Click on the url below and go down to What is usually called canon 28 (on the honour to be accorded the see of Constantinople) is in fact a resolution passed by the council at the 16th session. It was rejected by the Roman legates. Read the canon and notice for some thing to be de fide it must be accepted by accepted by the Bishop of Rome, the Pope.

geocities.com/Heartland/Valley/8920/churchcouncils/Ecum04.htm

kk


#3

Atreyu, Maybe if you are good at it. You or someone could fix Wikipedia’s article. Are you allowed to link to other sites? Or paraphrase them? :confused:

I was thinking of this as a start. newadvent.org/cathen/12260a.htm

But I think someone more web efficient and Pope knowledgeable should do it. :o

Of course having just read the article on wikipedia’s it will take someone much more knowledgeable to change it.


#4

I don’t know about editing the Wikipedia article, although that is something I have thought of doing before so maybe I should look into it a bit more. But I’m hardly a scholar on early church history so maybe I’ll leave this one to the experts, and stick to physics… Linking to the New Advent site is a good idea however, so I might look into that one.

As for my question, perhaps I should rephrase a little bit. What I’m intending to show is that the office of the Papacy developed (as per development of doctrine) into the office we know and love today. I’m not saying that the office didn’t exist to begin with, and suddenly sprang out of nothing. Rather, as more objections to the office surfaced, the doctrine itself was further defined. Therefore (as far as I’m aware), before the doctrine itself was declared, it wasn’t necessarily a matter of faith to believe in the Papacy. Correct me if I’m wrong here. But at some time (and I’m thinking it was the council of Chalcedon), the doctrine was defined, and hereafter the doctrine was a matter of faith. Therefore if the Orthodox accept this council, they must accept the Papacy.

Does this make sense? I hope you understand what I’m trying to say. What is the defined doctrine with respect to the Papacy; with respect to what was defined and where and when it was defined? And how did that differ from the honour bestowed on the Patriarch of Constantinople? I don’t really care too much about infalliblity at the moment, I’m looking for a church council that defined the authority of jurisdiction of the Pope.

Thanks again, and sorry for the very convoluted posts…


#5

bump

Anyone?


#6

You know, its facinating what you can find on Wikipedia, and its an interesting resource to have to look up things that may not have made it into traditional reference works, such as pop culture items, slang, and the like. The problems arise from the fact that traditional issues are also entered by people that have a particular bias or agenda, and some people begin to use it as a reference for everything that they decide to look up. Ah, the pitfall of the information age. :frowning:


#7

Yeah, I like to use it as a starting point. But this starting point isn’t getting me anywhere so far :frowning:

I guess I don’t really know how to look up the answers to my questions, and I hoped somebody here would. I guess I have to suck it up and do some work for a change!


#8

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.