Replies

Never mind answering any questions in the last --- those were not posed for you to solve, for me. For those touch nearly upon the center of those differences remaining in regards to those both East & 'West' of the Latin Church.

There are those of Rome who have pondered these things, hoping and praying for solution, seeing the problem, grasping or sensing towards it, even much as I myself have touched upon it, seeing too that Rome must play a part in that...knowing that as Papacy there was once spoken of (and still is, often enough) was not fully justified. The extraneous baggage clutters the scene, too many words declared irrevocably true --- the lawyers can't save it now, other than to distract the juries, but still can't get it past the Judge.

In Francis, we see restraint (but too much openness for some RC tastes). It is as if he knows, and would rein back from the most far-reaching of Rome's assertions, that being what what she has spoken of for herself (in the Kingdom of God) not be accessible unless thru herself. THere is a search on for just the right words...which can smooth things over...but allow the same claims to stand, understood in some particular light, those words if found be able to make it (her past errors) all go away, allowing her self perceptions to see her still perched upon a throne, an singular Princess, the one-and-only Bride to be, etc.

Any God that would deliberately set up a choke-point on His own Graces such as Rome has shown that it can be, would not be a a Wise God, nor Gracious God, nor one all-powerful either, as in having once delegated, then can no longer bring correction. It didn't work that-a-ways for the children of Israel, and they had Abraham as earthly (visible) Father direct flesh and blood descent. There's some Incarnational thinking to put in the 'ol pipe, light it up and puff for a while...

And we think that government employee Unions have job-lock? Ha. They are mere pikers in comparison to hard-headed Jews & CHristians who think themselves their replacements. Careful for what one wishes for?

Christ did not give the master set of "keys" to Peter, and to Peter alone, but retained for himself Master copy of that same set of keys. The early church understood this, which is part of why so many were aghast at Rome's clawing and grasping to declare for itself that they be appointed over all, even by God, doing so by conflating all concepts and past expression of "primacy" to get there --- which centuries later Newman had to declare to have been -- not there in the beginning -- but only in form of acorn.

It's like ---- a contract be written up -- then one party begins adding clauses, exemptions (for itself) while redefining words and phrases which once meant one thing (even to themselves) but now mean something just a bit subtly different --- but which difference has FAR reaching implications, going much much further than the mere adjusting of the word's connotative meanings (helped along by the added clauses and exemptions) would seemingly take it.

For that is what it boils down to, or often did, even as there is a kinder face now shown. It went from regional dominance, to asserting that same be the will of God (for themselves) the world over, without restraint other than that which they themselves would declare.

She is only restrained now --- because others will not allow her free roam, as much as she would, for she tells us what it is she wants, on these threads, those demands echoing from when Damasus first dialed up 1-800 THUGS FOR JESUS to place himself upon papal chair -- since that time, she has proven over and again that she cannot be trusted with unrestrained claims upon 'authority' any more than would be expected from anyone else (in the Kingdom) thus having brought upon herself the abiding suspicions and animosities many others still have for her.

Yet it seems that those who make some of the straightest, best and most honestly based open challenges often then go too far, such as in speaking of woman priests, or something even more far from traditions (both East & West of Rome -- the best which can be found in those) so seem in my eyes to have done more damage then if they had not pressured for return back to primary foundational principles and spirit in the first place...for Rome not only would bristle at any who would point out that she need reel back extent of many claims in regards to herself, but the exclusivity of those also.

Yet what occurs --- but a pointing towards some error in others "see, you are not perfect" before going right back to the "we" are the only perfect --- even after it's been shown her six ways from Sunday that that is simply not the truth...

Groundhog Day? you don't say.

Now I see the acorn appearing again (i did mention we woudl get to it, didn't I?). I damaged it (slightly) so you need go back and make rhetorical retrieval of some sort for it? Is that it?

It's the same 'ol song and dance.

The arguments you have brought to this thread, if one was paying attention, unfolded as much a retracing of how things got to where they are today, from Romanist perspective. Always massaging and polishing that which came before, draping it all in copious rhetoric of "explanation" while turning blind eyes and deaf ear to what is not wished to be seen or heard. Backwards-ville PRIDE, seemingly not capable of admitting to the slightest error (in some contexts) lest the facade and charade come to an end.

Rome -- inapproachable, save on her own terms. That is why she is so isolated, and is only now in the last century or so since the Reformation, coming to grips with it.

She has painted herself into a corner, with her own rhetoric concerning herself.

Whatever she has from God (not because of herself, but due to Grace) God Himself pours abundantly elsewhere, to all who would open themselves for it, to learn of it, and how too themselves forgive.

This is nothing new, other than the Good News itself, which was new for all of us when it came to us from the children of Israel. God bless 'em.