Skip to comments.
Pope Urged to Ax 'Vicar of Jesus' Title
Moscow Times ^
| April 2005
| By Tom Heneghan
Posted on 04/05/2006 9:49:12 PM PDT by Cato1
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 101-103 next last
To: marsh_of_mists
I agree. Now they are just pushing it.
There comes a time when enough is enough.
To: PetroniusMaximus
Jesus warned against exalted titles. The disciples took no exalted titles in the NT. You have to call them something. What do you call them? "Dude"? "Cool Guy"?
The NT Christians use titles such as deacons, presbyters, elders, and episkopos (bishops). Elder and bishop are exalted titles by your standard.
To: Cato1
Hilarion's request is hilarious.
To: steadfastconservative
Hilarion's request is hilarious. That is exactly why I am not hopeful of a union with the Russian Orthodox Church. Russians are well... Russians. They don't like foreigners. They distrust the motivations of outsiders.
Catholic Europe developed into a cosmopolitan community prior to the Protestant Revolt and "Enlightenment". Russia and the Russian Orthodox Church has always been and will always be nationalistic.
To: drewmc2001
DJ Benny & the Be-Bop Bishops?
25
posted on
04/06/2006 1:04:27 PM PDT
by
ArrogantBustard
(Western Civilisation is aborting, buggering, and contracepting itself out of existence.)
To: Robertsll
"You have to call them something."
How about "Brother Benedict"
"The NT Christians use titles such as deacons,"
Hmmm... "Deacon" or "Supreme Deacon of the Universe"
See any difference there?
Papal exalted titles are against the spirit of the NT, they were prohibited by Christ and they serve mainly to divide Christians. Can you think of a really good reason to ignore Christ's teaching?
To: PetroniusMaximus
Hmmm... "Deacon" or "Supreme Deacon of the Universe" See any difference there?
You are going to extremes here.
The etymology of the word bishop comes from the Greek word episkopos (åðéóêïðïò), which can be generally translated as bishop, overseer, superintendent, supervisor, or foreman.
The term "Vicar of Christ" is very biblical if you accept Matthew Chapter 16.
To: PetroniusMaximus
How do you get around with no eyes and no hands?
After all, Christ said, that if your eye were an occasion of sin to you, you should gouge it out, and if your hand led you to sin you should chop it off.
Oh . . . and if you've had the misfortune to lose one of your parents in death, I hope that - in fidelity to the words of Jesus - you didn't go to their funerals.
After all, let the dead bury their own dead.
And it must get cold in the winter walking around with no sandals . . .
Get a life.
To: Robertsll
By the same token, the Patriarch of Antioch could claim that same title because he too is a Successor of St. Peter.
St. Peter went to Antioch First :)
29
posted on
04/07/2006 11:53:35 AM PDT
by
pravknight
(Christos Regnat, Christos Imperat, Christus Vincit)
To: TaxachusettsMan
"How do you get around with no eyes and no hands? "
Since you seem to be implying that Jesus words were symbolic, what do you think he was getting at in the passage about no titles? If he didn't mean what he literally said, what was he "alluding" to?
"After all, let the dead bury their own dead."
You see symbolism? Metaphor? Odd, since I'm sure you find him to be most literal when he refers to eating his flesh. Right?
To: pravknight
By the same token, the Patriarch of Antioch could claim that same title because he too is a Successor of St. Peter. St. Peter went to Antioch First :) You sound like you're saying I don't know Church history. What you fail to understand is the bishops of Antioch did not replace Peter as leader of the Church. Unless you claim that Evodius (bishop of Antioch for many years while Peter was still alive) was the leader of the Church at the same time as Peter.
St. Peter was leader of Antioch for a time. Then he left and lead the Christians in Rome. Because he died as Bishop of Rome, not Bishop of Antioch, Peter's successor is the Bishop of Rome.
Peter's primacy resided with Peter throughout his life. He did not leave it with Bishop Evodius in Antioch.
To: PetroniusMaximus
Would you be a devotee of the
Battered Sheep Ministry? The Pope is more than a spiritual teacher like your local minister, he oversees a vast network and is also the sovereign of the Holy See (The Vatican), a nation-state. These are titles attached to the office to which he was elected. You might have an argument for eliminating all formalities and titles across the Catholic Church but I don't see a reason to single out the Pope.
I interpret the admonition about titles to be a caution against letting exalted titles go to your head, admonition against rejecting humility and the like--entirely as a reminder that we're created equal.
32
posted on
04/07/2006 10:37:30 PM PDT
by
newzjunkey
(Fellow 50th Congressional Freepers: Don't fall for Bilbray!)
To: Robertsll
In any case, the Patriarch of Antioch is every bit as much a successor of St. Peter as the Bishop of Rome. Successor of St. Peter is a title of the Melkite patriarch, not to mention the other claimants.
Besides, the only historical evidence that St. Peter transferred his authority to the bishops of Rome, ad personam, come from the spurious Clementines.
33
posted on
04/08/2006 1:43:54 AM PDT
by
pravknight
(Christos Regnat, Christos Imperat, Christus Vincit)
To: pravknight
The Pope should restore the title Vicar of Sts. Peter and Paul. From the acts of the Second Council of Nicea:If the ancient orthodoxy be perfected and restored by your means in those regions, and the venerable icons be placed in their original state, you will be partakers with the Lord Constantine, Emperor of old, now in the Divine keeping, and the Empress Helena, who made conspicuous and confirmed the orthodox Faith, and exalted still more your holy mother, the Catholic and Roman and spiritual Church, and with the orthodox Emperors who ruled after them, and so your most pious and heaven-protected name likewise will be set forth as that of another Constantine and another Helena, being renowned and praised through the whole world, by whom the holy Catholic and Apostolic Church is restored. And especially if you follow the tradition of the orthodox Faith of the Church of the holy Peter and Paul, the chief Apostles, and embrace their Vicar. Christ is present now and unto the ages, and in a sense every bishop is a Vicar of Christ according to St. Ignatios of Antioch. The title Vicar of Christ is nothing but shear Ultramontane triumphalism. Theodoret of Cyrrhus LXXXVI.(2) To Flavianus, bishop of Constantinople: Dioscorus, however, refuses to abide by these decisions; he is turning the see of the blessed Mark upside down; and these things he does though he perfectly well knows that the Antiochene metropolis possesses the throne of the great Peter, who was teacher of the blessed Mark, and first and coryphaeus of the chorus of the apostles.(3)
34
posted on
04/08/2006 1:54:48 AM PDT
by
pravknight
(Christos Regnat, Christos Imperat, Christus Vincit)
To: pravknight
For goodness sake, the Pope of Alexandria has historically borne the following titles, which the Melkite patriarch continues in the Catholic Church:
"Bishop of Bishops, Pastor of Pastors, 13th Apostle, Judge of the Universe."
35
posted on
04/08/2006 2:04:31 AM PDT
by
pravknight
(Christos Regnat, Christos Imperat, Christus Vincit)
To: dangus
How did the vicar of saint Peter become the vicar of Christ?
To: PetroniusMaximus
Oh, don't worry about me, dear. We've a Magisterium with authority from Christ in an unbroken descent from Peter to instruct unerringly in matters of interpretation.
The symbolic/literal dilemma is entirely yours!
Goes with the territory of "private interpretation".
And you're welcome to it!
I just think you should spend your precious time minding your own confused spiritual business, rather than waste it trying to teach lessons to the Church that, by Christ's mandate, was Mater et Magistra long before you were born and will continue to be so long after you've been caught up in the Rapture!
To: TaxachusettsMan
"Oh, don't worry about me, dear. We've a Magisterium with authority from Christ in an unbroken descent from Peter to instruct unerringly in matters of interpretation."
I'll take that to mean that you don't have an answer to my question... or that you would rather not answer. No surprise, since your "tradition" is clearly against the plain meaning of the Scripture.
"to instruct unerringly in matters of interpretation."
What is the basis for this claim of unerring interpretation? Just because you "say so"???
"Goes with the territory of "private interpretation"."
I'll stick with the example of noble Bereans of Acts, who, when confronted with an issue turned to the Scriptures (not the Magesterium) to seek the truth.
"I just think you should spend your precious time minding your own confused spiritual business, rather than waste it trying to teach lessons to the Church"
Your Church make a claim to a title. I dispute that claim with the Scripture. You have no answer to my Scriptural argument except something to the effect of, "oh, we can't be wrong 'cause we're always right".
And who looks confused here? (hint: it isn't me)
To: newzjunkey
"You might have an argument for eliminating all formalities and titles across the Catholic Church but I don't see a reason to single out the Pope."
Exactly. That is my argument. If Jesus meant what he said then all the pompous titles should go. Catholic, Orthodox, Protestant and whatever.
Jesus was born in a cattle stall. What kind of message is implied by that?
To: Cato1
More demands rom the Russian State Church. Booo-ring.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 101-103 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson