Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: adiaireton8
You seem to be assuming that if any bishop (other than the bishop of Rome) has authority, then the bishop of Rome does not have primacy. That's a non sequitur.
-A8


You seem to be assuming the Bishop of Rome had primacy beyond the Western Church. He did not. The Bishop of Rome could not unilaterrly appoint Bishops for the Estern Churches. The "Primacy" of Rome came much later.
148 posted on 11/18/2006 11:39:18 AM PST by OLD REGGIE (I am most likely a Biblical Unitarian? Let me be perfectly clear. I know nothing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies ]


To: OLD REGGIE
The "Primacy" of Rome came much later.

No, it came when Peter became bishop of the church at Rome. I'll grant that the *full* recognition of the primacy of Rome came later.

-A8

149 posted on 11/18/2006 12:09:04 PM PST by adiaireton8 ("There is no greater evil one can suffer than to hate reasonable discourse." - Plato, Phaedo 89d)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 148 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson