Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Early Church Fathers on The Primacy of Peter/Rome (Catholic/Orthodox Caucus)
Stay Catholic ^

Posted on 02/03/2007 1:58:47 PM PST by NYer

The Early Church Fathers understood from the beginning that Peter and his successors held a place of primacy in the Church.

Clement of Rome

Accept our counsel and you will have nothing to regret. . . . If anyone disobeys the things which have been said by him [Jesus] through us, let them know that they will involve themselves in no small danger. We, however, shall be innocent of this sin and will pray with entreaty and supplication that the Creator of all may keep unharmed the number of his elect (Letter to the Corinthians 58:2, 59:1[A.D. 95]).

Ignatius of Antioch

You [the See of Rome] have envied no one, but others have you taught. I desire only that what you have enjoined in your instructions may remain in force (Epistle to the Romans 3:1 [A.D. 110]).

Irenaeus

But since it would be too long to enumerate in such a volume as this the succession of all the churches, we shall confound all those who, in whatever manner, whether through self-satisfaction or vainglory, or through blindness and wicked opinion, assemble other than where it is proper, by pointing out here the successions of the bishops of the greatest and most ancient church known to all, founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles. Peter and Paul, that church which has the tradition and the faith which comes down to us after having been announced to men by the apostles. With that church, because of its superior origin, all the churches must agree, that is, all the faithful in the whole world, and it is in her that the faithful everywhere have maintained the apostolic tradition (Against Heresies 3:3:2 [inter A.D. 180-190]).

Clement of Alexandria

[T]he blessed Peter, the chosen, the preeminent, the first among the disciples, for whom alone with himself the Savior paid the tribute [Matt. 17:27], quickly grasped and understood their meaning. And what does he say? "Behold, we have left all and have followed you" [Matt. 19:2 7, Mark 10:28] (Who is the Rich Man That is Saved? 21:3-5 [A.D. 200]).

Tertullian

[T]he Lord said to Peter, "On this rock I will build my Church, I have given you the keys of the kingdom of heaven [and] whatever you shall have bound or loosed on earth will be bound or loosed in heaven" [Matt. 16:18-19]. ... Upon you, he says, I will build my Church; and I will give to you the keys, not to the Church; and whatever you shall have bound or you shall have loosed, not what they shall have bound or they shall have loosed (Modesty 21:9-10 [A.D. 220]).

Letter of Clement to James

Be it known to you, my lord, that Simon [Peter], who, for the sake of the true faith, and the most sure foundation of his doctrine, was set apart to be the foundation of the Church, and for this end was by Jesus himself, with his truthful mouth, named Peter, the first-fruits of our Lord, the first of the apostles; to whom first the Father revealed the Son; whom the Christ, with good reason, blessed; the called, and elect (Letter of Clement to James 2 [A.D, 221]).

Cyprian

With a false bishop appointed for themselves by heretics, they dare even to set sail and carry letters from schismatics and blasphemers to the Chair of Peter and to the principal church [at Rome], in which sacerdotal unity has its source" (Epistle to Cornelius [Bishop of Rome] 59:14 [A.D. 252]).

The Lord says to Peter: "I say to you," he says, "that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church" . . . On him he builds the Church, and to him he gives the command to feed the sheep John 21:17], and although he assigns a like power to all the apostles, yet he founded a single chair [cathedra], and he established by his own authority a source and an intrinsic reason for that unity. Indeed, the others were that also which Peter was [i.e., apostles], but a primacy is given to Peter, whereby it is made clear that there is but one Church and one chair. So too, all [the apostles] are shepherds, and the flock is shown to be one, fed by all the apostles in single-minded accord. If someone does not hold fast to this unity of Peter, can he imagine that he still holds the faith? If he [should] desert the chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built, can he still be confident that he is in the Church? (The Unity of the Catholic Church 4 [A.D. 251]).

Cyril of Jerusalem

In the power of the same Holy Spirit, Peter, both the chief of the apostles and the keeper of the keys of the kingdom of heaven, in the name of Christ healed Aeneas the paralytic at Lydda, which is now called Diospolis [Acts 9 ;3 2-3 4] (Catechetical Lectures 17;27 [A.D. 350]).

Optatus

In the city of Rome the Episcopal chair was given first to Peter, the chair in which Peter sat, the same who was head — that is why he is also called Cephas — of all the apostles, the one chair in which unity is maintained by all. Neither do the apostles proceed individually on their own, and anyone who would [presume to] set up another chair in opposition to that single chair would, by that very fact, be a schismatic and a sinner. . . . Recall, then, the origins of your chair, those of you who wish to claim for yourselves the title of holy Church" (The Schism of the Donatists 2:2 [circa A.D. 367]).

Ambrose of Milan

[Christ] made answer: "You are Peter, and upon this rock will I build my Church . . ." Could he not, then, strengthen the faith of the man to whom, acting on his own authority, he gave the kingdom, whom he called the rock, thereby declaring him to be the foundation of the Church [Matt. 16:18]? (The Faith 4:5 [A.D. 379]).

Augustine

Among these [apostles] Peter alone almost everywhere deserved to represent the whole Church. Because of that representation of the Church, which only he bore, he deserved to hear "I will give to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven" (Sermons 295:2 [A.D. 411]).

Who is ignorant that the first of the apostles is the most blessed Peter? (Commentary on John 56:1 [A.D. 416]).


TOPICS: Apologetics; Catholic; History; Orthodox Christian
KEYWORDS: church; peter; pope; primacy
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-85 next last
To: TexConfederate1861
"Leo X certainly THOUGHT he was the Lord."

Well, that's not really surprising. At Vatican I, the Roman Church became quite simply the pope. That's bound to go to one's head!

"Wherefore we teach and declare that,

* by divine ordinance,

* the Roman church possesses a pre-eminence of ordinary power over every other church, and that

* this jurisdictional power of the Roman pontiff is both episcopal and immediate.

61 posted on 02/04/2007 1:52:01 PM PST by Kolokotronis (Christ is Risen, and you, o death, are annihilated!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: Kolokotronis; adiaireton8
Is that the new Romish notion of what communion is?

Watch where you tread, using such language, for the sake of your Irish ancestors.

You really should read the Vatican I decree, A.

Do you mean the Vatican I that says the following?

5. This power of the Supreme Pontiff by no means detracts from that ordinary and immediate power of episcopal jurisdiction, by which bishops, who have succeeded to the place of the apostles by appointment of the Holy Spirit, tend and govern individually the particular flocks which have been assigned to them. On the contrary, this power of theirs is asserted, supported and defended by the Supreme and Universal Pastor; for St. Gregory the Great says: "My honor is the honor of the whole Church. My honor is the steadfast strength of my brethren. Then do I receive true honor, when it is denied to none of those to whom honor is due." [51]

Vatican I, Session 4, Chapter 3 (Source: http://www.ewtn.com/library/COUNCILS/V1.HTM

62 posted on 02/04/2007 1:56:28 PM PST by Pyro7480 ("Jesu, Jesu, Jesu, esto mihi Jesus" -St. Ralph Sherwin's last words at Tyburn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: Kolokotronis; TexConfederate1861
Leo X certainly THOUGHT he was the Lord.

Chapter and verse, please. :-Þ

63 posted on 02/04/2007 1:57:59 PM PST by Pyro7480 ("Jesu, Jesu, Jesu, esto mihi Jesus" -St. Ralph Sherwin's last words at Tyburn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: adiaireton8

Pope Gregory the Great rejected the title of "Universal Bishop"

In Tradition, the Pope was "primus inter pares" (first among equals")


64 posted on 02/04/2007 1:59:37 PM PST by TexConfederate1861 (Texas Secessionist Conservative, US Navy Veteran, Orthodox Christian.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480; TexConfederate1861
"Do you mean the Vatican I that says the following?

5. This power of the Supreme Pontiff by no means detracts from that ordinary and immediate power of episcopal jurisdiction, by which bishops, who have succeeded to the place of the apostles by appointment of the Holy Spirit, tend and govern individually the particular flocks which have been assigned to them. On the contrary, this power of theirs is asserted, supported and defended by the Supreme and Universal Pastor; for St. Gregory the Great says: "My honor is the honor of the whole Church. My honor is the steadfast strength of my brethren. Then do I receive true honor, when it is denied to none of those to whom honor is due." [51]

Indeed I do. I should have posted it. It adds such a surreal flavor to the decrees. The cited passage, coming as it does right after the anathema I cited, is an example of disingenuousness on a scale seldom seen outside papal proclamations. To call upon the memory of +Gregory the Great, a pope and a saint who rejected the term "Universal Bishop" is truly beyond the pale. I wonder if the Vatican I bishops thought they were fooling anyone with that?
65 posted on 02/04/2007 2:09:53 PM PST by Kolokotronis (Christ is Risen, and you, o death, are annihilated!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Kolokotronis; TexConfederate1861; adiaireton8
The things that make you go hmmmm....

From Quick Questions

Q: Is it true that Pope Gregory I denied that the pope is the "universal bishop" and taught that the Bishop of Rome has no authority over any other bishop?

No. Gregory the Great (540-604), saint, pope, and doctor of the Church, never taught any such thing. He would have denied that the title "universal bishop" could be applied to any one, himself included, if by that term one meant there was only one bishop for the whole world and that all other "bishops" were bishops in name only, with no real authority of their own. Such a distorted version of the biblical model of bishops is incompatible with Catholic teaching.

But that isn't to say that the title didn't--and doesn't--have a proper sense which Gregory approved of. If meant in the sense that the Bishop of Rome is the leader of all the bishops, the title is correct. If it means he is the only bishop and all the other "bishops" are not really successors to the apostles, it's false.

What Gregory condemned was the expropriation of the title Universal Bishop by Bishop John the Faster, the patriarch of Constantinople, who proclaimed himself Universal Bishop at the Synod of Constantinople in 588. Gregory condemned the patriarch's act because universal jurisdiction applies solely to the pope.

Some anti-Catholics cite the following quotations to give the false impression that Gregory was rejecting his own universal authority:

"I confidently say that whosoever calls himself, or desires to be called, Universal Priest, is in his elation the precursor of the Antichrist, because he proudly puts himself above all others" (Epistles 7:33).

"If then he shunned the subjecting of the members of Christ partially to certain heads, as if besides Christ, though this were to the apostles themselves, what wilt thou say to Christ, who is the head of the universal Church, in the scrutiny of the last judgment, having attempted to put all his members under thyself by the appellation of universal? Who, I ask, is proposed for imitation in this wrongful title but he who, despising the legions of angels constituted socially with himself, attempted to start up to an eminence of singularity, that he might seem to be under none and to be alone above all?" (Epistles 5:18).

Predictably, anti-Catholics neglect to inform their audiences that the context of these statements makes it clear that Gregory was not making these statements in regard to himself or to any other pope. He believed the Bishop of Rome has primacy of jurisdiction over all other bishops.

Gregory demonstrated this in his actions. He made it his business to approve candidates for the office of bishop. He rigorously examined men proposed for bishop and, rejecting some as unsuitable for the job, ordered that others be nominated instead (Epistles 1:55, 56; 7:38; 10:7). This is hardly behavior one would expect from a pope who renounced the idea of his having jurisdiction over other bishops.

Like his predecessors and successors, Gregory promulgated numerous laws, binding on all other bishops, on issues such as clerical celibacy (1:42, 50; 4:5, 26, 34; 7:1; 9:110, 218; 10:19; 11:56), the deprivation of priests and bishops guilty of criminal offenses (1:18, 32; 3:49; 4:26; 5:5, 17, 18), and the proper disposition of church revenues (1:10, 64; 2:20-22; 3:22; 4:11).

Gregory's writings show that he regarded and conducted himself as the universal bishop of the Church. He calls the diocese of Rome "the Apostolic See, which is the head of all other churches" (13:1). He said, "I, albeit unworthy, have been set up in command of the Church" (5:44). He taught that the pope, as successor to Peter, was granted by God a primacy over all other bishops (2:44, 3:30, 5:37, 7:37). He claimed that it was necessary for councils and synods to have the pope's approval to be binding and that only the pope had the authority to annul the their decrees (9:56, 5:39, 41, 44). He enforced his authority to settle disputes between bishops, even between patriarchs, and rebuked lax and erring bishops (2:50; 3:52, 63; 9:26, 27).

When Gregory denounced John the Faster's attempt to lay claim to the title Universal Bishop, his words were in accord with his actions and with his teachings. He was unequivocal in his teaching that all other bishops are subject to the pope: "As regards the Church of Constantinople, who can doubt that it is subject to the Apostolic See? Why, both our most religious Lord the Emperor and our brother the Bishop of Constantinople continually acknowledge it" (9:26).

66 posted on 02/04/2007 2:17:16 PM PST by Pyro7480 ("Jesu, Jesu, Jesu, esto mihi Jesus" -St. Ralph Sherwin's last words at Tyburn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: NYer
Matt. 16:18 - Jesus builds the Church only on Peter, the rock, with the other apostles as the foundation and Jesus as the Head.

That's incorrect. The rock refers to Peter's confession of faith.

Matt. 16:19 - only Peter receives the keys, which represent authority over the Church and facilitate dynastic succession to his authority.

Also incorrect. While the keys are mentioned to Peter, they are described as having the power to loose or bind on earth and heaven. When this is given, it is actually given to all of the Apostles equally.

67 posted on 02/04/2007 2:17:17 PM PST by FormerLib (Sacrificing our land and our blood cannot buy protection from jihad.-Bishop Artemije of Kosovo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: NYer
Ultimately, any claims that put Peter as the First with Authority over all are shattered by the previously quoted Scripture which I repeat below.
Matthew 20:25-28 But Jesus called them to Himself and said, "You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and those who are great exercise authority over them. Yet it shall not be so among you; but whoever desires to become great among you, let him be your servant. And whoever desires to be first among you, let him be your slave— just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many."
The end result is that the Orthodox Christian Church can never yield authority to the Pope because doing so would place us in opposition to the teachings of Jesus Christ.
68 posted on 02/04/2007 2:21:14 PM PST by FormerLib (Sacrificing our land and our blood cannot buy protection from jihad.-Bishop Artemije of Kosovo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: adiaireton8

"Why didn't the twenty-eighth canon of the Council of Chalcedon (451) become canon law?"

But it did, A. Read the excursus on Canon XXVIII here:

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/chalcedon.html


69 posted on 02/04/2007 2:26:45 PM PST by Kolokotronis (Christ is Risen, and you, o death, are annihilated!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480; TexConfederate1861; adiaireton8

Well, he certainly did condemn Pat. John and very rightly so. But citing to the arguments of an apologist for Roman Supremacy in response to those who question the outrage of Vatican I is hardly dispositive of the issue. Read all of what +Gregory the Great wrote in his letters and decrees and what emerges are the words of a saint who saw the role of the Pope not in terms of a Vatican I monarch but truly as the bishop who had the care of the entire Church in his hands, while at the same time acknowledging the equality of his fellow bishops and abjuring any notion that his unique position gave him any power, or better put for this discussion, universal, immediate jurisdiction, over his brother bishops or their dioceses. It is exactly that notion which he says deprives his brother bishops of their God given authority.


70 posted on 02/04/2007 2:35:16 PM PST by Kolokotronis (Christ is Risen, and you, o death, are annihilated!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: FormerLib; NYer

"When this is given, it is actually given to all of the Apostles equally."

Matt.18:18


71 posted on 02/04/2007 2:37:18 PM PST by Kolokotronis (Christ is Risen, and you, o death, are annihilated!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480

I am referring to his overwhelming arrogance, and GREED, especially in the "dogma of indulgences" He truly DID need to be "reformed."


72 posted on 02/04/2007 4:20:17 PM PST by TexConfederate1861 (Texas Secessionist Conservative, US Navy Veteran, Orthodox Christian.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

Comment #73 Removed by Moderator

To: Kolokotronis; adiaireton8
Finally, you comment that Orthodoxy isn't even "A Church" but rather "a multitude of independant autonomous churches". We are that and as such we are The Church, not "a" Church. By the way, by your definition, every Eastern Rite Church in communion with Rome except perhaps the Ruthenians and the Maronites aren't The Church either.

The new Code of Canon Law, promulgated by Pope John Paul II, uses the phrase "autonomous ritual Churches" to describe these various Churches (canon 112). Each Church has its own hierarchy, spirituality, and theological perspective. Because of the particularities of history, there is only one Western Catholic Church, while there are 22 Eastern Catholic Churches. The Latin Church is immediately subject to the Roman Pontiff. The Eastern Catholic Churches are each led by a Patriarch, Major Archbishop, or Metropolitan, who governs their Church together with a synod of bishops. Through the Congregation for Oriental Churches, the Roman Pontiff works to assure the health and well-being of the Eastern Catholic Churches.

While this diversity within the one Catholic Church can appear confusing at first, it in no way compromises the Church's unity. In a certain sense, it is a reflection of the mystery of the Trinity. Just as God is three Persons, yet one God, so the Church is 22 Churches, yet one Church.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church summarizes this nicely:

"From the beginning, this one Church has been marked by a great diversity which comes from both the variety of God's gifts and the diversity of those who receive them... Holding a rightful place in the communion of the Church there are also particular Churches that retain their own traditions. The great richness of such diversity is not opposed to the Church's unity" (CCC no. 814).

Although there are 22 Churches, there are only eight "Rites" that are used among them. A Rite is a "liturgical, theological, spiritual and disciplinary patrimony," (Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches, canon 28). "Rite" best refers to the liturgical and disciplinary traditions used in celebrating the sacraments. Many Eastern Catholic Churches use the same Rite, although they are distinct autonomous Churches. The Ukrainian Catholic Church and the Melkite Catholic Church are distinct Churches with their own hierarchies. Yet they both use the Byzantine Rite.

74 posted on 02/04/2007 4:52:38 PM PST by NYer ("Where the bishop is present, there is the Catholic Church" - Ignatius of Antioch)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: NYer
Peter & Succession (Understanding the Church Today)

Pope: may all Christians recognize true meaning of Peter’s primacy

THE PRIMACY OF THE SUCCESSOR OF PETER IN THE MYSTERY OF THE CHURCH

Pope St. Leo the Great and the Petrine Primacy

The Epiphany of the Roman Primacy

THE PRIMACY OF THE SUCCESSOR OF PETER IN THE MYSTERY OF THE CHURCH [Ratzinger]

75 posted on 02/04/2007 5:30:29 PM PST by Salvation (†With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: NYer

2051 The infallibility of the Magisterium of the Pastors extends to all the elements of doctrine, including moral doctrine, without which the saving truths of the faith cannot be preserved, expounded, or observed.
 
891 "The Roman Pontiff, head of the college of bishops, enjoys this infallibility in virtue of his office, when, as supreme pastor and teacher of all the faithful - who confirms his brethren in the faith he proclaims by a definitive act a doctrine pertaining to faith or morals. . . . The infallibility promised to the Church is also present in the body of bishops when, together with Peter's successor, they exercise the supreme Magisterium," above all in an Ecumenical Council. When the Church through its supreme Magisterium proposes a doctrine "for belief as being divinely revealed," and as the teaching of Christ, the definitions "must be adhered to with the obedience of faith." This infallibility extends as far as the deposit of divine Revelation itself.
 
2035 The supreme degree of participation in the authority of Christ is ensured by the charism of infallibility. This infallibility extends as far as does the deposit of divine Revelation; it also extends to all those elements of doctrine, including morals, without which the saving truths of the faith cannot be preserved, explained, or observed.
 
889 In order to preserve the Church in the purity of the faith handed on by the apostles, Christ who is the Truth willed to confer on her a share in his own infallibility. By a "supernatural sense of faith" the People of God, under the guidance of the Church's living Magisterium, "unfailingly adheres to this faith."
 
890 The mission of the Magisterium is linked to the definitive nature of the covenant established by God with his people in Christ. It is this Magisterium's task to preserve God's people from deviations and defections and to guarantee them the objective possibility of professing the true faith without error. Thus, the pastoral duty of the Magisterium is aimed at seeing to it that the People of God abides in the truth that liberates. To fulfill this service, Christ endowed the Church's shepherds with the charism of infallibility in matters of faith and morals. The exercise of this charism takes several forms:
 

76 posted on 02/04/2007 5:32:11 PM PST by Salvation (†With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480; Alex Murphy; Religion Moderator
Leo X was truly one of the bad popes. That I am not denying. But the rebellion of the "Reformers" was worse.

RM,

I dare say that was an invitation to Protestant input.

Snipe.

77 posted on 02/04/2007 7:40:48 PM PST by Enosh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: Enosh; Religion Moderator

Just because one person (me) made a comment? The article of the thread has no such "snipe."


78 posted on 02/04/2007 7:42:16 PM PST by Pyro7480 ("Jesu, Jesu, Jesu, esto mihi Jesus" -St. Ralph Sherwin's last words at Tyburn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480

You sniped us "reformers" in pointing to the "failure" of Pope Leo X.


79 posted on 02/04/2007 7:45:52 PM PST by Enosh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480; Enosh; NYer
It doesn't matter whether the snipe is in the article or in a reply post except that a reply post can be removed to keep the caucus closed.

The choice is yours, either I remove the reply post or open the thread for rebuttal.

80 posted on 02/04/2007 8:31:27 PM PST by Religion Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-85 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.

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