Please freepmail me if you want on/off this list
Posted on 05/29/2007 8:53:16 AM PDT by kawaii
28 May 2007, 12:17
Orthodox-Catholic Commission for Theological Dialogue to discuss primacy of the Pope of Rome and Patriarch of Constantinople at the meeting in October in Italy
Vienna, May 28, Interfax - The Moscow Patriarchate intends to assert its own position in the discussion on the primacy of the Pope of Rome in Christendom at the second meeting of the Joint Orthodox-Catholic Theological Commission to take place in October in Ravenna, Italy.
‘Our principal affirmation is this: primacy in the Church is necessary, also on the universal level, but on the level of the Universal Church it cannot be the primacy of jurisdiction but only the primacy of honour’, Bishop Hilarion of Vienna and Austria, Russian Church representative to European organizations, told Interfax on Monday.
‘There can be no compromises’ in this matter for the Moscow Patriarchate, he said. The aim of the theological dialogue is not to make a compromise but to identify the original understanding of the primacy of the Bishop of Rome in the early undivided Church, he noted.
‘Historically, the primacy of the Bishop of Rome in the Christian Church, from our point of view, was that of honour, not jurisdiction. That is to say, the jurisdiction of the Pope of Rome was never applied to all the Churches’, the bishop stressed.
He recalls that in the second millennium, the Pope of Rome have become ‘de facto Patriarch of the West’, while in the East the Church is headed by four patriarchs of local Orthodox Churches.
After the breakup with Rome, primacy in the Orthodox world ‘shifted automatically as it were to Constantinople, though all the early canons ascribe to the Bishop of Constantinople the second place after the Bishop of Rome; no canon speaks of the primacy of Constantinople’, the bishop noted.
‘We consider it (the primacy of Constantinople - IF) exclusively as primacy of honour, while the See of Constantinople itself tends occasionally to give a broad interpretation to this primacy. These are the questions I believe around which principal problems will emerge’, Bishop Hilarion said.
He says the Moscow Patriarchate is drafting a special document to reflect the official point of view of the Russian Orthodox Church on primacy in the Universal Church in general and the primacies of the Bishops of Rome and Constantinople in particular.
See the full text of interview under the Exclusive heading.
ping
Question: These Patriarchs of local Orthodox Churches, do they have the same level of authority (or Jurisdiction) as the Pope has in the West, over their local Church? If so, why is there a rejection of the concept of Papal supremacy?
they aren’t able to declare an aspect of doctrine infailably if that’s what you mean...
Hmm.
Would one be impertinent to wonder out loud how this same argument might apply to the Moscow patriarchate? ;)
In all sincerity, I would be interested in your interpretation of this passage
JMJ
they tried actually.
it applies to the Church as a whole.
At the risk of sounding like Arnie. . I'll be back
JMJ
JMJ
I’m curious, by what means is a doctrine declared infallible, or unchangable, or dogmatic, in the Church today and what are some relatively modern (post 16th Century) examples of this practice?
I can’t speak for an Orthodox interpretation, but I don’t think a Catholic interpretation would be totally dismissive of kawaii’s point either. The power to bind and loose is given to the Apostles corporately in Matt 18:18 after it is given to Peter singularly in Matt 16:
http://www.usccb.org/nab/bible/matthew/matthew18.htm
To frame the issue as an either-or doesn’t quite capture the complexity of Matt’s text. The “binding and loosing” which Peter is given personally is also shared among the Apostolic College, but as a body and not singularly.
How that balance is to be achieved between the Primus and the College of Bishops is above my pay grade, but it seems clear that some sort of balance is demanded in Scripture.
Here I am defending the Orthodox LOL...
But see Matt 18:18 for the Scripture behind kawaii’s logic, which clearly ascribes the power to bind and loose in the plural. I don’t think Catholics can be so dismissive of his point.
And as to Orthodox pride being the cause for schism....well, as a traditionalist Catholic, I’ve seen too much self-congratulatory pride on my side of aisle to offer that as an argument against the East.
1, Rome called the crusade, and never excommunicated the Bishops who preached that the crusaders were pre-forgiven for any sins in it’s taking. Further Rome has never returned the ‘booty’.
2. I don’t beleive the Pope is forbidden entry into Russia. Either way since the Pope is not the leader of a church in communion with the Orthodox, why would he be treated as anything other than the leader of a non-Orthodox group?
3. The filioque was added outside of a council so regardless of primacy the Pope excommunicated himself according to the canons of the councils which forbade changes.
4. There is no such primacy in scripture, where questions of doctrine are resolved in councilar form in the presence of the Holy Spirit, not by someone who arbitrarily decides they’re infailable by suggesting they were sitting down when they issued they’re decree however heretical or blasphemous it might actually be.
5. Of 5 Sees only one left the church, and that same one has since decided that it’d patriarch is infailable. He’ll have ex-ray vision soon too if there is not a return to deffering to the councils and the holy spirit.
I don’t beleive the Orthodox have declared anything infailable since well before the schism.
also
II. THE POWER OF THE KEYS
981 After his Resurrection, Christ sent his apostles “so that repentance and forgiveness of sins should be preached in his name to all nations.”526 The apostles and their successors carry out this “ministry of reconciliation,” not only by announcing to men God’s forgiveness merited for us by Christ, and calling them to conversion and faith; but also by communicating to them the forgiveness of sins in Baptism, and reconciling them with God and with the Church through the power of the keys, received from Christ:527
[The Church] has received the keys of the Kingdom of heaven so that, in her, sins may be forgiven through Christ’s blood and the Holy Spirit’s action. In this Church, the soul dead through sin comes back to life in order to live with Christ, whose grace has saved us.528
982 There is no offense, however serious, that the Church cannot forgive. “There is no one, however wicked and guilty, who may not confidently hope for forgiveness, provided his repentance is honest.529 Christ who died for all men desires that in his Church the gates of forgiveness should always be open to anyone who turns away from sin.530
983 Catechesis strives to awaken and nourish in the faithful faith in the incomparable greatness of the risen Christ’s gift to his Church: the mission and the power to forgive sins through the ministry of the apostles and their successors:
The Lord wills that his disciples possess a tremendous power: that his lowly servants accomplish in his name all that he did when he was on earth.531
Priests have received from God a power that he has given neither to angels nor to archangels . . . . God above confirms what priests do here below.532
Were there no forgiveness of sins in the Church, there would be no hope of life to come or eternal liberation. Let us thank God who has given his Church such a gift.533
http://www.vatican.va/archive/catechism/p123a10.htm#II
yet according to the CCC the whole episcopacy exercises the power of the keys which is given to THE CHURCH:
http://www.vatican.va/archive/catechism/p123a10.htm#II
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.