Papal Primacy vs. Papal Supremacy
#11
deleted: double post
[Image: catherinesiena-1.jpg]
Reply
#12
(04-03-2019, 07:48 AM)Markie Boy Wrote: So I have to be honest with myself.  As I try to learn more, in early Church history papal primacy is pretty clear - but papal supremacy seems to be very un-clear.

Did some research on the book Papal Primacy, and it appears for the first 300 years if you asked a Christian if the pope was infallible as described today the answer would have been no.

I am having a very hard time with this.  When they wanted to take Jesus and make Him a temporal king he said no.  But it seems Pius the IX did the near opposite.  

I am trying - but I can't seem to see it any other way.

Can you define what you mean by "primacy" and what you mean by "supremacy" and how you see them as different?  That might help.

But in short, the infallibility of the Pope and his jurisdiction are simply necessary consequences of a local church in primacy being a permanent, constituent element of the Church.  True "development" makes these implicit consequences explicit.  If the primatial Church could defect from the faith, then the Church would lose that constituent element.  Therefore, inasmuch as the bishop of the primatial church (which has always been Rome without question), defines the faith of that church and the faith necessary for all the other churches to be in communion with that church, he must be infallible--since, as St. Ireneaus noted in the 2nd century, all the churches must be in agreement with the faith of the church of Rome.

The same goes for jurisdiction.  The primatial church cannot defect from the universal Church through schism or the Church would lose that element.  Furthermore, the primacy would be meaningless flattery without it--and Christ established an office of service, not meaningless flattery.  

The EO churches have no primacy at all--not even in its more limited exercise.  If there was any doubt about it, the recent schism over Ukraine answers that question definitively--Contantinople's "primacy" was meaningless flattery that was discarded as soon as anything of consequence was at stake (not to mention Constantinople's complete impotence in even organizing a synod).

The Pope's job is to serve unity, what the Pope can and should do to do so are two different things, however. Ideally and traditionally, the Pope should try to act in common with his brother bishops, but different circumstances can require more or less unilateral action. However, the same abstract principles with regard to the Pope’s authority would need to be true for how the papacy was exercised in more or less active times. Unilateral acts with jurisdictional consequences have been present from the earliest centuries, even if much more sporadic. The Church’s dogmatic definition, therefore, must focus on the “can,” but the “should” may be different, depending on the circumstances.

There's an EO book called "The Primacy of Peter" that is a compilation of essays by EO theologians on the subject of the primacy.  I wrote a review of it in the link below, which you may find helpful--even what they acknowledge, points to the Catholic understanding (note, my post was written before the utter failure of the pan-orthodox synod to launch and the schism over Ukraine, but those just hammer home the point).

https://www.fisheaters.com/forums/showth...?tid=75891
[Image: catherinesiena-1.jpg]
[-] The following 1 user Likes SaintSebastian's post:
  • XavierSem
Reply
#13
(04-04-2019, 12:53 AM)jovan66102 Wrote: They fight and go into schism over the oddest things, too. How to pronounce the Holy Name and how to hold your fingers whilst making the Sign of the Cross (Old Believer schism-17th century), or what calendar to use (Old Calendarist schism- 20th century).

Or whether or not it's okay to pray the Rosary, or whether it's appropriate to depict St. Joseph holding Our Lord in icons.
[-] The following 1 user Likes In His Love's post:
  • XavierSem
Reply
#14
Gross simplifications follow:

Historically, the rise of "papal supremacy" in the West did not happen because of any kind of overreach on the part of the Pope. Instead, in Carolingian Europe, the configuration of episcopal authority began changing, with the bishops of metropolitan sees increasingly lording it over on the bishops of their suffragan sees, with the pallium taking on new meaning as a symbol of authority. This defied historic practice, and so the suffragan bishops responded by increasingly appealing to Rome, even marshaling forgery (through a vast body of forged Papal decretals, mixed in with authentic ones) to give explicit textual grounds for Papal involvement in local disputes between metropolitan bishops and their suffragans.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudo-Isi..._Decretals
[-] The following 1 user Likes Cyriacus's post:
  • XavierSem
Reply
#15
(04-04-2019, 07:37 AM)Markie Boy Wrote: The thing that really has had me frustrated, confused, and upset is the state of the Church.  I have tried to convert over the last couple years and it's been hard.  I have found out on top of things, my local and only available pastor is quite modern, church of nice, and in favor of not rocking any boat.  On top of that one of the top lay employees said to me personally, "We are cafeteria Catholics here, we don't believe all that stuff."

The way people think and talk there wouldn't have been tolerated at my old protestant church, which was very conservative.  And it's not because what they do and say is Catholic, it's because it's not even good basic Christianity.

And so I have been in turmoil, no longer believing in Sola Scriptura or Sola Fide, but also looking at this thing and seeing something that looks worse than what I left.  And so I started looking at the East, because this can't be "it".

Thanks for giving me information and not just a scolding.

I came OUT of Orthodoxy when I realised that they were a rudderless vessel with no captain, no pilot, and no steersman. Obviously, if they were right, Christ was wrong.

My advice? Immerse yourself in the Traditional Catholic Faith. Study the old catechisms, use the old devotions. Eschew anything post-conciliar. Check out Being Catholic and For Catholics on the main site. Go to Mass where you must, and offer up your pain and, yes, anger, for the good estate of Christ's Holy Catholic Church.

I will pray for you. I've been Catholic for almost 40 years. It hasn't been a pleasant ride for much of that time, especially the past six years, but as St Peter, our First Pope said, 'Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of eternal life. And we have believed and have known, that thou art the Christ, the Son of God.' Christ only founded one Church and it is demonstrably the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church in union with the Successor of Peter.
Jovan-Marya of the Immaculate Conception Weismiller, T.O.Carm.

Vive le Christ-roi! Vive le roi, Louis XX!
Deum timete, regem honorificate.
Kansan by birth! Albertan by choice! Jayhawk by the Grace of God!
“Qui me amat, amet et canem meum. (Who loves me will love my dog.)” 
St Bernard of Clairvaux

My Blog 'Musings of an Old Curmudgeon'
FishEaters Group on MeWe
[-] The following 1 user Likes jovan66102's post:
  • XavierSem
Reply
#16
I pray the Orthodox re-unite with the Catholic Church. Our Lady has promised that when Russia is consecrated to the Immaculate Heart by the Pope and the Bishops. When that happens, we can surely look forward to a wider restoration of the TLM in the Latin Church also; one Orthodox Patriarch was very enthusiastic in supporting Pope Benedict XVI's Summorum Pontificum. I believe it was Patriarch Alexei of Moscow, the predecessor of Patriarch Kirill. Right now, as was noted, Moscow and Constantinople are having a major schism between themselves.

Traditional Catholics should never consider lapsing into some separated sect. It is like betraying your wife, only worse, betraying the Bride of Christ. However, when those born Orthodox and separated Christians are sincerely inquiring, we should welcome them to come to the Church.

Let any sincere person read what even Greek Catholic Patriarchs of Constantinople said back when Constantinople was still Catholic, and, by the grace of God, they should see it is an obligation to quickly return to the Roman Church, the Church that has inherited headship from the Apostles.

"John VI, Patriarch of Constantinople (715)

The Pope of Rome, the Head of the Christian Priesthood, whom in Peter, the Lord commanded to confirm his brethren. (John VI, Epist. ad Constantin. Pap. ad. Combefis, Auctuar. Bibl. P.P. Graec.tom. ii. p. 211, seq.)

St. Nicephorus, Patriarch of Constantinople (758-828)

Without whom (the Romans presiding in the seventh Council) a doctrine brought forward in the Church could not, even though confirmed by canonical decrees and by ecclesiastical usage, ever obtain full approval or currency. For it is they (the Popes of Rome) who have had assigned to them the rule in sacred things, and who have received into their hands the dignity of Headship among the Apostles. (Nicephorus, Niceph. Cpl. pro. s. imag. c 25 [Mai N. Bibl. pp. ii. 30]).
Rosary Crusade to end Abortion: https://rosarycrusadingarmytoendabortion.home.blog/

"My dear Jesus, before the Holy Trinity, Our Heavenly Mother, and the whole Heavenly Court, united with Your Most Precious Blood and Your Sacrifice on Calvary, I hereby offer my whole life to the Intention of Your Sacred Heart and to the Immaculate Heart of Mary.  Together with my life, I place at Your disposal all Holy Masses, all my Holy Communions, all my good deeds, all my sacrifices ... https://marianapostolate.com/life-offering/
[-] The following 1 user Likes XavierSem's post:
  • In His Love
Reply
#17
(04-03-2019, 07:48 AM)Markie Boy Wrote: When they wanted to take Jesus and make Him a temporal king he said no.  But it seems Pius the IX did the near opposite.  

Actually, the declaration of the Dogma of Papal Infallibility in Pastor aeternus was in response to the loss of the temporal Kingship over the Papal States. The Popes had been temporal Kings for over a thousand years. The Papal Zouaves used the battle cry, Vive Pie Neuf, Pontife et Roi! (Long live Pius IX, Pontiff and King!).
Jovan-Marya of the Immaculate Conception Weismiller, T.O.Carm.

Vive le Christ-roi! Vive le roi, Louis XX!
Deum timete, regem honorificate.
Kansan by birth! Albertan by choice! Jayhawk by the Grace of God!
“Qui me amat, amet et canem meum. (Who loves me will love my dog.)” 
St Bernard of Clairvaux

My Blog 'Musings of an Old Curmudgeon'
FishEaters Group on MeWe
Reply
#18
(04-06-2019, 04:52 PM)jovan66102 Wrote: Actually, the declaration of the Dogma of Papal Infallibility in Pastor aeternus was in response to the loss of the temporal Kingship over the Papal States. The Popes had been temporal Kings for over a thousand years. The Papal Zouaves used the battle cry, Vive Pie Neuf, Pontife et Roi! (Long live Pius IX, Pontiff and King!).

That could just as easily be proof that the popes had strayed for over a thousand years.
Reply
#19
(04-07-2019, 04:22 PM)Melkite Wrote:
(04-06-2019, 04:52 PM)jovan66102 Wrote: Actually, the declaration of the Dogma of Papal Infallibility in Pastor aeternus was in response to the loss of the temporal Kingship over the Papal States. The Popes had been temporal Kings for over a thousand years. The Papal Zouaves used the battle cry, Vive Pie Neuf, Pontife et Roi! (Long live Pius IX, Pontiff and King!).

That could just as easily be proof that the popes had strayed for over a thousand years.
Pius IX is a Blessed. He’s hardly the straying type.
Reply
#20
And in the list of Pontiffs and Kings are:

St Paul I, St Leo III, St Paschal I, St Leo IV, St Nicholas I (the Great), St Adrian III, St Leo IX, St Gregory VII, Bl. Victor III, Bl. Urban II, Bl. Eugene III, Bl. Gregory X, Bl. Innocent V, St Celestine V, Bl. Benedict XI, Bl. Urban V, St Pius V, Bl. Innocent XI, Bl. Pius IX (and there are a few Servants of God as well). That's a lot of Saints and Blesseds to have been straying for a millennium.
Jovan-Marya of the Immaculate Conception Weismiller, T.O.Carm.

Vive le Christ-roi! Vive le roi, Louis XX!
Deum timete, regem honorificate.
Kansan by birth! Albertan by choice! Jayhawk by the Grace of God!
“Qui me amat, amet et canem meum. (Who loves me will love my dog.)” 
St Bernard of Clairvaux

My Blog 'Musings of an Old Curmudgeon'
FishEaters Group on MeWe
[-] The following 1 user Likes jovan66102's post:
  • In His Love
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)