www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News Russians leave ecumenical talks in rift with Constantinople

The traditional Catholic view is the former, while the leaders of the Protestant Reformation, in order to justify their break, took the latter. They resorted to translating "Petros" as a "piece of the Rock", with the understanding that it referred to Peter as being part of that which comprised the solid Rock upon which the Church was built (i.e. the faith of the whole Church). As I explained elsewhere, this does not hold up in light of the fact that Our Lord was speaking in Aramaic, and that the word "Kephas" only allows for one possible translation-"Rock", as in "solid rock" "Thou art Rock, and upon this Rock, I will build my Church". Logically, this can only be understood to refer to the person of Peter.

In Christ,
Dn. Robert

Fr. Deacon...Glory to Jesus Christ!

By "traditional Catholic view" I assume you mean the Roman Catholic view (I don't think anyone with argue with that being the RCC view)...I find it interesting that you are placing the rock as the faith that the church is founded on as part of the Protestant Reformation...is it possible that they were actually taking the Orthodox and original Catholic view in their repudiation of Rome?

Exactly...so the bishop of Rome is no higher (traditionally) than the bishop of Parma, OH (for example) there needed to be a "first among equals" who could "herd the cats"...not "rule over the cats"...

Todd I couldn't have said it better myself...good to see you "chiming in" I was just thinking we haven't heard from Todd in a while...

Chris

Dear Job....Glory Forever!

(1.) The term "Roman Catholic" is of fairly recent invention, and tends to be confusing. It can be traced to usage by Anglican clerics in England who used it to make a distinction between Catholics in union with Rome, and themselves. In Rome, officially, they still use the term "Church of Rome", and not "Roman Catholic Church". Members of Eastern Catholic churches tend to bristle, and rightfully so, when they are referred to as "Roman Catholics of the Eastern Rite". The terms "Catholic" and "Catholic Church" refers to all Catholics, Western or Eastern, of whatever "rite". Since Pope John Paul II promulgated the Code of Canons for Eastern Churches in 1990, the various "Eastern Rite Catholic Churches" are now referred to as "sui iuris" (self-governing) Churches, with the Rite simply referring the worship rituals adhered to. It is now recognized, pursuant to Vatican II documents, that these Eastern Churches, in addition to celebrating a particular "rite", also have a whole patrimony consisting of Theology, Disciplines, etc. which are indigenous to that particular Church. The documents of Vatican II recognize the absolute equality to the Roman Church of the various Eastern Churches in full communion with her. There is, of necessity, full agreement on matters of Faith and Morals (those things defined by the Ordinary & Extraordinary Magisterium, i.e., the Pope of Rome and all Bishops in communion with him) between all of the Catholic Churches (those in communion with the Church of Rome, and with each other).

(2.) As to your second point, I don't think that is correct. I don't have the book physically available at this moment, but, at home, I have a copy of an interesting book by Clement Englert, CSsR, entitled "Understanding Eastern Christianity". It was written in 1972, and published by Ligouri Publications (house organ of the Redemptorist religious order). The Redemptorists were founded in the Latin Church. However, they also have an operation amongst Ukrainian and Rusyn Greek Catholics. Many UGCC Bishops are Redemptorist "monks". The book is meant to explain Eastern Christianity, both Catholic and Orthodox, to Latin Catholics. It does take up the disputed issues between Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy. On the issue of Papal primacy, he manages to come up with quite a few quotes from revered Eastern Fathers of the Church which would indicate that their understanding of the Petrine ministry is identical to that of the Catholic Church. If you can get your hands on the book, I would suggest that you do so, even if it is for the purpose of testing that which you have heard.

In Christ,
Dn. Robert

It's as futile and pointless as arguing which geographic location has pre-eminence.

and a bishop is a bishop is a bishop.

Glory to Jesus Christ!

You better go email the Patriarch of Moscow and tell him to leave the Estonians alone then, he is after all just a bishop.

edit: oh yeah be sure to also tell him to leave the Ukrainain Orthodox Church - Kyiv Patriarchate alone too.

Fr. Deacon with all due respect...


I agree it does become confusing...I am utilizing it in the sence in which it was used as referring to the Western part of the Empire...knowing the Church as a whole is the Catholic Church as full and complete...it was not a true Catholic view which would encompass both East and West...


Can't really comment on that specific book since I have not seen it...but the first thing that comes to my mind, once again is as the author is a a member of the church in communion with Rome (what a mouthful ) through what lens is the author looking at this???

Chris

I also have a copy of that book of Clement Englert's. It is a remarkable example of gross oversimplification, and I would not recommend it to anyone.

Fr. Serge

Dear Job,

I think the bottom line is that, given the state of the world, and the overt hostility against Jesus Christ and his teachings, it is incumbent upon ,at least, the Catholics and Orthodox to find a way to heal the Great Schism, once and for all, so as to provide an undivided witness to the rest of the world. Humanly speaking, this sounds almost impossible, but if the Holy Spirit has anything to do with it, then it is very do-able.

In Christ,
Dn. Robert

I agree, but it is a healing of the schism that must be based on truth and unity of doctrine.

Joe

I think it would suffice for the Catholics and Orthodox to agree to act civilly towards each other and to form a common defense against the inroads of Islam and Western Secularism. We fight about who gets the biggest chair whilst the Hagarenes are killing our children in Beslan and elsewhere.

Alexandr

Agree. Unity where truth takes a back seat would be a false union, and would not be "of God".
Dn. Robert

I agree that a Bishop is a bishop is a bishop. But also think that a 'first among equals' must have some 'inherent teeth', at least administratively, or the primus is nothing more than someone with a bigger hat and a cushier cushion. <-- how much "teeth" is where the disagreements come in.

The Estonians have broken Church order and His Holiness has every right to intervene.

The KP is a schismatic sect, whilst the Ukrainian Orthodox Church is doing quite nicely under the spiritual direction of Metropolitan Vladimir, thank you very much.

Alexandr