|View First Unread||Thread Tools||Search Thread||Rate Thread||Display|
Today, 9:10 am
|Primacy but not Supremacy?
I’m not starting this thread to argue this topic with anyone. Instead, I want to listen to others give detailed answers to two questions:
(We can discuss the writings of the ECF’s at another time.)
Thanks in advance.
“For an Evangelical Christian to become a Catholic is not to deny all that is good within his non-Catholic faith, but to embrace more.” Fr. Dwight Longenecker
Today, 11:40 am
|Re: Primacy but not Supremacy?
In my view, since the Pope is subject to the teachings of the Magesterium, it would be erroneous to say he is supreme. The doctrine and dogma is supreme. The pope is prime in the magesterium which gives him the ability when called upon by the church to definitively decide something or to gather the bishops of the Magesterium and ratify their findings.
Going to Matt 18, in settling disputes, the final arbiter is the Pope. The pope may call the Magesterium to solve the dispute, but should that gridlock in some way, he can definitively decide the matter. Other matters may be so cut and dry he just declares it, as was done with the Marian dogmas.
I would imagine, both Acts 15 and John 20 can support this. In Acts 15, Peter demonstrates a primacy, but the idea came from another apostle James. In John 20 all the apostles receive the same gift of authority from Christ and then Jesus goes on to tell Peter alone to feed his sheep. This shows that Peter had a prime role but not necessarily a supreme roll.
Sometimes this may seem like semantics, but I guess depends on context and definitions.
Today, 1:55 pm
|Re: Primacy but not Supremacy?
Using scripture alone, I’ve used this passage as an argument in the past for primacy and supremacy.. although I don’t use this passage alone to make those points
The following links are operational
Lk 22 24 A dispute φιλονεικία also arose among them, which of them was to be regarded as the greatest . 25 And he said to them, “The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and those in authority over them are called benefactors. 26 But not so with you; rather let the greatest among you become as the youngest, and the leader ἡγούμενος as one who serves. 27 For which is the greater, one who sits at table, or one who serves? Is it not the one who sits at table? But I am among you as one who serves.
Looking at those Greek words
Looking at the meaning behind the word leader, # 2 Leader = hegeomai
1. to lead,a. to go before;
And who backs Simon up through this so he doesn’t fail? JESUS.
And with all this authority that Jesus gives Peter, what does Jesus also ask of Peter?
στήρισον strengthen his brothers. stērízō (from stēringks, “a support that fixes, plants down”; akin to 2476 /hístēmi, “to stand,” having a duplication of the primitive Gk root/sta, “to make stand”) – properly, set fast (fix); give support to secure (firmly establish); solidly plant (which eliminates vacillation).
Adding all this up, looking at all the definitions behind the terms , it Sure looks like Jesus is establishing the papacy.
And because as leader, part of the definition(s) (above) is Peter deserves cooperation by those who are led by him, that makes his office, one of primacyand supremacy.
Today, 2:26 pm
|Re: Primacy but not Supremacy?
Defintion: magisterium (Modern Catholic Dictionary)
Supreme magisterium, supreme shepherd and teacher:
Vatican I – Lumen Gentium 2525. Among the principal duties of bishops the preaching of the Gospel occupies an eminent place.(39*) For bishops are preachers of the faith, who lead new disciples to Christ, and they are authentic teachers, that is, teachers endowed with the authority of Christ, who preach to the people committed to them the faith they must believe and put into practice, and by the light of the Holy Spirit illustrate that faith. They bring forth from the treasury of Revelation new things and old,(164) making it bear fruit and vigilantly warding off any errors that threaten their flock.(165) Bishops, teaching in communion with the Roman Pontiff, are to be respected by all as witnesses to divine and Catholic truth. In matters of faith and morals, the bishops speak in the name of Christ and the faithful are to accept their teaching and adhere to it with a religious assent. This religious submission of mind and will must be shown in a special way to the authentic magisterium of the Roman Pontiff, even when he is not speaking ex cathedra; that is, it must be shown in such a way that his supreme magisterium is acknowledged with reverence, the judgments made by him are sincerely adhered to, according to his manifest mind and will. His mind and will in the matter may be known either from the character of the documents, from his frequent repetition of the same doctrine, or from his manner of speaking.
Although the individual bishops do not enjoy the prerogative of infallibility, they nevertheless proclaim Christ’s doctrine infallibly whenever, even though dispersed through the world, but still maintaining the bond of communion among themselves and with the successor of Peter, and authentically teaching matters of faith and morals, they are in agreement on one position as definitively to be held.(40*) This is even more clearly verified when, gathered together in an ecumenical council, they are teachers and judges of faith and morals for the universal Church, whose definitions must be adhered to with the submission of faith.(41*)
And this infallibility with which the Divine Redeemer willed His Church to be endowed in defining doctrine of faith and morals, extends as far as the deposit of Revelation extends, which must be religiously guarded and faithfully expounded. And this is the infallibility which the Roman Pontiff, the head of the college of bishops, enjoys in virtue of his office, when, as the supreme shepherd and teacher of all the faithful, who confirms his brethren in their faith,(166) by a definitive act he proclaims a doctrine of faith or morals.(42*) And therefore his definitions, of themselves, and not from the consent of the Church, are justly styled irreformable, since they are pronounced with the assistance of the Holy Spirit, promised to him in blessed Peter, and therefore they need no approval of others, nor do they allow an appeal to any other judgment. For then the Roman Pontiff is not pronouncing judgment as a private person, but as the supreme teacher of the universal Church, in whom the charism of infallibility of the Church itself is individually present, he is expounding or defending a doctrine of Catholic faith.(43*) The infallibility promised to the Church resides also in the body of Bishops, when that body exercises the supreme magisterium with the successor of Peter.To these definitions the assent of the Church can never be wanting, on account of the activity of that same Holy Spirit, by which the whole flock of Christ is preserved and progresses in unity of faith.(44*)
But when either the Roman Pontiff or the Body of Bishops together with him defines a judgment, they pronounce it in accordance with Revelation itself, which all are obliged to abide by and be in conformity with, that is, the Revelation which as written or orally handed down is transmitted in its entirety through the legitimate succession of bishops and especially in care of the Roman Pontiff himself, and which under the guiding light of the Spirit of truth is religiously preserved and faithfully expounded in the Church.(45*) The Roman Pontiff and the bishops, in view of their office and the importance of the matter, by fitting means diligently strive to inquire properly into that revelation and to give apt expression to its contents;(46*) but a new public revelation they do not accept as pertaining to the divine deposit of faith.(47*)
Today, 3:39 pm
|Re: Primacy but not Supremacy– then and now
personally — i found the following info — reveiling becasue th author was not trying to promote a particular “world view”
Ancient Church Fathers: What the Disciples of the Apostles Taught
The Ancient Church Fathers reveals the disciples of the twelve apostles, and what they taught, from their own writings.
It documents that the same doctrine was faithfully transmitted to their descendants in the first few centuries.
It also describes where, when, and by whom, the doctrines began to change.
The ancient church fathers make it very easy to know for sure what the complete teachings of Jesus and the twelve apostles were.
You will learn, from their own writings, what the first century disciples taught about the various doctrines that divide our church today.
You will learn what was discussed at the Seven General Councils and why.
You will learn about the cults and cult leaders who began to change doctrine and spread their heresy.
And you will learn how those heresies became the standard teaching in the medieval church.
A partial list of doctrines the ancient church discussed are:
Abortion Animals sacrifices Antichrist Arminianism Bible or tradition Calvinism Circumcision Deity of Jesus Christ Demons Euthanasia Evolution False gospels False prophets Foreknowledge Free will Gnostic cults Homosexuality Idolatry Islam Israel’s return Jewish food laws
Mary’s virginity Mary’s assumption
Meditation The Nicolaitans Paganism Predestination premillennialism
Psychology Reincarnation Replacement theology
The Sabbath Salvation Schism of Nepos Sin / Salvation The soul Spiritual gifts Transubstantiation Yoga Women in ministry
This book is brought to you by Biblefacts Ministries, Biblefacts.org
As an avid history buff, this book is so satisfying as it gets as close to eyewittnesses as possible. It should be used in any apologetics course taught or studied
in , my opinion, for that very reason. But more astonding than the clear and concise tracing of each father and topic
, truth and error, is a short couple of pages on an ancient document that is said to be a written response by Christ.
This,in fact. would be the only one!! Getting to read the circumstances and actual note was so very thrilling!! Why aren’t more scholars sharing that with others?
The author seems to go to great lengths to explain the steps he takes to uncover the origin of both the truth and error of our Christian faith.
The book is very clear in thought and very balanced in approach. The material speaks volumes as to how far our various churches may have strayed from the original teaching of our Lord. It is a great check up. It will definitely open eyes to many myths, traditions, and flase teachings that have crept into the church.
It is worth getting for anyone who believes it is better to study history by studying it from eyewittness accounts or close sources!