From an Orthodox critique on Roman Catholic teachings: An official Vatican I (1870) proclamation read: “The Pope is Christ in office, Christ in jurisdiction and power....We bow down before thy voice, O Holy Father, as we would before Christ Himself.”[xxviii] Pope Leo XIII declared, “We hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty.”[xxix] Pope Pius X (1903-1914) said, “The Pope is not only representative of Jesus Christ, but he is Jesus Christ Himself, hidden under the veil of the flesh. Does the Pope speak? It is Jesus Christ Himself Who speaks.”[xxx] Pope Pius XI (1922-1939) uttered, “You know that I am the Holy Father, the representative of God on earth, the Vicar of Christ, which means that I am God on earth.”[xxxi] According to the First Vatican Council, the Pope was infallible when he defined a doctrine concerning faith or morals. In accordance with this doctrine such a definition is infallible even previous to its acceptance by the Latin Church. Also, the Church of Rome teaches that the same infallibility attaches to whatever is taught as part of the deposit of revelation by the entire body of bishops in union with Rome, whether inside or outside of an Ecumenical Council.[xxxii] The familiar complaint of Orthodoxy against Rome is assigning to a single bishop the infallibility which properly belongs neither to him alone nor yet to the hierarchy in general, but only to the Body of Christ as a whole. Infallibility is not to be confused with impeccability. It is not our purpose to parade the moral failings of the Popes, for these are well known to all, and Rome today does not deny the facts. An Orthodox Pope who remains in the truth is, in a certain sense, first among bishops. He enjoys a primacy of honor or, rather, a seniority with certain privileges among his peers, but not a supremacy of power or rule.[xxxiii] The last reply of the Orthodox bishops addresses papal supremacy. The Orthodox prove by reference to the Fathers and the Canons of the Ecumenical Councils that the Pope was never considered the supreme authority and infallible head of the Church, but only the first bishop in respect of rank, as first among equals, privileges of honor having been accorded to him because he was the bishop of the capital city of the empire. The Orthodox maintain that every bishop is head and president of his own particular Church. He is subject only to the synodical ordinances and decisions of the Church universal as being alone infallible. They also assert that the Bishop of Rome is no exception to this rule (see Canon VI, First Ecumenical Council). Canon XXVIII of the Fourth Ecumenical Council (Chalcedon, 451), states: “We too decree and vote the same things in regard to the privileges and priorities of the most holy Church of Constantinople, the New Rome. For to the throne of Old Rome, as the imperial city, the Fathers gave suitable privileges. Motivated by the same aim, the one hundred and fifty most God-beloved bishops have accorded the like priorities to the most holy throne of New Rome; rightfully judging that the city (Constantinople), being honored by a monarchy and a senate, and equal to old imperial Rome in respect of other privileges, should be magnified also, as she is in respect of ecclesiastical affairs, as coming next after her, or as being second to her.”[xxxiv] Papal theologians state that the Apostle Peter received an exceptional gift that made him the sole foundation of the Church. They refer us to the Gospel passage: “Thou art Peter (su ei Petros), and upon this rock (epi tauth th petra) I will build My Church; and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven” [Mt. 16:18, 19]. The Orthodox Church declares Peter’s person is not the rock of the Church, but the faith that he confessed and bore witness to when he said, “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God” [Mt. 16:16]. It is precisely upon this confession and faith that the saving preaching of the Gospel by all the Apostles and their successors rests unshaken. Moreover, the Greek words tauth th petra (“this rock”), are feminine; they cannot refer to the person of Peter. When the Apostle Peter received the “keys,” or spiritual authority, it was for the same reason, by virtue of his confession. Let us also direct our attention to our Saviour’s words, “I will build my Church.” The word “build” (oikodomhsw) is a verb in the future tense which refers to the establishment of the Church after the Resurrection and Descent of the Holy Spirit. Furthermore, to say, “I will build” means that new members would be added to the present company, with Peter and his confession being only the first “rock” in the building of the Church. According to the divine Paul, the members of the body of Christ, who are the Church [Col. 1:24], “are built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief cornerstone” [Eph. 2:20]. It is therefore a novel doctrine to heap excessive privileges upon the Bishop of Rome as a successor of the Apostle Peter. Listen to two western Fathers speak against papal supremacy. Saint Ambrose writes: “Faith is the foundation of the Church, for it was not of the person but of the faith of St. Peter that it was said that the gates of Hades should not prevail against it; it is the confession of faith that has vanquished Hades.”[xxxv] The truth professed by the disciple Peter is the foundation of the Church. No promise was made to his person. Saint Hilary of Poitiers (+358), acknowledges that it is upon the rock of Peter’s confession–that is to say, upon the divinity of Jesus Christ–that the Church is built.[xxxiii] He add, “There is but one unchangeable foundation,[xxxiv] that only rock confessed by the mouth of St. Peter, ‘Thou art the Son of the living God.’” A contemporary of these two western Fathers, St. John Chrysostom (354-407), in concert with other Greek Fathers, recognized no supremacy in the apostolate of Rome. Saint John commented that the Apostles were equal in dignity. Peter and Paul were alike, first among the Apostles: the one for the Jews, and the other for the nations. “Christ did certainly divide His army in two parts, and entrusted the Jews to Peter and the Gentiles to Paul. The divisions of the army are indeed several, but the General is one.”[xxxv] Thus, Peter never received any exclusive supremacy over all Christendom. In fact, when the Apostles met in Synod at Jerusalem, it was not Peter who presided, but Iakovos (James) the brother of the Lord, and it was his decision which was accepted by all [Acts 15:19]. Moreover, where was St. Peter’s supremacy when St. Paul “withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed” [Gal. 2:11]? At the First Œcumenical Synod, 318 holy Fathers determined the canonical books of the New Testament and their sequence. Far from thinking that St. Peter had any supremacy, the Synod did not place his epistles first, but in their proper position, and after the Epistle of St. James. The only Chief of the Church was, is, and ever shall be, Jesus Christ Himself. The Orthodox believe and acclaim with the Apostle Paul that Christ is the Head [Eph. 4:15] and, elsewhere, that Jesus is “the Head of the body, the Church, Who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in all things He might have the preeminence” [Col. 1:18].[xxxvi] Pope Gregory I, the Great (590-604), the fourth and last of the traditional Latin “Doctors of the Church,” addressed a letter to Patriarch John IV, the Faster of Constantinople (585-595), protesting the title of “Œcumenical Patriarch.”[xxxvii] It is a famous letter which absolutely condemns the modern papacy. Here are some pertinent extracts: “Peter the first of the Apostles, was a member of the holy and universal Church. Paul, Andrew, John–were they not the chiefs of certain nations? Yet, all are members under only one Head. In a word, the saints before the law, the saints under the law, and the saints under grace–do they not all constitute the body of the Lord? Are they not members of the Church?”[xxxviii] Rome may glory that St. Peter made her illustrious when he martyred in Rome, but not that he made her Head of the Church instead of Christ. Pope Gregory continues: “The title of ‘universal’ was offered by the holy Synod of Chalcedon to the Bishop of the Apostolic see (Rome), which, by God’s grace, I (Gregory) serve.[xxxix] Nevertheless, none of my predecessors would use this impious word, because, in reality, if a Patriarch is called ‘universal,’ he takes from all the others the title of Patriarch.” Saint Gregory considered himself a Patriarch equal to the other Patriarchs.[xl] The title “Supreme Bishop of the Universal Church,” he considered blasphemous, though it is now one of the official titles of the Pope of Rome.[xli] Since the 11th century, partisans of the papacy have constantly asserted that the Pope has a universal authority–that he is the universal bishop–that, properly speaking, he is the only bishop, the source whence flows all ecclesiastical dignity.[xlii] The Greeks did not attach as great importance as Rome did to whether a bishopric had been founded by an Apostle. (In fact, the Holy Fathers chiefly valued such sees on the explicit assumption that they retained the most direct and faithful transmission of the Apostolic preaching; thus it was assumed fidelity to the Gospel that gave the voice of these sees greater weight than, perhaps, others had. Without this, the historical relationship to an Apostle was merely historical in value.) Moreover, the Greeks also argued that if the Latins base the primacy of Rome on the fact that Peter lived there, then Antioch had a weightier claim, since Peter had preached there, and according to St. Gregory the Great (Epistles, Bk. VIII, Ep. XL, To Eulogius, Patriarch of Alexandria), St. Jerome (On Illustrious Men, Ch. I and XVI), St. John Chrysostom (“On the Inscription of the Acts”, II), and others was bishop there for many years, before he ever came to Rome. Moreover, Jerusalem could make a much more substantial claim to primacy, simply because our Lord Jesus Christ Himself had preached and died and risen again there.
Posted on: Sun, 02 Nov 2014 22:00:39 +0000
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015