Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- All Categories 13.8K
- General Category 10.9K
- General Announcements 184
- Faith Issues 3.4K
- Coptic Orthodox Church 2.5K
- Personal Issues 1.4K
- Prayer Requests 423
- Random Issues 1.8K
- Introductions 294
- Non-Orthodox Inquiries 232
- Youth Corner 606
- Hymns 2.5K
- Hymns Discussion 2.5K
- Technicial Difficulties 368
- Technical Topics 368
Is Saint Peter the Head of the Church on Earth?
Hi,
When Christ told Saint Peter: "You are the rock on which I will build my CHurch" - does that signify a desire from Our Lord Jesus Christ to make Peter the head of the Church?
This raises a few questions:
a) In the 1st Council of Jerusalem - the apostles and elders gathered. If Saint peter was the sole head, there would be no need for all of them to gather. His word would have been final.
b) In the early Church (Nicene and Post-Nicene), the One Apostolic Church lived by many patriarchs each one being responsible for their Church (Diocese). It wasn't only Rome.
But - what is Saint Peter's Role in all this?
What do we tell Catholics who ask us to admit that Christ gave the keys of heaven to Saint Peter and HIM ONLY (i.e. that only unless we are part of Saint Peter's Church that we are saved).
I usually answer and say that we are Saint Peter's faith. It was Saint Peter's faith that Christ built His Church; not on one man. But even if it is on Saint Peter, what about the other apostles? What is their role? To submit to Saint Peter, or to saint Peter's successor? What if that successor suddenly decided to introduce heresies? What then? Do we all introduce heresies in our Churches because of that??
What do you think? What is our position as orthodox Christians in light of responding to the Catholics concerning us submitting to their Pope's authority.
Personally, after what I've seen, I feel it would be extremely dangerous to unite with Catholics.
a) THe RC is divided already. They have communities that are against each other: You have the latin right against the non traditionalists, and they are still excommunicated from the World Wide Body of the RC.
b) The RC has a growing and extremely dangerous Charismatic community. I've seen it and it is HUGELY dangerous.
You would NOT believe it if I told you that I witnessed myself catholics dancing around the alter of Notre Dame Cathedral - would you??
But here is the video of the event I attended (that TRULY shocked me to the core).
c) They do not partake usually of the Blood and Body of Christ. They argue that either one saves you; so it is up to you if you wish to have both. This is a lack of orthodoxy in their part, and a compromise in Apostolic Traditions.
I could go on, but the other issues all result in compromises in apostolic tradition and teachings.
Finally, the main issues of Purgatory/Immaculate Conception and Filoque are still important.
For me, above all of this, the most important difference IS the heresy of the Filoque. I thought it was trivial before, but now I see that our entire theology is based on a Triune God where each Person has a function: the Father is the Source, and from Him proceeds the Son and the Holy Spirit. From the Will of the Father, proceeds the action of the Son, and the procession of the live giving Holy Spirit. I was not aware of this importance until of late; but we cannot accept the Filoque. Its no laughing matter.
What do you all think??
When Christ told Saint Peter: "You are the rock on which I will build my CHurch" - does that signify a desire from Our Lord Jesus Christ to make Peter the head of the Church?
This raises a few questions:
a) In the 1st Council of Jerusalem - the apostles and elders gathered. If Saint peter was the sole head, there would be no need for all of them to gather. His word would have been final.
b) In the early Church (Nicene and Post-Nicene), the One Apostolic Church lived by many patriarchs each one being responsible for their Church (Diocese). It wasn't only Rome.
But - what is Saint Peter's Role in all this?
What do we tell Catholics who ask us to admit that Christ gave the keys of heaven to Saint Peter and HIM ONLY (i.e. that only unless we are part of Saint Peter's Church that we are saved).
I usually answer and say that we are Saint Peter's faith. It was Saint Peter's faith that Christ built His Church; not on one man. But even if it is on Saint Peter, what about the other apostles? What is their role? To submit to Saint Peter, or to saint Peter's successor? What if that successor suddenly decided to introduce heresies? What then? Do we all introduce heresies in our Churches because of that??
What do you think? What is our position as orthodox Christians in light of responding to the Catholics concerning us submitting to their Pope's authority.
Personally, after what I've seen, I feel it would be extremely dangerous to unite with Catholics.
a) THe RC is divided already. They have communities that are against each other: You have the latin right against the non traditionalists, and they are still excommunicated from the World Wide Body of the RC.
b) The RC has a growing and extremely dangerous Charismatic community. I've seen it and it is HUGELY dangerous.
You would NOT believe it if I told you that I witnessed myself catholics dancing around the alter of Notre Dame Cathedral - would you??
But here is the video of the event I attended (that TRULY shocked me to the core).
c) They do not partake usually of the Blood and Body of Christ. They argue that either one saves you; so it is up to you if you wish to have both. This is a lack of orthodoxy in their part, and a compromise in Apostolic Traditions.
I could go on, but the other issues all result in compromises in apostolic tradition and teachings.
Finally, the main issues of Purgatory/Immaculate Conception and Filoque are still important.
For me, above all of this, the most important difference IS the heresy of the Filoque. I thought it was trivial before, but now I see that our entire theology is based on a Triune God where each Person has a function: the Father is the Source, and from Him proceeds the Son and the Holy Spirit. From the Will of the Father, proceeds the action of the Son, and the procession of the live giving Holy Spirit. I was not aware of this importance until of late; but we cannot accept the Filoque. Its no laughing matter.
What do you all think??
Comments
Christ said blessed are you Peter for you are the Rock (Faith) and on this Rock (Faith) I will build my Church.
Peter is not the Faith persay but he is the first one to Shout the Christian Faith which is Christ is the Son of God.
The Rock means the faith.. because Peter said : "You are the Christ the Son of God"
Christ said blessed are you Peter for you are the Rock (Faith) and on this Rock (Faith) I will build my Church.
Peter is not the Faith persay but he is the first one to Shout the Christian Faith which is Christ is the Son of God.
Are there any Nicene/Post-Nicene fathers who can attest to this understanding?
Thanks
Bishop Gregorious (of the Coptic Church--Late Bishop of Higher Theological Studies), of thrice blessed memory, wrote a very scholarly article in the Canadian Journal: Coptologia. This publication was edited by the late Prof. Dr. Fayek Ishak. In this lenghty he took all of the Biblical references that refute Peter's Primacy, as well as, historical placements and references of the Church Fathers throughout time.
No, he [St. Peter] is not. It is nonsense. The use of the Primacy of Peter is purely for Imperial gain.
Bishop Gregorious (of the Coptic Church--Late Bishop of Higher Theological Studies), of thrice blessed memory, wrote a very scholarly article in the Canadian Journal: Coptologia. This publication was edited by the late Prof. Dr. Fayek Ishak. In this lenghty he took all of the Biblical references that refute Peter's Primacy, as well as, historical placements and references of the Church Fathers throughout time.
Thanks SaintMark,
Does anyone know where I can find a copy of this???
Thanks,
Coptologia has a website. Here is a link to the particular article entitled: "Tension Engendered by Theological Statements on the Exercise of the Primacy" (Vol. VIII, p. 15).
http://www.coptologia.com/toc2.htm#VIII
I think that you will be amazed by the types of articles in this journal. I have been a subscriber for years, and the scholarly aspect is a jewel for Coptic scholarship which was criticized in other threads. We have amazing scholars who are following in the traditions of their Church Fathers.
You should look into the expanse of work done by Dr. Aziz S. Atiya, and Dr. Fayek Ishak. They made a huge mark for the Coptics. You will find a lot of articles about different aspects of Coptic History, Ecclesiastical interactions, Theology, Cultural marks, etc.
Enjoy! May God satiate your appetite for knowledge and quench your thirst for refreshment in His Grace.