Dies Irae said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

PabloSerna said:

---

"And this is the actual crux. The misbelief that Rome has the authority to cut people off from God. Its this misbelief that led to the great schism and to the subsequent issues. It's the primary issue that will continue to separate the church, likely until Christ returns."

+++

How do you answer Christ's words to the Apostles when he says (Mt 18:18-20) "Truly I tell you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven."

Authority or no authority?

---

The problem that you and Faithful Ag and others have is this misconception that Rome speaks for the entire Christian Church.

---

Who speaks for the Churches that make up the Body of Christ?

---

A great many people have spoken and will speak for the Church.

---

I understand that given your position it is extremely difficult to give a straight answer but the purposeful vagueness of your responses does nothing to further the discussion.

How do we vet them? The Lutherans have transsexual lesbians claiming the Eucharistic nature of abortion. You have the Anglicans consecrating genderqueers. Who has the authority to say "this is not okay"

---

I'm not being vague at all.

And your examples are disgusting, but not surprising. Are you going to pretend Rome doesn't have the same issues, and in some case worse?

Lets talk about the German Catholic Bishops who now bless same sex unions. Or we could talk about Popes and their kids? Or the child sex scandal with Roman Priests?

Shoot, I believe right now there's a Roman Catholic Priest on the run for grooming an 18 yr old girl.

So no, I'm not being vague. The Church has had its defenders rise when it was necessary.

---

I'm not calling attention to Protestants who do bad things, everyone does bad things, I'm calling attention to Protestant "clergy" who are enthusiastically supported by their sect who are clearly outwardly championing and living contra Christianity.

And no you're not answering ANY of these questions. You're just saying "they'll come when they need it any we'll know them
When we see them" and you wonder why you have infinite numbers of sects and infinite personal interpretations guiding atomized "flocks".

I'm watching the Astros right now and some dude named Mark Shook and his wife are both "pastors" of their church, I wasn't aware that women could be Pastors, but they seem fine with it. Their commercial shows a lot of concerts, tattooed guys dancing around the stage, and some plays. How do I know this guy is legit? He's obviously a multi-millionaire so someone is buying what he's selling.

---

And I'm calling attention to Popes who claimed to be the "vicar of christ" while breaking any and all of the 10 commandments.

But since you mentioned the "Lutheran transsexual lesbians" I'm assume you know that you're likely referring to the ELCA, which is Lutheran in name only and likely not christian and none of the truly historically/confessional Lutheran Churches are in any sort of fellowship with them. Honestly, Rome is in closer contact with them via the LWF than I am.

To your question, what do you want me to say? I haven't seen Rome come out and disavow Hillsong or Bethel or the aforementioned Lutheran World Federation which recognizes same sex unions among all the other weird stuff they do. I'm guessing Mark Shook is related to Kerry Shook? Haven't seen Rome picketing outside their church or anything?

But to this question:

Quote:

---

When we see them" and you wonder why you have infinite numbers of sects and infinite personal interpretations guiding atomized "flocks".

---

Rome has claimed authority for a long time. Yet these sects keep coming. So for as much as you want to blame everyone else, maybe it turns out that having unwritten traditions that don't hold up and appealing to authority outside of Scripture isn't working either.

Dies Irae said:

---

Point of order, I believe Christ declared them the infallible interpreter when he said what Peter bound and loosed on earth would be bound and loosed in heaven. Peter then passed on this charism as did the other Apostles.

---

Yeah...Everybody will claim that on the surface.

But not everybody claims to have an infallible unwritten "tradition" or a human that's an infallible interpreter/speaker.

Dies Irae said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

PabloSerna said:

---

"And this is the actual crux. The misbelief that Rome has the authority to cut people off from God. Its this misbelief that led to the great schism and to the subsequent issues. It's the primary issue that will continue to separate the church, likely until Christ returns."

+++

How do you answer Christ's words to the Apostles when he says (Mt 18:18-20) "Truly I tell you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven."

Authority or no authority?

---

The problem that you and Faithful Ag and others have is this misconception that Rome speaks for the entire Christian Church.

---

Who speaks for the Churches that make up the Body of Christ?

---

A great many people have spoken and will speak for the Church.

---

I understand that given your position it is extremely difficult to give a straight answer but the purposeful vagueness of your responses does nothing to further the discussion.

How do we vet them? The Lutherans have transsexual lesbians claiming the Eucharistic nature of abortion. You have the Anglicans consecrating genderqueers. Who has the authority to say "this is not okay"

---

I'm not being vague at all.

And your examples are disgusting, but not surprising. Are you going to pretend Rome doesn't have the same issues, and in some case worse?

Lets talk about the German Catholic Bishops who now bless same sex unions. Or we could talk about Popes and their kids? Or the child sex scandal with Roman Priests?

Shoot, I believe right now there's a Roman Catholic Priest on the run for grooming an 18 yr old girl.

So no, I'm not being vague. The Church has had its defenders rise when it was necessary.

---

I'm not calling attention to Protestants who do bad things, everyone does bad things, I'm calling attention to Protestant "clergy" who are enthusiastically supported by their sect who are clearly outwardly championing and living contra Christianity.

And no you're not answering ANY of these questions. You're just saying "they'll come when they need it any we'll know them
When we see them" and you wonder why you have infinite numbers of sects and infinite personal interpretations guiding atomized "flocks".

I'm watching the Astros right now and some dude named Mark Shook and his wife are both "pastors" of their church, I wasn't aware that women could be Pastors, but they seem fine with it. Their commercial shows a lot of concerts, tattooed guys dancing around the stage, and some plays. How do I know this guy is legit? He's obviously a multi-millionaire so someone is buying what he's selling.

---

And I'm calling attention to Popes who claimed to be the "vicar of christ" while breaking any and all of the 10 commandments.

But since you mentioned the "Lutheran transsexual lesbians" I'm assume you know that you're likely referring to the ELCA, which is Lutheran in name only and likely not christian and none of the truly historically/confessional Lutheran Churches are in any sort of fellowship with them. Honestly, Rome is in closer contact with them via the LWF than I am.

To your question, what do you want me to say? I haven't seen Rome come out and disavow Hillsong or Bethel or the aforementioned Lutheran World Federation which recognizes same sex unions among all the other weird stuff they do. I'm guessing Mark Shook is related to Kerry Shook? Haven't seen Rome picketing outside their church or anything?

But to this question:

Quote:

---

When we see them" and you wonder why you have infinite numbers of sects and infinite personal interpretations guiding atomized "flocks".

---

Rome has claimed authority for a long time. Yet these sects keep coming. So for as much as you want to blame everyone else, maybe it turns out that having unwritten traditions that don't hold up and appealing to authority outside of Scripture isn't working either.

---

Appealing to authority without scripture is pretty much mandatory since for several hundred years you had a functioning evangelical and apostolic church without a confirmed canon of scripture.

And these splits aren't from the Church, they're wholly within the Protestant sects. Instead of one pope, you now have a million some who see no problem with abortion, or gay marriage, or drug use, or mutilating children.

Bad Popes are the Vicar of Christ just as Barack Obama was President of the United States. You can dislike the man, as I do, but you can't say he wasn't President; he very much was. Our best Pope was our first Pope; St.Peter; he denied Christ 3 times in one of His greatest moments in need. No other Pope comes close to that level of disappointment; yet the entire Church was built on him.

---

Your last paragraph is a great speech...little truth to it though. Peter was not a Pope, certainly not in the modern sense of Rome. Again, Rome stands alone in that claim and it's self fulfilling.

But you missed my point.

People split, but few go to Rome. For all the claims of Rome, people look at history, look at the bible and still don't see the claims of Rome as true or valid.

Interesting

Dies Irae said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

PabloSerna said:

---

"And this is the actual crux. The misbelief that Rome has the authority to cut people off from God. Its this misbelief that led to the great schism and to the subsequent issues. It's the primary issue that will continue to separate the church, likely until Christ returns."

+++

How do you answer Christ's words to the Apostles when he says (Mt 18:18-20) "Truly I tell you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven."

Authority or no authority?

---

The problem that you and Faithful Ag and others have is this misconception that Rome speaks for the entire Christian Church.

---

Who speaks for the Churches that make up the Body of Christ?

---

A great many people have spoken and will speak for the Church.

---

I understand that given your position it is extremely difficult to give a straight answer but the purposeful vagueness of your responses does nothing to further the discussion.

How do we vet them? The Lutherans have transsexual lesbians claiming the Eucharistic nature of abortion. You have the Anglicans consecrating genderqueers. Who has the authority to say "this is not okay"

---

I'm not being vague at all.

And your examples are disgusting, but not surprising. Are you going to pretend Rome doesn't have the same issues, and in some case worse?

Lets talk about the German Catholic Bishops who now bless same sex unions. Or we could talk about Popes and their kids? Or the child sex scandal with Roman Priests?

Shoot, I believe right now there's a Roman Catholic Priest on the run for grooming an 18 yr old girl.

So no, I'm not being vague. The Church has had its defenders rise when it was necessary.

---

I'm not calling attention to Protestants who do bad things, everyone does bad things, I'm calling attention to Protestant "clergy" who are enthusiastically supported by their sect who are clearly outwardly championing and living contra Christianity.

And no you're not answering ANY of these questions. You're just saying "they'll come when they need it any we'll know them
When we see them" and you wonder why you have infinite numbers of sects and infinite personal interpretations guiding atomized "flocks".

I'm watching the Astros right now and some dude named Mark Shook and his wife are both "pastors" of their church, I wasn't aware that women could be Pastors, but they seem fine with it. Their commercial shows a lot of concerts, tattooed guys dancing around the stage, and some plays. How do I know this guy is legit? He's obviously a multi-millionaire so someone is buying what he's selling.

---

And I'm calling attention to Popes who claimed to be the "vicar of christ" while breaking any and all of the 10 commandments.

But since you mentioned the "Lutheran transsexual lesbians" I'm assume you know that you're likely referring to the ELCA, which is Lutheran in name only and likely not christian and none of the truly historically/confessional Lutheran Churches are in any sort of fellowship with them. Honestly, Rome is in closer contact with them via the LWF than I am.

To your question, what do you want me to say? I haven't seen Rome come out and disavow Hillsong or Bethel or the aforementioned Lutheran World Federation which recognizes same sex unions among all the other weird stuff they do. I'm guessing Mark Shook is related to Kerry Shook? Haven't seen Rome picketing outside their church or anything?

But to this question:

Quote:

---

When we see them" and you wonder why you have infinite numbers of sects and infinite personal interpretations guiding atomized "flocks".

---

Rome has claimed authority for a long time. Yet these sects keep coming. So for as much as you want to blame everyone else, maybe it turns out that having unwritten traditions that don't hold up and appealing to authority outside of Scripture isn't working either.

---

Appealing to authority without scripture is pretty much mandatory since for several hundred years you had a functioning evangelical and apostolic church without a confirmed canon of scripture.

And these splits aren't from the Church, they're wholly within the Protestant sects. Instead of one pope, you now have a million some who see no problem with abortion, or gay marriage, or drug use, or mutilating children.

Bad Popes are the Vicar of Christ just as Barack Obama was President of the United States. You can dislike the man, as I do, but you can't say he wasn't President; he very much was. Our best Pope was our first Pope; St.Peter; he denied Christ 3 times in one of His greatest moments in need. No other Pope comes close to that level of disappointment; yet the entire Church was built on him.

---

Your last paragraph is a great speech...little truth to it though. Peter was not a Pope, certainly not in the modern sense of Rome. Again, Rome stands alone in that claim and it's self fulfilling.

But you missed my point.

People split, but few go to Rome. For all the claims of Rome, people look at history, look at the bible and still don't see the claims of Rome as true or valid.

---

Look at where all those devout who are splitting from Protestantism are going. I believe we've had 4 Anglican Bishops swim the Tiber over just the last year. We've had so many become Catholic we've had to start a personal prelature to handle them.

Wishy washy Catholics turn to Protestantism because they want better music, valet parking and a coffee bar on the premises. Devout Protestants turn to the Apostolic faith because they crave the Body of Christ. I'll take my remnant.

---

Anecdotal stories are just that. Anecdotal.

Anglican is going through a massive upheaval right now over wokeism and it's no surprise to see people leave over it. Granted, they may be going to Rome to enjoy the comforts of the more liberal bent anyways.

Redstone said:

---

For 1500 years, Rome was one of 3 primary sees very clearly set apart. Orthodox are significantly closer to Peterine primacy than any Protestant, for excellent historical reasons.

---

Rome does not equate to the Roman Catholic Church.

I may be mistaking on the language the patriarch, but believe the EO see the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople as the head of Rome for them?

So while Rome the city is important, that does not equate to the Roman Catholic Church.

Everyone has a pope. We Catholics just know who our's is.

AgLiving06 said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

PabloSerna said:

---

"And this is the actual crux. The misbelief that Rome has the authority to cut people off from God. Its this misbelief that led to the great schism and to the subsequent issues. It's the primary issue that will continue to separate the church, likely until Christ returns."

+++

How do you answer Christ's words to the Apostles when he says (Mt 18:18-20) "Truly I tell you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven."

Authority or no authority?

---

The problem that you and Faithful Ag and others have is this misconception that Rome speaks for the entire Christian Church.

---

Who speaks for the Churches that make up the Body of Christ?

---

A great many people have spoken and will speak for the Church.

---

I understand that given your position it is extremely difficult to give a straight answer but the purposeful vagueness of your responses does nothing to further the discussion.

How do we vet them? The Lutherans have transsexual lesbians claiming the Eucharistic nature of abortion. You have the Anglicans consecrating genderqueers. Who has the authority to say "this is not okay"

---

I'm not being vague at all.

And your examples are disgusting, but not surprising. Are you going to pretend Rome doesn't have the same issues, and in some case worse?

Lets talk about the German Catholic Bishops who now bless same sex unions. Or we could talk about Popes and their kids? Or the child sex scandal with Roman Priests?

Shoot, I believe right now there's a Roman Catholic Priest on the run for grooming an 18 yr old girl.

So no, I'm not being vague. The Church has had its defenders rise when it was necessary.

---

I'm not calling attention to Protestants who do bad things, everyone does bad things, I'm calling attention to Protestant "clergy" who are enthusiastically supported by their sect who are clearly outwardly championing and living contra Christianity.

And no you're not answering ANY of these questions. You're just saying "they'll come when they need it any we'll know them
When we see them" and you wonder why you have infinite numbers of sects and infinite personal interpretations guiding atomized "flocks".

I'm watching the Astros right now and some dude named Mark Shook and his wife are both "pastors" of their church, I wasn't aware that women could be Pastors, but they seem fine with it. Their commercial shows a lot of concerts, tattooed guys dancing around the stage, and some plays. How do I know this guy is legit? He's obviously a multi-millionaire so someone is buying what he's selling.

---

And I'm calling attention to Popes who claimed to be the "vicar of christ" while breaking any and all of the 10 commandments.

But since you mentioned the "Lutheran transsexual lesbians" I'm assume you know that you're likely referring to the ELCA, which is Lutheran in name only and likely not christian and none of the truly historically/confessional Lutheran Churches are in any sort of fellowship with them. Honestly, Rome is in closer contact with them via the LWF than I am.

To your question, what do you want me to say? I haven't seen Rome come out and disavow Hillsong or Bethel or the aforementioned Lutheran World Federation which recognizes same sex unions among all the other weird stuff they do. I'm guessing Mark Shook is related to Kerry Shook? Haven't seen Rome picketing outside their church or anything?

But to this question:

Quote:

---

When we see them" and you wonder why you have infinite numbers of sects and infinite personal interpretations guiding atomized "flocks".

---

Rome has claimed authority for a long time. Yet these sects keep coming. So for as much as you want to blame everyone else, maybe it turns out that having unwritten traditions that don't hold up and appealing to authority outside of Scripture isn't working either.

---

Appealing to authority without scripture is pretty much mandatory since for several hundred years you had a functioning evangelical and apostolic church without a confirmed canon of scripture.

And these splits aren't from the Church, they're wholly within the Protestant sects. Instead of one pope, you now have a million some who see no problem with abortion, or gay marriage, or drug use, or mutilating children.

Bad Popes are the Vicar of Christ just as Barack Obama was President of the United States. You can dislike the man, as I do, but you can't say he wasn't President; he very much was. Our best Pope was our first Pope; St.Peter; he denied Christ 3 times in one of His greatest moments in need. No other Pope comes close to that level of disappointment; yet the entire Church was built on him.

---

Your last paragraph is a great speech...little truth to it though. Peter was not a Pope, certainly not in the modern sense of Rome. Again, Rome stands alone in that claim and it's self fulfilling.

But you missed my point.

People split, but few go to Rome. For all the claims of Rome, people look at history, look at the bible and still don't see the claims of Rome as true or valid.

---

Look at where all those devout who are splitting from Protestantism are going. I believe we've had 4 Anglican Bishops swim the Tiber over just the last year. We've had so many become Catholic we've had to start a personal prelature to handle them.

Wishy washy Catholics turn to Protestantism because they want better music, valet parking and a coffee bar on the premises. Devout Protestants turn to the Apostolic faith because they crave the Body of Christ. I'll take my remnant.

---

Anecdotal stories are just that. Anecdotal.

Anglican is going through a massive upheaval right now over wokeism and it's no surprise to see people leave over it. Granted, they may be going to Rome to enjoy the comforts of the more liberal bent anyways.

---

You don't know what you're talking about. Their ordiniariate faces east and gives the mass in Latin, in traditional vestments. They're more traditional than 95% of the rest of western Catholicism.

Redstone said:

---

In many respects it's a question of history:
was Peter given unique authority within the Apostles, who were themselves given unique authority?
Then, were Peter and Paul killed in Rome, and does this hold significance?

What we can say is that for the first 1,500 years of the faith, the answers were affirmative, even after the tragic, unnecessary break with Constantinople.

---

Those can both be true and mean nothing with respect to the Modern Roman Catholic Church.

I doubt your opinions of the current Curia are any more positive than mine.

Different question than Apostolic spiritual authority, protected from evil men and women by the Holy Spirit, over thousands of years.

Redstone said:

---

I doubt your opinions of the current Curia are any more positive than mine.

Different question than Apostolic spiritual authority, protected from evil men and women by the Holy Spirit, over thousands of years.

---

There's been at least 3 iterations of Rome over the centuries.

The pre-Pope era. The rise of the Pope, and Rome created at Trent.

When I think of the modern Rome, it's the third I'm thinking of.

That's not to say that in the last 100 years we aren't seeing the development of a 4th iteration, but that's to be seen.

Shameful discussion that has nothing to do with the mission. Jesus's words about seeing Satan fall like lighting come to mind.

PabloSerna said:

---

Shameful discussion that has nothing to do with the mission. Jesus's words about seeing Satan fall like lighting come to mind.

---

Here's the thing. I want to agree with you. Most of this "should" be between Christians and fellow believers. Within most of the Protestant groups, we can disagree with each other and debate and discuss while being fellow Christians.

However, there's only one group in this conversation that has declared anathema on any group that disagrees with them and means:

"an anathema simply means you are cut off from the church (it does not damn someone to hell). Trent basically said if you do not agree with the Church, you are now outside the Church."

So these discussions become of the utmost importance BECAUSE Rome has said many on this forum are outside of the Church.

Redstone said:

---

"Outside the Church" has a wide meaning that's not easy to articulate. It has a specific meaning but is also at the same time true in various contexts.

Meaning, all sincere Christians seeking Christ are in the Church - AND the Apostolic faith wishes for all to receive its Sacraments, understood to be the fullness of Christian life and worship.

Perhaps like the Sacrament of Baptism - we should be baptized, following Christ's example. This is a physical act, a conduit of grace received in faith. There are also, spiritually, baptisms - of desire (the good thief) and of blood (many who died for the faith).

We would never say John the Baptist was not a holy Christ follower because he died before these Sacraments, especially the Eucharist. He is obviously a major figure of the Church.

Instead, we have the Sacraments and we have the Church, inviting all to join.

---

Yes, As part of this new iteration of Rome, you've tried to soften it, but there's no doubt that to be outside the church had a pretty specific meaning during the time of these anathema's.

one MEEN Ag said:

---

Not defending anyone's misdeeds but there is a lot of protestant conflation here.

The authority of the church extends even to those who do misdeeds while holding office of the church. Priests are held to a higher standard, and responsible for their actions/inactions/misdeeds on judgement day. They're going to have to answer for their misdeeds one day just like the rest of us. God said there's gonna be some sheep and some goats within the church getting sorted out on Judgement day. You know how easy it is to tell the difference between sheeps and goats? But its not our job to judge. Our job as laity is to seek God, seek discernment, live piously, and submit to the church and local authorities as much as possible without disobeying God through worshipping idols

Protestants hone in on the misdeeds of the catholic hierarchy 500 years ago, and they are valid critiques of sin that has caused harm. But that does not grant protestants the right then or now to split from the church on their own terms instead of submit to the church and be a part of the healing of it. Luther finger pointed at the Pope for having no right to be the sole arbiter of catholicism, while appointing himself sole arbiter of his schism. And for catholics pointing to the scoreboard, catholics had no right to declare themselves unequal among the Patriarchates of the united catholic/orthodox church.

---

To be fair, even our Orthodox brothers have no problem with Petrine Primacy; even if it takes on more of a symbolic/honorific status in their understanding. I place about 90% of the blame with Rome on the Catholic/Orthodox split; and that's coming from someone who loves the Catholic Church more than anything on this world. Given that, I find the current rationale for maintaining separate 90/10% the fault of the Orthodox. We've had 26 orthodox churches rejoin communion with Rome; there's no reason not to have the rest.

one MEEN Ag said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

one MEEN Ag said:

---

Not defending anyone's misdeeds but there is a lot of protestant conflation here.

The authority of the church extends even to those who do misdeeds while holding office of the church. Priests are held to a higher standard, and responsible for their actions/inactions/misdeeds on judgement day. They're going to have to answer for their misdeeds one day just like the rest of us. God said there's gonna be some sheep and some goats within the church getting sorted out on Judgement day. You know how easy it is to tell the difference between sheeps and goats? But its not our job to judge. Our job as laity is to seek God, seek discernment, live piously, and submit to the church and local authorities as much as possible without disobeying God through worshipping idols

Protestants hone in on the misdeeds of the catholic hierarchy 500 years ago, and they are valid critiques of sin that has caused harm. But that does not grant protestants the right then or now to split from the church on their own terms instead of submit to the church and be a part of the healing of it. Luther finger pointed at the Pope for having no right to be the sole arbiter of catholicism, while appointing himself sole arbiter of his schism. And for catholics pointing to the scoreboard, catholics had no right to declare themselves unequal among the Patriarchates of the united catholic/orthodox church.

---

To be fair, even our Orthodox brothers have no problem with Petrine Primacy; even if it takes on more of a symbolic/honorific status in their understanding. I place about 90% of the blame with Rome on the Catholic/Orthodox split; and that's coming from someone who loves the Catholic Church more than anything on this world. Given that, I find the current rationale for maintaining separate 90/10% the fault of the Orthodox. We've had 26 orthodox churches rejoin communion with Rome; there's no reason not to have the rest.

---

There is definitely history and reverence for the Bishop of Rome among the orthodox bishops because of Peter. You see it in history where a bishop would petition the Rome for some assistance in a squabble. But where the line is drawn is that reverence doesn't mean elevation.

---

What do you think about this? The Bishop of Rome as the Speaker of the House? Just a regular Representative but only really gets involved as a tie-breaker when the rest of the team is undecided. Would that be a more historical understanding of the position?

My understanding is that the Patriarchates of Rome, Jerusalem, Constantinople, Antioch, and Alexandria were all theologically equal. In the orthodox view there is only three tiers: laity, priests and bishops. So having a bishop over a bishop doesn't mean anything on theology superseding theology. But its even more nuanced than that. It's the quality of the pious men who made the office of the patriarchates influential, not the other way around. You don't read the church fathers because of their titles, but their content.

Go look at the counsels. It wasn't 5 guys in a room. It was hundreds. And look at how the first counsel was deadlocked on Arianism and came to a conclusion. It was St. Spyridon who performed a miracle during the debate by showing that God the Father/Jesus/Holy Spirit were like the nature of a clay pot. Where water poured out from his hand to show the water of a clay tile, fire shot from his finger tips to show the heat of the kiln and dry clay crumbled on the ground. Miracles: Thats how you get consensus.

Thats why there is an issue with the Filioque. Its the Bishop of Rome saying by themselves they can claim something so profound as to the nature of the Holy Spirit. No east/west spanning counsel, no counsel acceptance.

I don't think the Bishop of Rome was ever a tiebreaker. But a revered seat. Look at the list of patriarchates now. Its more than just the ancient 5, they're technically all equal, but you think the newest additions could ever supplant the ancient ones? No. Would say some seats are more revered? Yes.

one MEEN Ag said:

---

My understanding is that the Patriarchates of Rome, Jerusalem, Constantinople, Antioch, and Alexandria were all theologically equal. In the orthodox view there is only three tiers: laity, priests and bishops. So having a bishop over a bishop doesn't mean anything on theology superseding theology. But its even more nuanced than that. It's the quality of the pious men who made the office of the patriarchates influential, not the other way around. You don't read the church fathers because of their titles, but their content.

Go look at the counsels. It wasn't 5 guys in a room. It was hundreds. And look at how the first counsel was deadlocked on Arianism and came to a conclusion. It was St. Spyridon who performed a miracle during the debate by showing that God the Father/Jesus/Holy Spirit were like the nature of a clay pot. Where water poured out from his hand to show the water of a clay tile, fire shot from his finger tips to show the heat of the kiln and dry clay crumbled on the ground. Miracles: Thats how you get consensus.

Thats why there is an issue with the Filioque. Its the Bishop of Rome saying by themselves they can claim something so profound as to the nature of the Holy Spirit. No east/west spanning counsel, no counsel acceptance.

I don't think the Bishop of Rome was ever a tiebreaker. But a revered seat. Look at the list of patriarchates now. Its more than just the ancient 5, they're technically all equal, but you think the newest additions could ever supplant the ancient ones? No. Would say some seats are more revered? Yes.

---

It would seem like there was some sort of juridical supremacy regarding Rome with many different councils referencing the need to have their agreements sent to Rome for confirmation.

Also To be fair, I do not think the filioque to be quite the conundrum that non-communion Orthodoxy makes it out to be. As I mentioned there are 26 Churches in Communion with Rome who do not use the filioque in the creed. I find the conversation with the East about the filioque to be as follows

C- the Holy Spirit descends from the Father and the Son
EO- that demeans the Holy Spirit
C- No it doesn't, the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father through the Son in one divine spiration.
EO- oh well, that's the same as what we believe
C- we know
EO- you still shouldn't have added words to the creed

The gulf is not wide between Catholic and Orthodox. Here's some excellent short articles:

https://commonman.substack.com/p/death-comes-for-the-great-schism

https://commonman.substack.com/p/people-look-east

Aztec1948 said:

---

Many think Marism had its roots in other religious sects... pagan godess worship. It was simply adopted over to Catholicism. Many other items related to Catholicism followed similar paths.

• The Catholic rite of Holy Communion parallels pre-Christian Greco-Roman and Egyptian rituals that involved eating the body and blood of a god.
• A number of Catholic holidays and myths, such as Christmas, Easter, and Mardi Gras, graph onto the timeline of pre-Christian fertility festivals.
• The Catholic practice of praying to saints has been called "de-facto idolatry" and even a relic of goddess worship.

A link to other related items:

https://bigthink.com/the-present/pagan-roots-of-catholicism/

---

The Catholic mystical tradition has much to tell us. I always return to Bl. Anne Catherine Emmerich. Her insights, like NDEs, are subjective (meaning the transcripts of her years long visions can't be considered in canonization).

Regarding pagan and "holy things" (Christ among us before the Eucharist, as in manna and the Ark) mixture:
this tends to be deliberate perversions of our divine Logos interacting with humanity, often containing seeds of truth, confused further as years pass.

My version, the 7 volumes from TAN Books, has the foundation of the world to St. Anne / St. Mary covered in only about 300 of 2,000 pages, but much about this. For example, Joseph and his wife Ansenth, rulers of Egypt, came to be worshipped as Osiris and Isis.

Redstone said:

---

My version, the 7 volumes from TAN Books, has the foundation of the world to St. Anne / St. Mary covered in only about 300 of 2,000 pages, but much about this. For example, Joseph and his wife Ansenth, rulers of Egypt, came to be worshipped as Osiris and Isis.

---

Is this bit about Joseph and his wife from her visions written in The Life of Jesus Christ?

Yes, middle of Tan version vol. 1 of 4

I do wish FARSIGHT would have done a project on Mary and her conception of Jesus. Dick Allgires remote viewing group has collected some very interesting data on one Mr. Bob Lazar. Yes, I'm pretty convinced on the legitimacy of the technique. In all instances...can that even be applied to any other method of data collection? So of you may be familiar with Bob's claims.

Then there is always Aztec to warn us all of these UFOs.