re: Pope Francis has Died

quote:

---

Either you're intentionally lying, or you are severely, severely misinformed.

There was a period of relative unity in the first century of Christianity, and the patriarchates recognized Rome as primus inter pares in the ecumenical councils, but the other patriarchates never accepted Papal primacy - which is what I asked about, not church unity. Again, you're either mixed up on what 1000 years of church unity meant regarding ecumenical councils and Apostolic succession vs. Papal primacy, you're misinformed, or your telling a lie.

Never was Papal primacy recognized by the Apostolic churches, and to say anything but is an outlandish misrepresentation of the truth, i.e., an outright lie.

---

Well, I'm not lying, and I'm not misinformed. The Orthodox position you espouse is revisionist history that requires one to not take words written in several ecumenical councils to mean what they seem to mean.

quote:

---

Well, I'm not lying, and I'm not misinformed. The Orthodox position you espouse is revisionist history that requires one to not take words written in several ecumenical councils to mean what they seem to mean.

---

My guy, this is not up for debate, and it's not hard to find if you wanted to: The patriarchates never entertained the notion of Papal authority and never will. Period. End of story.

SIAP. Pope Francis’ cause of death has been revealed:

Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.

quote:

---

Either you're being disingenuous, or you don't know what you're talking about.

---

right - so the pope can say stupid stuff and it’s ok because he wasn’t speaking ex cathedra - is what I’m saying

So we are not bound to it as Catholics

Just like if a patriarch says stupid things - all of the million other patriarchs from the other orthodox denominations can come and correct him and say he’s wrong. No one is bound to believe him or do what he says.

Now if the Pope says altar rails need to be put back in all Catholic Churches - it’s supposed to be done - but not necessarily because it’s not a doctrine

As the case when Benedict XVI asked for the tabernacles to be put back on the altar. Not every single Catholic Church has done that. Or Pope Paul VI in 1974 and Pope John Paul II said some of the Mass still needs to be said in Latin - not every Catholic Church does that

So much for the Papal Primacy you speak of.

My condolences to all Catholics on the passing of His Holiness, Pope Francis.

quote:

---

Now if the Pope says altar rails need to be put back in all Catholic Churches - it’s supposed to be done - but not necessarily because it’s not a doctrine

---

The kicker is that they were never mandated to be removed in the first place, but the morons that embraced the Spirit of Vatican II (and likely never read the actual docs from VII) pushed for it.

I don’t know about all the practices of the various denominations. In reality, so long as they aren’t adding to, or taking away from scripture, and not in open rebellion to the word and what it says, I don’t have a problem with them.

quote:

---

Sure you can, but you have no assurance of it.

---

Why can I have no assurance of it when it’s right there in red and black and white?

quote:

---

Sir, the Bible does not say so many different things that there needs to be tens of thousands of different interpretations.

---

I agree.

quote:

---

Which Pentecost sect is right on who's going to hell if you don't speak in tongues? If I can't handle a rattlesnake without being bitten, do I truly have faith? And since protestantism (and others) believe in the concept of faith and faith alone, regardless of works, does that mean I'm destined for hell if the snake bites me?

---

The Bible teaches that faith and faith alone will get you saved. It doesn’t teach that faith and faith alone will guard you from consequences of picking up a rattlesnake.

quote:

---

Which Methodist sect is correct? Should we champion sexual perversions, or not?

---

No we shouldn’t. But that’s in the Bible as well. So the churches that do that are in open rebellion to God and His word.

quote:

---

Why do some baptists drink alcohol when the others don't?

---

I’ve never once heard a single Baptist preacher say that your salvation rests upon whether or not you consume alcohol. They warn against it, sure. But there isn’t a single one that I’ve ever heard say that your salvation is incumbent upon it.

quote:

---

The entire spectrum is ludicrous. It's mass confusion, and God is not the God of confusion.

---

It’s really not that hard to understand. They may have different practices, but if their teaching is doctrinally sound and doesn’t go against the word of God, then I don’t see why it’s anything other than a different blend of seasonings on the same steak.

quote:

---

Where, specifically?

---

You can’t be serious, right?

quote:

---

On 2000 year old traditions, Paul was the priest at Thessalonica for 3 months teaching them the ways of the early church, but he left only 8 chapters in Scripture for them/us. Do you think those 8 chapters were all he taught them? Think of the teaching and apprenticeship he gave them in the ways of the church, and that's just one example.

---

I can’t speak to what all Paul taught them during his time in Thessalonica other than what is in his letters, just as you yourself cannot and to do so is speculation at best. I can however speak to what is written in the letters he wrote them that were included in the Holy Bible. I seem to also remember a Jewish carpenter who went against thousands of years old of religious tradition. Was he wrong to do so?

quote:

---

I thought you had to convert for the marriage to be recognized by the Roman Catholic Church. Is that not the case?

---

Not the case at all. Priest just wanted to make sure I wouldn’t refuse my children the opportunity to be raised Catholic. I am agnostic so it was an obvious yes. My kids can decide on their own before confirmation.

quote:

---

quote:
Where, exactly, are you drawing the line on Papal authority?
Seriously? Youre asking me on when the other patriarchates drew the line on Papal authority? There was this thing called the Great Schism. Look it up.

Because they never recognized papal authority. Ever.
quote:
Are you saying they never signed a letter explicitly saying, "Rome has authority over me"?


No, they didn't.

You are severely, severely confused on the difference between papal authority and primus inter pares. What you are stating is an outright lie, and undermines the Orthodox patriarchates to the degree where you ought to be ashamed, but since papal primacy is a cult like obsession for so many, I know you won't.

You've a lot of learning to do.

---

I know more than enough to have this discussion with you. You didn't answer my question.

I understand what the Great Schism is. I know what first among equals means. But you said they never entertained Papal authority. My response was that they accept several first-millennium ecumenical councils in which Rome's primacy (not limited to ecumenical councils) was stated directly or indirectly. How does that square with your assertion that they never entertained Papal primacy?