Papal Primacy - Printable Version
+- The British Orthodox Church - Fellowship Forum (http://britishorthodox.org/forum)
+-- Forum: Knowledgebase (/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: Ask a Question (/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Thread: Papal Primacy (/showthread.php?tid=164)
Papal Primacy - John Charmley - 30-11-2007 12:19 PM
I guess this is one for Kirk, but it may be that others here have some information. One of my Catholic friends has written to me on the subject of Papal primacy as follows:
Quote:There is an ancient Syriac collection of canons attributed to St. Maruthas of Maipherqat that contains two canons about papal primacy.I'd be interested to know if these are genuine or interpolations.
papal primacy - kirk yacoub - 01-12-2007 11:26 AM
My first, unresearched, response is that the text quoted is certainly not what we believe. It is notoriously easy to mistranslate Syriac. What could be intended is the idea that the Bishop of Rome should be primus inter pares amongst a communion of bishops. I will ask those more learned than me in the Syriac Orthodox Church.
Thanks - forum - 01-12-2007 12:20 PM
Many thanks. It doesn't 'smell' right, so to say. Many of these Catholic claims that the ancient Church recognised the primacy of the bishop of Rome seem to involve interpreting texts in a way contemporaries would not have recognised.
I'm very grateful to you for taking this further. My friend is, I am sure, entirely genuine in believing what he has been told by others, but I have this habit of wanting to check up on things - must be the historian in me.
Re: Thanks - John Charmley - 01-12-2007 12:36 PM
forum Wrote:Dear Kirk,
Kirk, this is another one which has ended up under Peter's rather than my name!
- John Francis - 13-02-2008 11:49 AM
Dear Kirk and John
This is an interesting post regarding papal primacy. Were there any further developments regarding its authenticity and interpretation?
kind regards John Francis
- John Charmley - 13-02-2008 05:39 PM
Dear John Francis,
Clearly not yet!!
This whole business is hampered by the way in which some insist on reading any evidence of 'primacy' as meaning what it means now. This is often accompanied by a restless search for any passage which can be interpreted in that light.
I suspect it would be easier all round if the idea could be accepted that the office has developed over the centuries, and that it was not, in the fifth century, what it is now. Then, according to taste, some could think that fine, and others a shame.
This Pope, like his predecessor, is a very considerable leader and a great Christian example, and if he can help bring us together by working on the moral and spiritual primacy of his office, then that will be a good thing.
- John Francis - 13-02-2008 07:25 PM
Thank you for your reply-words do change their meaning , use and consequently interpretation-especially when translation from another language is involved.
kind regards John Francis
papal primacy - kirk yacoub - 15-02-2008 11:45 AM
This is just to inform you that I asked about the quotation a long time ago and it seems to have got lost somewhere in the hierarchy of the Syriac Orthodox Church! Perhaps the quotation is fom an obscure source,or perhaps it doesn't exist, or perhaps it was written by someone else!
An important point to bear in mind is that the RC Church does not just claim Papal primacy, but Papal supremacy, which is something even more
- John Charmley - 15-02-2008 05:31 PM
Thanks for your efforts.
I suspect that, like most such quotations, it is taken out of context to 'prove' that the past was like it is now; it wasn't, and the continued attempts to prove it by misquotation suggest nothing so much as a poor case.
What I don't understand is why the RCC can't say that, like other dogmas, our understanding of the Pope's power has grown with time and prayer.