" It is the Tradition which makes us orthodox, not "the Petrine This statement, Peter, from this article, is at the heart of the argument against the Magisterium centre". of Rome. What we Anglicans have to be very careful of, is that we don't get seduced into another insular striving for 'primacy' in our own Communion - in the way that Rome accords to herself. This would completely and irrevocably overturn any benefits secured by the process of enlightenment from ongoing reformation in the Church Universal - of which we happen to be merely one part? - where 'Unity in diversity is seen as a strength rather than a weakness -
The notion of the Petrine Primacy can also be interpreted to mean something other than what successive Popes have arrogated to themselves - an understanding which has been challenged by other branches of the Church Universal who claim to be valid expressions of the Body of Christ in the world
One signifcant factor against the Petrine argument is that Peter had to be, on at least one occasion, persuaded by Paul to overcome his Jewish prejudice against Gentiles. If Peter had been allowed to 'rule' on that occasion, there may never have been a Gentile Church.
Also, there is the matter of the rival Pope at Avignon. Who then was the legitimate Successor of Peter, the one-time married man?
'Orthodoxy' surely can best be described in the words of Jesus himself as resting on "He who does the will of my Father in Heaven" - Not he who obeys the Pope; who is, after all, the self-proclaimed *Servant of the Servants of God* - whoever they happen to be.
You may be interested in Cardinal Walter Kasper's address to the ABC
"I know well, that the day of tomorrow is not an easy one for you. It is not a day of victory for one side, it should be for both a day of penance" & calling the CofE a "church"!
4 comments:
" It is the Tradition which makes us orthodox, not "the Petrine
This statement, Peter, from this article, is at the heart of the argument against the Magisterium centre".
of Rome. What we Anglicans have to be very careful of, is that we don't get seduced into another insular striving for 'primacy' in our own Communion - in the way that Rome accords to herself. This would completely and irrevocably overturn any benefits secured by the process of enlightenment from ongoing reformation in the Church Universal - of which we happen to be merely one part? - where 'Unity in diversity is seen as a strength rather than a weakness -
The notion of the Petrine Primacy can also be interpreted to mean something other than what successive Popes have arrogated to themselves - an understanding which has been challenged by other branches of the Church Universal
who claim to be valid expressions of the Body of Christ in the world
One signifcant factor against the Petrine argument is that Peter had to be, on at least one occasion, persuaded by Paul to overcome his Jewish prejudice against Gentiles. If Peter had been allowed to
'rule' on that occasion, there may never have been a Gentile Church.
Also, there is the matter of the
rival Pope at Avignon. Who then was the legitimate Successor of Peter, the one-time married man?
'Orthodoxy' surely can best be described in the words of Jesus himself as resting on "He who does the will of my Father in Heaven" - Not he who obeys the Pope; who is, after all, the self-proclaimed *Servant of the Servants of God* - whoever they happen to be.
Wouldn't an Anglican magisterium, Ron, help us to know what the will of the Father is? Especially when we disagree as to what that will is?
You may be interested in Cardinal Walter Kasper's address to the ABC
"I know well, that the day of tomorrow is not an easy one for you. It is not a day of victory for one side, it should be for both a day of penance" & calling the CofE a "church"!
http://www.archbishopofcanterbury.org/3116
Thank you, Bosco!
I like Kasper and what he has to say about the C of E. I am sure you join with me in interpreting his 'churches' to include ACANZP :)
Post a Comment