A thread about the historical facts related to the primacy of the pope of Rome. What interpretation was given to the notion of primacy in different times and places.
In the thread I've had a discussion with a Catholic guy regarding the primacy of the pope. I was very demanding "Give me citations in support of this or that, or else your claims are void". And I was given more than what I expected. So it was my turn to do my homework. As always, it was a pleasure to read the works of the cited saints. I learned a lot of things I didn't know before. For this I am very grateful.
I decided to post my responce in a separate thread because there is so much more to learn. A thread where we are not going to debate whether the Catholic doctrine is correct but a place where we can learn a little history and (maybe) a little more about each other.
EASTERN AND WESTERN MENTALITY
What rights does the pope have? It is hard to write about this. I have the feeling that whatever I write I am going to be misunderstood because the Eastern and the Western mentalities are so different. Even when we use identical words we can not be sure that we are talking about the same thing.
The Western mind is analytic, it wants to explain everything and to reduce everything to some simple rules. This is why we can find the legalistic approach everywhere in the Catholic theology. This is also the source of scholasticism, so incompatible with the Eastern theological approach.
The Western mind does a good job in the science. But science is never static, the science makes new discoveries and revises old theories all the time. How can the Western mind do theology? It seems it has only two choices:
– to develop opposing theological theories and then to revise them all the time. This is the approach of the protestants.
– to settle the differences by some supernatural "source of truth". This is the approach of the catholics.
The Eastern approach in theology is different. The mind there is not permitted to "invent" the truth because the truth is a gift we get. The truth is not a product of the mind; the words we use in order to describe the truth, however, are. In this way, in the Eastern theology the mind is useful and important, it is not, however, permitted to go astray.
Even the most learned theologian can not be more respected teacher in the Orthodox Church, than a simple unlearned old man, whose deeds show the grace of God. The Orthodox preach about the Good News is not in wisdom of words. It is foolishness to those who are dying, but to us who are saved it is the power of God. For it is written, "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, I will bring the research of the researchers to nothing." Where is the wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the rhetorician of this world? Hasn't God made foolish the wisdom of this world? God chose people who are not wise (according to the flesh), not mighty and not noble. God chose the foolish things of the world so that he might put to shame those who are wise. God chose the weak things of the world, so that he might put to shame the things that are strong. And God chose the lowly things of the world, and the things that are despised, and the things that are nothing, so that he might bring to nothing the things that are something. But to us, who are in Christ Jesus, He was made to us wisdom from God, and righteousness and sanctification, and redemption: that, according as it is written, "He who boasts, let him boast with the Lord."
