"Rome and Constantinople are not called to vie for primacy" - Leo XIV Contradicts Leo I
Pope Leo XIV said on July 17 in Castel Gandolfo to a group of byzantine Catholics from the USA: "Unity among those who believe in Christ is one of the signs of God’s gift of consolation; Scripture promises that 'in Jerusalem you will be comforted' (Is 66:13). Rome, Constantinople and all the other Sees, are not called to vie for primacy, lest we risk finding ourselves like the disciples who along the way, even as Jesus was announcing his coming passion, argued about which of them was the greatest (cf. Mk 9:33-37)."
However, Catholicism teaches that the primacy belongs to the Pope.
Pope Leo I (†461)
“The See of Constantinople cannot be made equal to that of Rome.”
Council of Florence (1439)
“We define that the Holy Apostolic See and the Roman Pontiff holds the primacy over the whole world; and that the Roman Pontiff is the successor of the blessed Peter, prince of the Apostles, and the true vicar of Christ, the head of the whole Church, and the father and teacher of all Christians.” …More
@LouieVerrecchio
: This is huge. No primacy of Rome=no indefectibity=a fallible church that can lead souls to Hell. Sound familiar? Leo is the head of just such a church.
"Individual Churches may become corrupt in morals, may fall into heresy ... Only to One particular Church is indefectibility assured, viz. to the See of Rome." (Catholic Encyclopedia)
The primacy of the Papacy betrayed by the modernist heretic Robert Prevost.
Unity in Apostasy.
The Roman Primacy Betrayed: Another Week with …
Lumen Gentium and Nostra Aetate promote the heresy of religious indifference, which violates the First Commandment and is apostasy. Religious indifference has been defined as the greatest blasphemy against the Holy Trinity, as it equates false religions with the Catholic faith.
Well, Every Day For Life Canada, it seems to me that Jesus' words, "whoever is not against us, is for us," don't apply to this particular situation (Luke 9:49-50 and Mark 9:37-39).
And like all the conciliar popes, now called "synodal," they are misinterpreted and taken out of context.
"Rome, Constantinople and all the other Sees, are not called to vie for primacy"
---
Smells and looks like heresy cf. solemn Vatican I Magisterium on primacy (Pastor aeternus):
If anyone, therefore, shall say that Blessed Peter the Apostle was not appointed the Prince of all the Apostles and the visible Head of the whole Church Militant; or that the same, directly and immediately, received from the same, Our Lord Jesus Christ, a primacy of honor only, and not of true and proper jurisdiction; let him be anathema.
If then, any should deny that it is by the institution of Christ the Lord and by Divine right, that Blessed Peter should have a perpetual line of successors in the Primacy over the Universal Church, or that the Roman Pontiff' is the successor of Blessed Peter in this primacy; let him be anathema.
If anyone, then, shall say that the Roman Pontiff has the office merely of inspection or direction, and not the full and supreme power of jurisdiction over the Universal Church, not only in things which belong to faith and morals, but also in those which relate to the discipline and government of the Church spread throughout the world; or assert that he possesses merely the principal part, and not all the fullness of this supreme power; or that this power which he enjoys is not ordinary and immediate, both over each and all the Churches and over each and all the Pastors and the faithful; let him be anathema
When his goal is united One world religion, who cares about Rome's primacy or anything else Catholic. It's not like he is the pope!
Clear, direct, objective denial of an irreformable dogma of the Roman Catholic Church. The Roman Pontiff's job is to defend all dogma, including the dogma of Primacy of the Successors of Peter, against all heretics. Instead, we have an infiltrator and usurper saying that the Primacy is irrelevant. The man is a heretic. He is not a Roman Catholic. He is not the Pope.
Nevertheless, the other catholic orthodox churches believe the same things as the Roman church…so why insist on supremacy…what did Jesus say, who is not against us is for us! Also because of the word AND the separation happened……Jesus is both God AND man was the dispute.. one side insisted that he was only God, the other side that he was both….. or do we have that wrong, just asking.
Because the Roman Catholic Church through its Extraordinary Magisterium has infallibly declared that the Roman Pontiff has supremacy over the whole Church by the will of God.
If you say that declaration was false, then you are saying that what the Church claims are infallible teachings are, in fact, fallible. In that case, there would be no "Rock" of Truth, which is the ministry of the Successors of Peter.
Jesus said that Peter is the "Rock" upon which He would build His Church. In denying the primacy, you change the meaning of Jesus's words as they were originally interpreted by the Apostles and confirmed by every Roman Pontiff throughout history. You become an ally of the enemies of the Roman Catholic Church, who have always sought to destroy the Primacy of Peter.
@Everyday for Life Canada . The Orthodox do NOT believe or hold as doctrine the same things as the Roman Catholic Church. They differ in regard to the Doctrine on the Blessed Trinity as stated in both the Athanasian and the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creeds - namely, God the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son. This is no small issue! Also, they do not believe in the Immaculate Conception of Our Lady - another important issue. They also differ in regard to divorce and contraception. And, the difference over papal primacy itself is a key issue! If Prevost caves in and says "no big deal" - he is not a Roman Catholic - and this is a BiG Deal!