2 thoughts on “Faithful to the First Millennium: Fr. Joseph Ratzinger’s Commentary on Eastern Orthodoxy

  1. Eh….no mention by Ratzinger, in your article at any rate, of the role of the Emperor in calling councils and as a force for unity in the first millennium. Bit of a hole, that, but understandable if one wishes to present that the Bishop of Rome was the only force for oecumenical unity. Further, it is always one thing to say that the Bishops of Rome to make claims as to their prerogatives; it is another to say that all other bishops agreed at all times to those claims (a much higher bar). Finally, there is scant, next to none, maybe even none, liturgical evidence to support those claims, which is of the course the highest standard by which something can be considered dogmatic.

    That’s not to say, of course, that the Bishop of Rome was not held by all Christians in the first or even into the second millennium a place of highest honor, as a court of last resort, and as indeed a locus of unity in faith. But who could deny that innovations to that faith would undermine the credibility and standing of any bishop who promoted such innovations???

    • Seems to me you entirely missed the point of this article. The single purpose was to show speak to the usage of Fr. Ratzinger by contemporary writers in a few of his quotes that try to make it out that he beleived the Orthodox Church was the one faithful to the 1st millennium rather than the Catholic Church.

      Whether Fr. Ratinzger was correct or not had no place in my goal.

Leave a Reply to Stephen Keeler Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s