OrthodoxChristianity.net
December 21, 2014, 11:58:23 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 »   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Primacy of Petrine Papacy proved through Patristics  (Read 60808 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 33,156


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #270 on: July 09, 2008, 01:13:17 AM »

For example, pope Honorius kept coming up along with the fact that the pope at the time condemned him for heresy. This is not true, as even St Maximos poiunted out.
So, Pope Honorius was condemned for being a mouse, for being too weak and afraid to assert his papal authority to do what he could to squash the rampant heresy of monotheletism.  What's the difference between this and actively teaching heresy?  Thanks to his [lack of] action, the heresy spread just as if he had taught it, and even the quote you cited from Pope Leo II made clear that this was the reason for his condemnation.

Quote
Time and time again I find the antipapist view mistaken, which reaffirms my faith in RC.
Fair enough.  At least you're honest, though I would counter that you're the mistaken one, but I don't call your honesty into question.
« Last Edit: July 09, 2008, 01:15:15 AM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
SolEX01
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of New Jersey
Posts: 11,831


WWW
« Reply #271 on: July 09, 2008, 01:16:50 AM »

What are you getting at?

Forget it!

Edited to stay away from trouble.
« Last Edit: July 09, 2008, 01:23:28 AM by SolEX01 » Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 33,156


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #272 on: July 09, 2008, 01:19:52 AM »

How about describing your understanding of the question?
How about staying on topic? Wink
Logged
SolEX01
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of New Jersey
Posts: 11,831


WWW
« Reply #273 on: July 09, 2008, 01:22:19 AM »

^ You know Peter, why didn't you say this 20 posts ago?   Angry
Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 33,156


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #274 on: July 09, 2008, 01:27:46 AM »

^ You know Peter, why didn't you say this 20 posts ago?   Angry
Can't fault me for trying. angel
Logged
SolEX01
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of New Jersey
Posts: 11,831


WWW
« Reply #275 on: July 09, 2008, 01:30:48 AM »

Brother, truth, I apologize for calling you a troll.  I respect Roman Catholicism as one of the Lungs of World Christianity.  I ask for humble forgiveness.   Smiley
« Last Edit: July 09, 2008, 01:31:18 AM by SolEX01 » Logged
SolEX01
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of New Jersey
Posts: 11,831


WWW
« Reply #276 on: July 09, 2008, 01:33:23 AM »

Can't fault me for trying. angel

Thank You.   Smiley
Logged
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #277 on: July 09, 2008, 07:41:44 AM »

One of the reasons I became RC was because no such thing happened.
I think you need to own that statement. You should say: "One of the reasons I became RC was because I believe no such thing happened."

Time and time again I find the antipapist view mistaken, which reaffirms my faith in RC.
Fine. No one is permitted to proselytize you on this forum. Pay us the same respect and we'll get along just dandy. Smiley
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #278 on: July 09, 2008, 10:18:10 AM »

The time being discussed was after 1000 AD. You're kinda missing the point.

Was there a point to miss?

You're missing the point. We were talking about openly teaching heresy. I know that the east have disrepected the roman popes...but thats not the issue.

The filioque is not considered heretical by the learned in the west, whereas everyone learned from the west and east agree that the eastern sees were openly teaching heresies.

Big difference.

The Learned of the Universal Ecumenical Seventh Council, both East and West saw no difference, and insisted on the anathema of Honorius while praising St. Sophronius of Jerusalem (one of those eastern sees).  I'm gonna go with them on this.

The second and fourth Universal Councils condemned additions to the Creed, something Pope Leo III enforced "for love and protection of the Orthodox Faith."  What the "learned" of the West think is of no consequence.

Ya, but the point is, the learned from the east and west agree that the eastern sees were heretical.

Actually, no.  We acknowledge that many fell, but you omit that then many rose to defense of the True Faith.  Case in point, the emperor and his archbishop of Constantinople might have been Arian, but St. Gregory and those who followed him in the capital (all out of communion with Rome, btw) were not.  Similarly the Faithful stuck with St. Athanasius in exile.  St. Pope Cyril helped the Faithful of Constantinople depose patriarch Nestorius.  The Iconoclasts and Monotheletes emperors had to remove many of the hierarchs (a point St. Maximus pointed out) to replace them with heretics.  Had the emperor been able to get his hands on Rome, the Pope there would have had a similar fate.  Except Pope Honorius of course, no need to replace him.

The problem with you using St Maximos is that his quotes are some of the strongest for the See of Rome's case. Especially in regard to pope Honorius. You guys seem to have missed what the Roman popes and St Maximos said regarding Honorius at the said council. No doubt to try to increase your case.

And yet the Fathers of the Council condemned Honorius, and Pope St. Leo instituted the papal oath of the Liber Diurnus, which anathematized Honorius by name.  Take it up with them, that they "missed the point."

I am sure most here know the story of the eastern sees persecuting St Maximos, and how he sought the See of Rome for help. Thats it in a nutshell.

St. Maximus had the full backing of St. Sophronius, patriarch of Jerusalem, one of the Eastern Sees.

And yet you're pinning your adherence to papal supremacy as it is defined today on the supposed precedent of the early church, which makes our accusation that the RCC fell into heresy in the 2nd Millennium totally relevant to any discussion of how the Eastern churches fell into heresy in the 1st.

Yes, I've notice how "truth" like to be a moving target.



It means that the See of Rome never taught heresy. And as far I am concerned, if this is the best you guys have against papacy, and knowing of the major heresies taught in the east, there is no comparison. The See of Rome was always kept unsullied. This is one of the reasons why I became RC.

You haven't explained how Arianism lived on for centuries in the Roman patriarchate, whereas it quickly died in the Eastern patriarchates in less than a century.  And the Emperor Justinian in the East had to come and put an end to it.

I dont understand. Everybody knows the east was heretical. Only the east for the last 1000s years think that the west in is heresy. Why do you think your point relevant?

We have been condemning your addition to the Creed over a millenium.  The Pope of Rome did too, then changed his mind.

Interesting question. Seeing that I dont think that the church ever taught wrongly, I am not sure how I would know. I suppose ultimately the answer would have to be circular. If I were to witness Rome saying to never be holy, and in fact hurt the innocent all of the time, I would cease to be RC. As I see it, Rome is protected from such failures.

Ah, the problem of Rome contradicting herself, as Leo IX contradicts Leo III concerning the filioque.
« Last Edit: July 09, 2008, 10:58:39 AM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
truth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 167


« Reply #279 on: July 09, 2008, 10:41:28 AM »

Quote
So, Pope Honorius was condemned for being a mouse, for being too weak and afraid to assert his papal authority to do what he could to squash the rampant heresy of monotheletism.  What's the difference between this and actively teaching heresy? 


It means that the See of Rome never taught heresy. And as far I am concerned, if this is the best you guys have against papacy, and knowing of the major heresies taught in the east, there is no comparison. The See of Rome was always kept unsullied. This is one of the reasons why I became RC.
Logged
truth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 167


« Reply #280 on: July 09, 2008, 10:51:06 AM »

Quote
The Learned of the Universal Ecumenical Seventh Council, both East and West saw no difference, and insisted on the anathema of Honorius while praising St. Sophronius of Jerusalem (one of those eastern sees).  I'm gonna go with them on this.

I already dealt with Honorius. He never taught heresy, and was never condemned for that. He was condemned for what he wrote in a private letter. Big difference.

Quote
The second and fourth Universal Councils condemned additions to the Creed, something Pope Leo III enforced "for love and protection of the Orthodox Faith."  What the "learned" of the West think is of no consequence.

The filioque added nothing to the creed that was not already believed by the west. Besides, you guys changed it as well, and say the same thing. Again, even St Maximos accepted the fact that the filioque was not obviously heretical!

Quote
Actually, no.  We acknowledge that many fell...

We can disagree. You can go ahead and think that the eastern heresies were a very small and almost nondetectable crisis. (Althouth you admit that many fell) I am content knowing that mostly all of the OC think diferently, as well as history books. I wont bring that up with you anymore, or at least until you take the bull by the horns. 
« Last Edit: July 09, 2008, 10:57:44 AM by truth » Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #281 on: July 09, 2008, 11:10:28 AM »

I already dealt with Honorius. He never taught heresy, and was never condemned for that. He was condemned for what he wrote in a private letter. Big difference.

The letter a heresy of commission and this silence (qui tacit consentit) a heresy of omission.  So much for strenghthening the brethren (which was done by Patriarch Sophronius of Jerusalem).

Actually, the Sixth Council dealth with Honorius.

Quote
The filioque added nothing to the creed that was not already believed by the west.

As the Creed was composed in the East, with no bishop from the West, or any imput from the Pope of Rome (in fact, the Fathers at the time were not in communion with Rome at the time), what was believed by the West is irrelevant.

Quote
Besides, you guys changed it as well, and say the same thing.

 
Quote
Again, even St Maximos accepted the fact that the filioque was not obviously heretical!

No, he accepted the explanation he was given, and suggested it be dropped, as in the original Greek, it was heretical (as even your church admits, and does not allow it in the Greek). Instead, the West tried to impose it.


Quote
We can disagree. You can go ahead and think that the eastern heresies were a very small and almost nondetectable crisis. (Althouth you admit that many fell) I am content knowing that mostly all of the OC think diferently, as well as history books. I wont bring that up with you anymore, or at least until you take the bull by the horns. 

I didn't say they were small: I said they were combated and dealt with, and did not survive in the East.  They have been revived in the West, especially by the Protestants (btw, how do you explain them away?).
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
truth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 167


« Reply #282 on: July 09, 2008, 11:35:28 AM »

Quote
Actually, the Sixth Council dealth with Honorius.

Right, but not the way that was first presented here. He was the way I presented here. Big difference.

Quote
I didn't say they were small: I said they were combated and dealt with, and did not survive in the East.  They have been revived in the West, especially by the Protestants (btw, how do you explain them away?).

I dont agree that the See of Rome is heretical, so we should stick to where the east and west agreed. As far as protestants, let them believe what they want.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #283 on: July 09, 2008, 11:48:23 AM »

Right, but not the way that was first presented here. He was the way I presented here. Big difference.

Well, I guess Rome has spoken.

But not infallibly.

Quote
I dont agree that the See of Rome is heretical, so we should stick to where the east and west agreed. As far as protestants, let them believe what they want.

No, I'm afraid if you are going to bandy about our heretics, schismatics, etc., you are going to have to own up to yours.

And East and West agreed that the Creed shouldn't be tampered with, until Rome changed her mind in the 11th century.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Heracleides
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Patriarch of Jerusalem
Posts: 390


Kona-Kai


« Reply #284 on: July 09, 2008, 11:50:16 AM »

Right, but not the way that was first presented here. He was the way I presented here. Big difference.

I dont agree that the See of Rome is heretical, so we should stick to where the east and west agreed. As far as protestants, let them believe what they want.
.

But we know the Archbishop of Rome and the church he leads are heretical and have been for the past millennium. Not only heretical herself, the Roman Catholic Church has spawned the greatest heresy ever - that being your Protestant offspring - you know, the whole 'by their fruits' business. I suppose we will simply have to agree to disagree with your views on this matter and the choices you have made.
« Last Edit: July 09, 2008, 12:26:50 PM by Heracleides » Logged

"And having found Heracleides there again, we instructed him to proclaim the Gospel of God..."  ~Acts of Barnabas
theistgal
Byzantine (Ruthenian) Catholic gadfly
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Follower of Jesus Christ
Jurisdiction: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 2,082


don't even go there!


« Reply #285 on: July 09, 2008, 11:52:00 AM »

So, Pope Honorius was condemned for being a mouse, for being too weak and afraid to assert his papal authority to do what he could to squash the rampant heresy of monotheletism.  What's the difference between this and actively teaching heresy?  Thanks to his [lack of] action, the heresy spread just as if he had taught it, and even the quote you cited from Pope Leo II made clear that this was the reason for his condemnation.

I have to thank you because I hadn't thought of this before.  But you're right - and it's even listed in the old prayer books which have lists of ways we can be materially guilty of a sin - and one of them is by "silence".

If a Pope sees a sin - such as a heresy - being committed; has the power to stop it; and doesn't - why wouldn't he be counted guilty of that same sin?
« Last Edit: July 09, 2008, 11:52:21 AM by theistgal » Logged

"Sometimes, you just gotta say, 'OK, I still have nine live, two-headed animals' and move on.'' (owner of Coney Island freak show, upon learning he'd been outbid on a 5-legged puppy)
ignatius
Baptacathadox
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic > Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA - Diocese of the South
Posts: 1,690


My Son Aidan... :-)


« Reply #286 on: July 09, 2008, 12:07:45 PM »

I have to thank you because I hadn't thought of this before.  But you're right - and it's even listed in the old prayer books which have lists of ways we can be materially guilty of a sin - and one of them is by "silence".

If a Pope sees a sin - such as a heresy - being committed; has the power to stop it; and doesn't - why wouldn't he be counted guilty of that same sin?

Gratia et Pax Vobiscum (a little Latin doesn't hurt does it?),

On of the nine ways of being an accessary to another's sin is silentio (L: By Silence) as you've said. Perhaps he never actively taught error but by his silence he allowed it.

Lord have mercy.
Logged

St Basil the Great (330-379 A.D.): “I think then that the one goal of all who are really and truly serving the Lord ought to be to bring back to union the churches who have at different times and in diverse manners divided from one another.”
theistgal
Byzantine (Ruthenian) Catholic gadfly
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Follower of Jesus Christ
Jurisdiction: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 2,082


don't even go there!


« Reply #287 on: July 09, 2008, 12:26:17 PM »

Gratia et Pax Vobiscum (a little Latin doesn't hurt does it?)

Not at all - as they say, "Sola lingua bona est lingua mortua."  Wink
Logged

"Sometimes, you just gotta say, 'OK, I still have nine live, two-headed animals' and move on.'' (owner of Coney Island freak show, upon learning he'd been outbid on a 5-legged puppy)
Salpy
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Armenian Church
Posts: 12,892


Pray for the Christians of Iraq and Syria.


« Reply #288 on: July 09, 2008, 12:38:58 PM »

This is one of the reasons why I became RC.

Hi truth,

I'm just curious.  To what Church did you belong before becoming RC?  I am just curious because I think it may help us to better understand you and where you are coming from.  Were you Protestant?  We have a lot of converts from Protestantism here.  That could be something you and other posters could have in common.  You don't have to answer my question, of course.  It's just that I am curious and I always find conversion stories interesting.   Smiley
Logged

ignatius
Baptacathadox
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic > Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA - Diocese of the South
Posts: 1,690


My Son Aidan... :-)


« Reply #289 on: July 09, 2008, 12:52:00 PM »

Not at all - as they say, "Sola lingua bona est lingua mortua."  Wink

Only good language is a dead one?  Undecided
Logged

St Basil the Great (330-379 A.D.): “I think then that the one goal of all who are really and truly serving the Lord ought to be to bring back to union the churches who have at different times and in diverse manners divided from one another.”
theistgal
Byzantine (Ruthenian) Catholic gadfly
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Follower of Jesus Christ
Jurisdiction: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 2,082


don't even go there!


« Reply #290 on: July 09, 2008, 02:37:21 PM »

Only good language is a dead one?  Undecided

Vah! Denuone Latine loquebar? Me ineptum. Interdum modo elabitur.  Wink
Logged

"Sometimes, you just gotta say, 'OK, I still have nine live, two-headed animals' and move on.'' (owner of Coney Island freak show, upon learning he'd been outbid on a 5-legged puppy)
truth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 167


« Reply #291 on: July 09, 2008, 07:40:19 PM »

Quote
Well, I guess Rome has spoken.

But not infallibly.

This is not the point. Rome's position was misrepresented. Thats the problem. This is the same problem with the filioque. It is misrepresented in order to attack it. Starw man.

Quote
No, I'm afraid if you are going to bandy about our heretics, schismatics, etc., you are going to have to own up to yours.

Not when we are talking about times when everyone agreed with who was heretical. The west does not agree that the west is heretical, or ever was. Everyone agrees that the eastern sees were heretical. See the difference?

Quote
And East and West agreed that the Creed shouldn't be tampered with, until Rome changed her mind in the 11th century.

You guys adjusted it to.
« Last Edit: July 09, 2008, 07:47:27 PM by truth » Logged
truth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 167


« Reply #292 on: July 09, 2008, 07:43:21 PM »

But we know the Archbishop of Rome and the church he leads are heretical and have been for the past millennium. Not only heretical herself, the Roman Catholic Church has spawned the greatest heresy ever - that being your Protestant offspring - you know, the whole 'by their fruits' business. I suppose we will simply have to agree to disagree with your views on this matter and the choices you have made.

Protestantism sole source is not the RC. Many of them would protest you too.

Again, I realize you think that RC is heretical. The problem is, that that falls outside of the current domain, that is: when both east and west agree as to who was in heresy.
Logged
truth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 167


« Reply #293 on: July 09, 2008, 07:45:06 PM »

I have to thank you because I hadn't thought of this before.  But you're right - and it's even listed in the old prayer books which have lists of ways we can be materially guilty of a sin - and one of them is by "silence".

If a Pope sees a sin - such as a heresy - being committed; has the power to stop it; and doesn't - why wouldn't he be counted guilty of that same sin?

Because it is different? The See of Rome and the pope are protected by God as to what it teaches, not the personal letters of the said pope. The east, on the other hand, openly taught the heresy. Big difference.
Logged
truth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 167


« Reply #294 on: July 09, 2008, 07:46:04 PM »

Hi truth,

I'm just curious.  To what Church did you belong before becoming RC?  I am just curious because I think it may help us to better understand you and where you are coming from.  Were you Protestant?  We have a lot of converts from Protestantism here.  That could be something you and other posters could have in common.  You don't have to answer my question, of course.  It's just that I am curious and I always find conversion stories interesting.   Smiley

I was an atheist.
Logged
Salpy
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Armenian Church
Posts: 12,892


Pray for the Christians of Iraq and Syria.


« Reply #295 on: July 09, 2008, 08:03:29 PM »

Well, I'm glad you are no longer an atheist.  Please don't let internet religious debates turn you back into one.  That's happened to a couple of people here because of the stupid Chalcedon debates that take place here sometimes.

I have a friend at work who was raised an atheist and then converted to Catholicism.  I remember that after her baptism she came to work glowing.  Just really literally glowing.  Nothing could wipe the peaceful smile off her face.  Some months later during Holy Week I was sitting in the lunch room griping about how busy and tired I was, partly because of all the volunteer work I always end up doing at church.  So I was griping and then I caught sight of my friend, who was glowing again.  I shut up and I congratulated her on her first Easter.

Anyway, I know everyone here, including myself, is disagreeing with you on everything.  Just don't let it get to you.  I think sometimes we have to remember that the internet is not the real world.   Smiley
Logged

truth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 167


« Reply #296 on: July 09, 2008, 08:14:25 PM »

Thanks for your thoughtful post. I became RC after many years of studying philosophy, theology, and history. Every post directed towards me always strengthens my faith. The same thing happens on atheist disscusion boards. The post directed towards me here always miss a critical point that for whatever reason they think I wont find, or they in fact were not aware of (ie: pope honorius, filioque, particular canons etc.)


So thx for your concern. You were the OO right? I am slowly learning your history.

Thank you.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #297 on: July 09, 2008, 09:54:45 PM »

This is not the point. Rome's position was misrepresented. Thats the problem. This is the same problem with the filioque. It is misrepresented in order to attack it. Starw man.

No, it is not.  You cannot translate it with ekporeusis without committing heresy.  Even your church admits that.  And if it cannot use the words of the Fathers without causing heresy, it is exactly why the Fathers forbade fiddling with the Creed.  And that Rome changed the Creed is neither a misrepresentation nor a straw man.

Quote
Not when we are talking about times when everyone agreed with who was heretical. The west does not agree that the west is heretical, or ever was. Everyone agrees that the eastern sees were heretical. See the difference?

Again, no.  No one in the East says the Eastern Sees were heretical.  Outnumbered at times, yes.  Athanasius contra mundi.  And the West was represented, approved of and promulgatged the Sixth Council, every pope of Rome taking the oath  anathematizing Honorius on assuming the office.

Quote
You guys adjusted it to

Changed We belive to I believe. Earthshaking?

Protestantism sole source is not the RC. Many of them would protest you too.

Again, I realize you think that RC is heretical. The problem is, that that falls outside of the current domain, that is: when both east and west agree as to who was in heresy.

Yes, Honorius for starters.
« Last Edit: July 09, 2008, 09:56:28 PM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 13,498


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #298 on: July 09, 2008, 10:56:33 PM »

Ho hum.  How many times have we argued over this quote before, with you and with other would-be apologists like you?  We have argued consistently that RC attempts to use St. Maximos as a defender of your position either take his quote out of context or doctor the quote to fit your arguments or isolate St. Maximos from the authoritative context of all the holy Fathers.  Yet you have done little but dodge our criticisms, accuse us of misusing his writings or of dodging the issue ourselves, and continue with the same thrust that St. Maximos has spoken truth and that we must all assent to [your interpretation of] his quote.

When will you address our criticisms head on and prove to us that you and your ilk are NOT taking an isolated quote from St. Maximos out of context?  When will you give us the whole of the corpus of St. Maximos's writings so we can read his quotes in context?  When will you provide for us a broad picture of the history of the Church during the time of St. Maximos and of the issues that St. Maximos confronted, the issues that shaped how he related to Rome and to the other patriarchates?  Can you do this for us?  Or is this going to be like asking you to go to the moon to bring us back a piece of the green cheese that makes up its surface?

This is the game the RCC plays with their Protestants. They look for gotcha quotes ( Biblical with them, Writings with the Fathers with us)...  No isolated passage overturns what is clear from the historical records, especially of the Councils. Rome didn't rule over the entire Church.

If there were such convincing Patristic quotes, why then did Rome promulgate so many writings that we now know were forged? Why bother if genuine quotes and the record of events were so clear? 
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 33,156


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #299 on: July 09, 2008, 11:32:29 PM »

Because it is different? The See of Rome and the pope are protected by God as to what it teaches, not the personal letters of the said pope.
And yet, it doesn't appear that God protected Pope Honorius from doing great damage to the Church through his failure or refusal to confront the spreading Monothelete heresy.

Quote
The east, on the other hand, openly taught the heresy. Big difference.
When are you going to get off this kick of blaming the WHOLE of the East for openly teaching heresy?  You've read quite a few of us admit that many churches--in fact, even the majority of churches--in the East did indeed fall into heresy quite a few times, but that many others, also in the East, resisted the various heresies and actually brought the East back to the Orthodox faith.  Thus it can be said that the East remained remarkably faithful to the doctrines of the Apostles despite the many heresies that threatened to destroy her ship from inside.  So how can you continue to say that "the [unqualified] East openly taught heresy"?  Face it, truth, the more you repeat this already tired mantra, the more you undermine the authority of your message on this thread.
Logged
truth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 167


« Reply #300 on: July 10, 2008, 01:26:00 AM »

No, it is not.  You cannot translate it with ekporeusis without committing heresy.  Even your church admits that.  And if it cannot use the words of the Fathers without causing heresy, it is exactly why the Fathers forbade fiddling with the Creed.  And that Rome changed the Creed is neither a misrepresentation nor a straw man.

Again, no.  No one in the East says the Eastern Sees were heretical.  Outnumbered at times, yes.  Athanasius contra mundi.  And the West was represented, approved of and promulgatged the Sixth Council, every pope of Rome taking the oath  anathematizing Honorius on assuming the office.

Changed We belive to I believe. Earthshaking?

Yes, Honorius for starters.

I have already answered your counters in previous posts in this thread. I dont blame you if you dont have the time to read them, so please dont blame me for not wanting to repeat myself.
Logged
truth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 167


« Reply #301 on: July 10, 2008, 01:29:09 AM »

This is the game the RCC plays with their Protestants. They look for gotcha quotes ( Biblical with them, Writings with the Fathers with us)...  No isolated passage overturns what is clear from the historical records, especially of the Councils. Rome didn't rule over the entire Church.

If there were such convincing Patristic quotes, why then did Rome promulgate so many writings that we now know were forged? Why bother if genuine quotes and the record of events were so clear? 

There were forgeries, but that does not make every quote a forgery automatically because of that. If I find a quote from you saying that you renounced something, when in fact you did not, does that then make any positive statement you had that was true to you a forgery?
Logged
truth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 167


« Reply #302 on: July 10, 2008, 01:34:54 AM »

Quote
And yet, it doesn't appear that God protected Pope Honorius from doing great damage to the Church through his failure or refusal to confront the spreading Monothelete heresy.

This is true. But then why does God let so many more evil things happen that dwarf the evil you speak of? The protection I was speaking of was wrong doctrine being taught by the See of Rome, or rather the pope. The case regarding Honorius you guys keep using fails because he was condemned of what was found in a private letter (he never taught it as pope to his see or the entire church), whereas the eastern heresies were openly taught by their popes. See the difference yet?


Quote
When are you going to get off this kick of blaming the WHOLE of the East for openly teaching heresy?

Well, they did. This is documented history that most of you admit without a fuss.

Quote
You've read quite a few of us admit that many churches--in fact, even the majority of churches--in the East


Okay, I'll just let it be agreed that the majority of eastern sees openly taught heresy in order to keep the thread from being halted. Thats fine.
« Last Edit: July 10, 2008, 01:36:44 AM by truth » Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 33,156


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #303 on: July 10, 2008, 02:13:59 AM »

This is true. But then why does God let so many more evil things happen that dwarf the evil you speak of? The protection I was speaking of was wrong doctrine being taught by the See of Rome, or rather the pope. The case regarding Honorius you guys keep using fails because he was condemned of what was found in a private letter (he never taught it as pope to his see or the entire church), whereas the eastern heresies were openly taught by their popes. See the difference yet?
The only thing I see is that you continue to miss, or should I say dodge, the point that Honorius was not condemned solely for what he said in a private letter; he was condemned for what he did not do as Pope, which aided the spread of heresy just as much as if he had taught it himself.  In essence, Pope Honorius taught the heresy by doing nothing to combat it.  Why do you not address this point of fact?  Would doing so undermine your thesis?  Or is it just too much of an inconvenience for you?
« Last Edit: July 10, 2008, 02:19:28 AM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 33,156


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #304 on: July 10, 2008, 02:16:48 AM »

There were forgeries, but that does not make every quote a forgery automatically because of that.
That's not the point.  The point is that many of the quotes you use to bolster your argument with us ARE forgeries, and the use of such known forgeries destroys your position.
Logged
truth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 167


« Reply #305 on: July 10, 2008, 02:36:25 AM »

Quote
In essence, Pope Honorius taught the heresy by doing nothing to combat it.  Why do you not address this point of fact?  Would doing so undermine your thesis?  Or is it just too much of an inconvenience for you?

He did not teach the heresy.

And you're right, he could of done a lot more. He kept silent, and even in his letter said as much. I am not dodging any of this. You are wrong however in equating him keeping silent to openly teaching heresy, which is what the eastern sees did. You have to claim that they are equal because it hurts your case not to. Big difference. Not to mention according to St Maximus, that the said popes views were misundertsood. In fact, the roman popes said as much in the said council.
« Last Edit: July 10, 2008, 02:40:23 AM by truth » Logged
truth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 167


« Reply #306 on: July 10, 2008, 02:39:21 AM »

Quote
That's not the point.  The point is that many of the quotes you use to bolster your argument with us ARE forgeries...
What proof do you have that I have in fact used a forgery many times here? And the points made in the forgeries in question are substantiated elsewhere from those that are not.

The following case should really put this case to rest:

http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2001/0104fea4.asp
« Last Edit: July 10, 2008, 02:41:43 AM by truth » Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 33,156


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #307 on: July 10, 2008, 03:09:45 AM »

He did not teach the heresy.

And you're right, he could of done a lot more. He kept silent, and even in his letter said as much. I am not dodging any of this. You are wrong however in equating him keeping silent to openly teaching heresy,
And yet, the end result was the same, was it not?

Quote
which is what the eastern sees did.
Again, your blanket statements of what the whole East supposedly did, and this in violation of the promise you just made a few posts ago to stop doing this.

Quote
You have to claim that they are equal because it hurts your case not to.
And yet I'm making this claim.

Quote
Big difference.
No, not really.

Quote
Not to mention according to St Maximus, that the said popes views were misundertsood. In fact, the roman popes said as much in the said council.
Again, just saying that St. Maximos said such and such don't make it so.  You have evidence to support your claim, and not just a couple of excerpts of his quotes taken out of context?
Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 33,156


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #308 on: July 10, 2008, 03:16:10 AM »

What proof do you have that I have in fact used a forgery many times here? And the points made in the forgeries in question are substantiated elsewhere from those that are not.

The following case should really put this case to rest:

http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2001/0104fea4.asp

Yes, I've read this article.  Just another Catholic apologetic (i.e., second-hand source) quoting whatever patristic or conciliar evidence supports their position--no different from what you're doing here.  It does nothing, absolutely nothing, to put this case to rest.  Now give us something really objective.
Logged
truth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 167


« Reply #309 on: July 10, 2008, 10:55:49 AM »

Quote
And yet, the end result was the same, was it not?

You are assuming that the same result would of occured. But I believe many people would not be RC today if Honorius did openly teach heresy. I would not for example. If the See of Rome and the pope are not protected from error in doctrine, why be a RC? This would of had major reprecussions. It would also make decalrations of the pope today self refuting. How can you say that it would make no difference? You only mean that it would make no difference in the numbers of converts to the said heresy. This is false too. Because announcing the said heresy officially would of convinced many to endorse it since they would of believed that it was correct doctrine. But how can you eqaute the effects of a silent teaching with an open one? How would you of been convinced if you never heard of it?...that is, unless you lived in the east? If you are saying that the number of people who would buy a product but never saw an advertisement for it, is the very same number of people who see the advertisements on TV an buy the product, then why are companies spending trillions of dollars on ads?  Huh

Your case is illogical. Why do you think that the popes write encyclicals? To spread their teachings.  Embarrassed

But in the Honorius' case, what they found were private letters that have him requesting silence. C'mon.

And keep in mind: this is the best case you have.

« Last Edit: July 10, 2008, 11:08:42 AM by truth » Logged
truth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 167


« Reply #310 on: July 10, 2008, 10:59:32 AM »

Quote
Again, just saying that St. Maximos said such and such don't make it so.  You have evidence to support your claim...

Your claim was that I used many forgeries. Please try to prove this. Or, withdraw your accusation.
« Last Edit: July 10, 2008, 11:03:52 AM by truth » Logged
ignatius
Baptacathadox
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic > Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA - Diocese of the South
Posts: 1,690


My Son Aidan... :-)


« Reply #311 on: July 10, 2008, 11:17:22 AM »

Vah! Denuone Latine loquebar? Me ineptum. Interdum modo elabitur.  Wink

Oh! I speak Latin another time? Inept I am. It comes out in spurts....
Logged

St Basil the Great (330-379 A.D.): “I think then that the one goal of all who are really and truly serving the Lord ought to be to bring back to union the churches who have at different times and in diverse manners divided from one another.”
theistgal
Byzantine (Ruthenian) Catholic gadfly
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Follower of Jesus Christ
Jurisdiction: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 2,082


don't even go there!


« Reply #312 on: July 10, 2008, 11:46:25 AM »

Oh! I speak Latin another time? Inept I am. It comes out in spurts....

LOL - sorry, I found this rather amusing site: http://www.biopsych.net/psyhumor/latin_phrases_for_all_occasions.htm and have been cutting & pasting from it.  Mea culpa!  Cool
Logged

"Sometimes, you just gotta say, 'OK, I still have nine live, two-headed animals' and move on.'' (owner of Coney Island freak show, upon learning he'd been outbid on a 5-legged puppy)
theistgal
Byzantine (Ruthenian) Catholic gadfly
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Follower of Jesus Christ
Jurisdiction: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 2,082


don't even go there!


« Reply #313 on: July 10, 2008, 11:49:06 AM »

He did not teach the heresy.

And you're right, he could of done a lot more. He kept silent, and even in his letter said as much. I am not dodging any of this. You are wrong however in equating him keeping silent to openly teaching heresy, which is what the eastern sees did. You have to claim that they are equal because it hurts your case not to. Big difference. Not to mention according to St Maximus, that the said popes views were misundertsood. In fact, the roman popes said as much in the said council.

So truth, as one RC to another, let me ask you:  how then do you respond to the fact that in all the old confessional manuals, in the lists of mortal sins, it's always specified that one of the ways of cooperating with a sin is "silence"?

Please explain why, if Pope Honorius had the authority and the opportunity to renounce the heresy, and did not, he was not himself guilty of it?
Logged

"Sometimes, you just gotta say, 'OK, I still have nine live, two-headed animals' and move on.'' (owner of Coney Island freak show, upon learning he'd been outbid on a 5-legged puppy)
Heracleides
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Patriarch of Jerusalem
Posts: 390


Kona-Kai


« Reply #314 on: July 10, 2008, 11:51:21 AM »

And keep in mind: this is the best case you have.


As ialmisry stated in message #226, and which you have conveniently chosen to ignore, there is more:

Quote
All we have?

Pope Vigilius was stricken from the dyptich until he condemned the Three Chapters.

Pope Zosimos dragged his feet on Pelagius: we had to send him and Jerome back West.

Pope Leo III puts the Creed without the filioque on the doors of St. Peter's and St. Paul's, and Pope Leo IX (?) sends someone to us to excommunicate us for "omitting" it.

etc.ect.ect.
.
« Last Edit: July 10, 2008, 11:54:10 AM by Heracleides » Logged

"And having found Heracleides there again, we instructed him to proclaim the Gospel of God..."  ~Acts of Barnabas
Tags: Primacy of Peter Pope Leo Petrine Primacy Chalcedon cheval mort Flavian Ephesus II Tome of Leo The St. Maximos Quote That Irenaeus quote 
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 »   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.154 seconds with 72 queries.