Firstly, PtA has provided statements from the Third Council of Constantinople outlining the anathematisation of Pope Honorius due to his impious teachings.
The point I made, as well as the popes at the time, as well as modern apologist, is that he was not teaching heresy openly. What the said council indicates was that he was condemned from a letter addressed to Segiuis; not to the entire church or universal. This explains why there was no open heresy to be found in the See of Rome, and in fact the letter has him saying to be silent.
...as many Roman Catholics have done before him, to try to prove that anathematisation of Pope Honorius did not specifically mean he was heretical.
Every RC source I have read regarding him has him condemned as heretical, just not openly teaching it. Please show me where in the said council it says this! The council mentions a private letter, not an encyclical addressed to the entire church as you would have it.
What was Pope Honorius?
Heretical. That was easy.
Well, that argument is solely up to truth to formulate and debate.
Not if he was condemned by an ecunmenical council, which he was.
Please provide your argument and its support by 23:59 EST, 18 July 2008, otherwise option 2 will come into effect. I believe other questions have gone unanswered, but this is the tangent we shall follow for now.
Please provide where in the said council that he was condemned for openly teaching heresy. Until then, what am I suppose to prove?...a negation? A negation means it was absent, which is what I am saying.
Secondly, if this debate continues to dry up and falter, I will have no choice but to lock this thread. Any significant tangents can be debated in their own threads, if required, in an attempt to stimulate meaningful debate.
You should dry it up, because no one is providing any evidence for their case. They say that he was openly teaching heresy; yet the council says that he was condemned by a private letter.
Keep in mind this private letter is the best case you have against Rome in the pre-schism hereies. This pales in comparison to the openly taught heresies in the east, and in doing so killed St Maximos in the process.
I am begging anybody here: please show me where your claim that he openly taught the said heresy from the from the said council. I know the council said that he was condemned for his views confirmed in the private letter. This is not the same.