OrthodoxChristianity.net
November 25, 2014, 11:31:58 PM *
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 »  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: David Newman and the Pope  (Read 12959 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
David Newman
Moderated
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Kiousis Synod
Posts: 38


BANNED FOR DUPLICATE ACCOUNT - He's also Euthymios


« on: March 04, 2009, 04:03:01 AM »


 Hello, I am happy to be here.  I hope they allow dialogue and friendly debate here. I hope I am in the right section for this. I am fully Orthodox, but I believe the bishops of Rome (the popes) were considered the head of the Church within the first millenum. I want to discuss this because I have come across some Orthodox people who deny this. Christ is the spiritual head of the entire Church. But this does not mean he did not leave the visible Church on earth with a visible head to safeguard unity and orthodoxy. It's not an "either / or" (either Christ OR the pope). It can be both. I believe this was the understanding of the ancient Church. If local parishes can have a head (a priest), and Metropolitans, bishops, etc, as head of their diocese, then why can't the whole Church also have a head? I submit it can.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
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: 37,963



« Reply #1 on: March 04, 2009, 04:08:44 AM »


 Hello, I am happy to be here.  I hope they allow dialogue and friendly debate here. I hope I am in the right section for this. I am fully Orthodox, but I believe the bishops of Rome (the popes) were considered the head of the Church within the first millenum. I want to discuss this because I have come across some Orthodox people who deny this. Christ is the spiritual head of the entire Church. But this does not mean he did not leave the visible Church on earth with a visible head to safeguard unity and orthodoxy. It's not an "either / or" (either Christ OR the pope). It can be both. I believe this was the understanding of the ancient Church. If local parishes can have a head (a priest), and Metropolitans, bishops, etc, as head of their diocese, then why can't the whole Church also have a head? I submit it can.

What is a "Kiousis synod?"
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
David Newman
Moderated
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Kiousis Synod
Posts: 38


BANNED FOR DUPLICATE ACCOUNT - He's also Euthymios


« Reply #2 on: March 04, 2009, 04:09:08 AM »


With all due respect to the people who voted "no," they are clearly not educated in Church history. Here are a few examples from the pre-schism Church showing the popes to be head of the Church. I'm Orthodox and I'm an honest Orthodox. The facts are the facts.



Pope Innocent wrote to the Council of Carthage in 417 and referred to his see as one "incorrupt head." [PL 20:582-3].

Prosper [5th century] called the See of Peter the "head of the pastoral office for the world." [PL. 51:96].

The Priest Philip [5th century].- called the pope the "head". [ACO I: 1: 3:58].

Cyril of Alexandria [5th century] called Pope Celestine "archbishop of the entire habitable world." [PG 77: 1040].

In 450 the empreror Valentinian told Theodosius that the the bishop of Rome holds the principality of the priesthood over all." [Inter epp. S. Leonis, 55. PL 54:859].

At the Council of Chalcedon, the priest Paschasinus stood and made the announcement: "We have in our hands orders from the most blessed and apostolic pope of the city of Rome, which is head of all the churches...." [ACO II, Vol. 3, pt. 1, 40].

He also called Pope Leo "universal pope, Leo." [ACO II, Vol. 3, Pt. 2, 18].

And "universal archbishop and patriarch of Great Rome." [ACO II, Vol. 1, Pt. 2, 15 sq].

At the end of the fifth session of Chalcedon, Emperor Marcian characterized Pope Leo as "the most blessed and apostolic pope of the universal church." [Mansi 7:132-6].

In 451, the bishops wrote to Pope Leo and said Leo "had been in charge as the head.." [Inter epp. S. Leonis, 98. PL 54: 952].

They called him the "head" and "summit." [PL 54:958].

The emperor Marcian said "Leo is the first of the arhchbishops." [Nau, 263-4].

The bishops of second Moesia defended the Council of Chalcedon and called "Leo, bishop of Rome, who is head of bishops." [ACO IV, Vol. 5, 32].

In 485, a Roman synod of 43 bishops met and they wrote to the clergy and archimandrites of Constantinople. saying "the faith of your holiness has been proven to the Apostolic See, which rules over us all." [CSEL 35: 158-9].

In 484, Eugene, primate of Carthage spoke of the pope as "the Roman Church, head of all the churches." PL 58: 215].

In 517, Pope Hormisdas received appeals from the east signed by alomst 200 signatures which refered to the pope as "patriarch of the whole world...Christ our God has constituted you prince of pastors...[you] are head of all." [CSEL 35: 572 sq].

Emperor Justinain wrote the pope saying "...the Lord will bring about through you, as Supreme Shepherd, the salvation of all." [Thiel, 955].

Justinain wrote to Epiphanius saying "...holy pope and patriarch of old Rome, to whom we have written likewise. For we do not allow anything pertaining to ecclesiastical order not to be reported to His Beatitude, since he is head of all the holy priests of God..."[Codex Iustinianus I 1, 7. Ed. P. Krueger, Corpus Iuris Civilis, Berlin 1882, Vol. II, 8].

In 533 Justinian called Pope John II ".....head of all the churches." [Codex Iustianus I 1, 8. Corpus Irus Civilis, Berlin 1882, Vol. II, 11].

Pope Damasus [382]: ".....nevertheless the holy Roman Church has been set before the other churches not by any synodical decrees, but by the evangelical voice of the Lord and Savior, saying "Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church......."[Epp. VII, 34. PL 77:893].

Pope Boniface [418-422] wrote to the bishops of Thessaly and said of the Roman church: "... this Roman church is to the Churches spread through the world, as it were, the head of it's own members, from which whoever cuts himself off is expelled from the Christian religion..." [PL. 20:777-79].
Logged
LBK
No Reporting Allowed
Moderated
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 11,443


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #3 on: March 04, 2009, 04:11:56 AM »

Sorry, David. The Orthodox Church has always been conciliar. Every patriarch (and even every bishop, irrespective of rank) has had an equal voice in the life of the Church. The west has distorted the idea of "first among equals" (as in, which patriarch has the casting vote, and little more than this) to support the idea that the Pope of Rome is supreme. Not so. The Head of the whole Orthodox Church is Christ, and the Church is led by the Holy Spirit.

Each bishop and patriarch is responsible for safeguarding doctrinal, liturgical and theological unity. But no one bishop or patriarch has the authority to override all other bishops or patriarchs in such matters, unless all of these had fallen into heresy or other grave error.
Logged
LBK
No Reporting Allowed
Moderated
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 11,443


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #4 on: March 04, 2009, 04:12:45 AM »

What is a "Kiousis synod?"

The Kiousis synod is one of the various schismatic Greek Old Calendarist groups.
Logged
David Newman
Moderated
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Kiousis Synod
Posts: 38


BANNED FOR DUPLICATE ACCOUNT - He's also Euthymios


« Reply #5 on: March 04, 2009, 04:13:13 AM »


You can learn more about us here ( www.thegreekorthodoxchurch.com).

I'm not technically with them yet, but I am in spirit and faith -- hopefully.
Logged
Elisha
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,462


« Reply #6 on: March 04, 2009, 04:14:44 AM »


 Hello, I am happy to be here.  I hope they allow dialogue and friendly debate here. I hope I am in the right section for this. I am fully Orthodox, but I believe the bishops of Rome (the popes) were considered the head of the Church within the first millenum. I want to discuss this because I have come across some Orthodox people who deny this. Christ is the spiritual head of the entire Church. But this does not mean he did not leave the visible Church on earth with a visible head to safeguard unity and orthodoxy. It's not an "either / or" (either Christ OR the pope). It can be both. I believe this was the understanding of the ancient Church. If local parishes can have a head (a priest), and Metropolitans, bishops, etc, as head of their diocese, then why can't the whole Church also have a head? I submit it can.

What is a "Kiousis synod?"

I had no idea either until I googled and found this:
http://orthodoxwiki.org/Old_Calendarists

"The Chrysostomite Synod: Amidst charges of maladministration, the majority of the Florinite synod chose in 1986 a new leader in Archbishop Chrysostom (Kiousis), who demonstrated rather effectively that the True Orthodox in Greece were a force to be reckoned with. Choosing to take on the Greek legal system, court cases were held where it was demonstrated that the Old Calendarists of Greece were not schismatics. Though their public reputation had been tarnished over nearly two decades of divisions, their legal existence was, and is presently, safe. The synod of Chrysostom of Athens is today the largest synod of the True Orthodox Church of Greece. "
Logged
David Newman
Moderated
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Kiousis Synod
Posts: 38


BANNED FOR DUPLICATE ACCOUNT - He's also Euthymios


« Reply #7 on: March 04, 2009, 04:15:02 AM »

LBK, this is poisoning the well and a red herring. Please, let us stay on topic. But we don't fit the definition of schism because we never left the Church. Those in the WCC and other Freemasonic organizations left the Church. We never went anywhere.
Logged
LBK
No Reporting Allowed
Moderated
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 11,443


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #8 on: March 04, 2009, 04:17:07 AM »

Hello David

It would be useful for you to locate the text for the vigil (festal Vespers and Matins) service for the feast of Apostles Peter and Paul. There are several threads on this forum which deal with the primacy or otherwise of the see of Rome, and of the primacy or otherwise of Apostle Peter, as well as at least one thread which contains much of the hymnody for the above-mentioned feast.
Logged
David Newman
Moderated
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Kiousis Synod
Posts: 38


BANNED FOR DUPLICATE ACCOUNT - He's also Euthymios


« Reply #9 on: March 04, 2009, 04:19:30 AM »

Sorry, David. The Orthodox Church has always been conciliar. Every patriarch (and even every bishop, irrespective of rank) has had an equal voice in the life of the Church. The west has distorted the idea of "first among equals" (as in, which patriarch has the casting vote, and little more than this) to support the idea that the Pope of Rome is supreme. Not so. The Head of the whole Orthodox Church is Christ, and the Church is led by the Holy Spirit.

Each bishop and patriarch is responsible for safeguarding doctrinal, liturgical and theological unity. But no one bishop or patriarch has the authority to override all other bishops or patriarchs in such matters, unless all of these had fallen into heresy or other grave error.

At the Council of Chalcedon, the Roman legate Paschasinus made the following statement:

"We have in our hands orders from the most blessed and apostolic pope of the city of Rome, which is head of all the churches......" [ACO II, Vol. 3, Pt. 1, 40].

Do you agree?
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
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: 37,963



« Reply #10 on: March 04, 2009, 04:21:20 AM »

Wow. This is a popular thread.  Grin

you misspelled redundant.
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
David Newman
Moderated
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Kiousis Synod
Posts: 38


BANNED FOR DUPLICATE ACCOUNT - He's also Euthymios


« Reply #11 on: March 04, 2009, 04:22:42 AM »

Sorry, David. The Orthodox Church has always been conciliar. Every patriarch (and even every bishop, irrespective of rank) has had an equal voice in the life of the Church. The west has distorted the idea of "first among equals" (as in, which patriarch has the casting vote, and little more than this) to support the idea that the Pope of Rome is supreme. Not so. The Head of the whole Orthodox Church is Christ, and the Church is led by the Holy Spirit.

Each bishop and patriarch is responsible for safeguarding doctrinal, liturgical and theological unity. But no one bishop or patriarch has the authority to override all other bishops or patriarchs in such matters, unless all of these had fallen into heresy or other grave error.

You're wrong, just like the other Orthodox I have talked to about this.

LETERAN COUNCIL [649].

Saint Maximus the Confessor put this council on the same level as an Ecumenical council.

Pope Martin called this council. The opening of the Acts exist in Latin and Greek and calls it:

"the holy apostolic synod, which occurred in the most celebrated Old Rome, according to the sacred command and canonical procurement of the most holy and thrice blessed Pope Martin, who presided over the entire divine hierarchy under the sun, for the establishment and defense of the dogmas of the fathers and synods of the Catholic and apostolic Church according to the gospel." [Mansi X, 863-64].

The notary Theophylact asked Pope Martin to address the bishops, "over which you are pre-eminent through the great and apostolic summit, which is in charge of all the priests throughout the world." [Mansi X, 867-70].

The conciliar acts contain a letter from Maurus, bishop of Ravenna, "to the most holy and most blessed, apostolic and universal pontiff throughout the whole world, Pope Martin." [Mansi X, 883-90].

Pope Martin allowed Stephen, bishop of Dora to enter, in accordance with his petition.

Bishop Stephen of Dora stated:

"And for this cause, we sometimes asked for...the wings of a dove...that we might fly away and announce these things to that chair which rules and presides over all, that is to yours, the head and highest..." [Mansi X, 893].

Nothing that he had offered his profession of faith "to the all-holy president, the thrice blessed pope Martin...." [Mansi X, 902].

Stephen was followed by a delegation of Greek and Armenian monks led by John, abbot of St. Sabas, who described the council as meeting "by command of the one divinely presiding over you, priest of priests and father of fathers pre-eminent over all, our Lord Martin, the thrice blessed pope...."  And he talked about "this highest and apostolic throne...." [Mansi X, 903-5].

Bishop John continued, "this is why we urge and implore you all, most holy fathers, and the apostolic and highest throne" to anathematize the heretics. "The hearts of all look to you, after God, knowing that you have been established by Christ our God as leader and head of the churches." [Mansi X, 905-8].
 
POPE SAINT GELASIUS

Pope Gelasius wrote the emperer in 494:

"If it is fitting that the hearts of the faithful show submission to a universal gathering of priests rightly handling divine things, how much more should consent be given to the bishop of that see which the supreme divinity willed to be pre-eminent over other priests, and the universal churches' subsequent piety has continually celebrated? In every century, the authority of the Apostolic See has been in charge of the universal church, and is confirmed by the series of canons of the Fathers and by a manifold tradition." [Thiel, 350-56].
 
St. Gelasius wrote to the bishops of Dardania on February 1, 495, defending Rome's right to enforce the decrees of Chalcedon:
 
"The first see both confirms every synod by its authority and guards by its continuous rule, by reason, namely, of its supremacy, which, received by the apostle Peter by the mouth of the Lord, the Church however seconding it, it both has always held, and retains... We will not pass over in silence what ever church throughout the world knows, that the see of blessed apostle Peter has the right to absolve from what has been bound by the sentence of any prelates whatsoever, in that it has the right of judging of the whole Church; neither is it lawful for anyone to pass judgement on its judgement, seeing that the canons have willed that appeals to it may be made from any part of the world, but from it nobody be permitted to appeal." [Theil, 395-9].
Logged
David Newman
Moderated
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Kiousis Synod
Posts: 38


BANNED FOR DUPLICATE ACCOUNT - He's also Euthymios


« Reply #12 on: March 04, 2009, 04:24:49 AM »

Hello David

It would be useful for you to locate the text for the vigil (festal Vespers and Matins) service for the feast of Apostles Peter and Paul. There are several threads on this forum which deal with the primacy or otherwise of the see of Rome, and of the primacy or otherwise of Apostle Peter, as well as at least one thread which contains much of the hymnody for the above-mentioned feast.

We can get into Saint Peter if you want. Do you deny that Peter was the chief, head, and leader of the apostles?
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
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: 37,963



« Reply #13 on: March 04, 2009, 04:26:37 AM »


With all due respect to the people who voted "no," they are clearly not educated in Church history. Here are a few examples from the pre-schism Church showing the popes to be head of the Church. I'm Orthodox and I'm an honest Orthodox. The facts are the facts.



Pope Innocent wrote to the Council of Carthage in 417 and referred to his see as one "incorrupt head." [PL 20:582-3].

Prosper [5th century] called the See of Peter the "head of the pastoral office for the world." [PL. 51:96].

The Priest Philip [5th century].- called the pope the "head". [ACO I: 1: 3:58].

Cyril of Alexandria [5th century] called Pope Celestine "archbishop of the entire habitable world." [PG 77: 1040].

In 450 the empreror Valentinian told Theodosius that the the bishop of Rome holds the principality of the priesthood over all." [Inter epp. S. Leonis, 55. PL 54:859].

At the Council of Chalcedon, the priest Paschasinus stood and made the announcement: "We have in our hands orders from the most blessed and apostolic pope of the city of Rome, which is head of all the churches...." [ACO II, Vol. 3, pt. 1, 40].

He also called Pope Leo "universal pope, Leo." [ACO II, Vol. 3, Pt. 2, 18].

And "universal archbishop and patriarch of Great Rome." [ACO II, Vol. 1, Pt. 2, 15 sq].

At the end of the fifth session of Chalcedon, Emperor Marcian characterized Pope Leo as "the most blessed and apostolic pope of the universal church." [Mansi 7:132-6].

In 451, the bishops wrote to Pope Leo and said Leo "had been in charge as the head.." [Inter epp. S. Leonis, 98. PL 54: 952].

They called him the "head" and "summit." [PL 54:958].

The emperor Marcian said "Leo is the first of the arhchbishops." [Nau, 263-4].

The bishops of second Moesia defended the Council of Chalcedon and called "Leo, bishop of Rome, who is head of bishops." [ACO IV, Vol. 5, 32].

In 485, a Roman synod of 43 bishops met and they wrote to the clergy and archimandrites of Constantinople. saying "the faith of your holiness has been proven to the Apostolic See, which rules over us all." [CSEL 35: 158-9].

In 484, Eugene, primate of Carthage spoke of the pope as "the Roman Church, head of all the churches." PL 58: 215].

In 517, Pope Hormisdas received appeals from the east signed by alomst 200 signatures which refered to the pope as "patriarch of the whole world...Christ our God has constituted you prince of pastors...[you] are head of all." [CSEL 35: 572 sq].

Emperor Justinain wrote the pope saying "...the Lord will bring about through you, as Supreme Shepherd, the salvation of all." [Thiel, 955].

Justinain wrote to Epiphanius saying "...holy pope and patriarch of old Rome, to whom we have written likewise. For we do not allow anything pertaining to ecclesiastical order not to be reported to His Beatitude, since he is head of all the holy priests of God..."[Codex Iustinianus I 1, 7. Ed. P. Krueger, Corpus Iuris Civilis, Berlin 1882, Vol. II, 8].

In 533 Justinian called Pope John II ".....head of all the churches." [Codex Iustianus I 1, 8. Corpus Irus Civilis, Berlin 1882, Vol. II, 11].

Pope Damasus [382]: ".....nevertheless the holy Roman Church has been set before the other churches not by any synodical decrees, but by the evangelical voice of the Lord and Savior, saying "Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church......."[Epp. VII, 34. PL 77:893].

Pope Boniface [418-422] wrote to the bishops of Thessaly and said of the Roman church: "... this Roman church is to the Churches spread through the world, as it were, the head of it's own members, from which whoever cuts himself off is expelled from the Christian religion..." [PL. 20:777-79].

Brief, because I'm tired.

1.  It's Pope Cyril and Archbishop Celestine.  Otherwise, you are being anachronistic.

2. Many/most of your quotes have the pope of Rome or his entourage saying that he's the head.  Not terribly impressive.

One point: today the Vatican has her pope commemorated in the diptychs of every service no matter where in the world.  Any evidence of this in the first millennium?
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
Quinault
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 4,518


What about frogs? I like frogs!


« Reply #14 on: March 04, 2009, 04:28:12 AM »


You can learn more about us here ( www.thegreekorthodoxchurch.com).

I'm not technically with them yet, but I am in spirit and faith -- hopefully.

Ok, in spirit you are with them. In reality what jurisdiction are you a part of? Are you a catechumen? Are you part of another jurisdiction and desiring to change? Do you like them but there aren't any close enough to attend?
« Last Edit: March 04, 2009, 04:29:45 AM by Quinault » Logged
David Newman
Moderated
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Kiousis Synod
Posts: 38


BANNED FOR DUPLICATE ACCOUNT - He's also Euthymios


« Reply #15 on: March 04, 2009, 04:29:55 AM »

 Lets let the Lateran Council [649], Saint Maximus the Confessor and Saint Theodore the Studite explain this to us.

SAINT MAXIMUS THE CONFESSOR

]He was following the events regarding Pope Honorius closely. Writing to an abbot named Thalassius, he described the behavior of the Roman legates:

".....How much more is this the case with the Church and clergy of Rome, which from of old up to this time, as the eldest of all the churches under the sun, has the pre-eminence over all.. Having undoubtedly obtained this canonically, both from the councils and from the apostles as well as from their supreme principality, because of the eminence of her pontificate she is not bound to produce any writings of synodical letters, just as in these matters all are subject to her, in accordance with priestly law.........as firm ministers of the truly solid and i mmovable rock, that is, the greatest apostolic church....." [Mansi X, 677-8].


Saint Maximus also stated:

"....the Apostolic See, which from God the incarnate Word Himself as well as all the holy Councils, according to the sacred canons and definitions, has received and possesses supreme power in all things and for all things, over all the holy churches of God throughout the world, as well as power and authority of binding and loosing. For with this church, the Word, who commands the powers of heaven, binds and looses in heave n...."[ PG 91: 144].

Theodore the Studite wrote to Pope Leo III[795-816]:


...O arch-shepherd of the church... save us now... For if they, usurping an authority which does not belong to them, have dared to convene a heretical council, whereas those who follow ancient custom do not even have the right of convening an orthodox one without your knowledge, it seems absolutely necessary, we dare to say to you, that your divine primacy should call together a lawful council, so that the Catholic dogma may drive out heresy and that your primacy may neither be anathematized by these new voices lacking authority...

It is in order to obey your divine authority as chief pastor that we have set forth these things as it befitted our nothingness... [PG 99: 1017-21]

St. Theodore wrote to Pope Paschal[817-824]:

... O apostolic head, divinely established shepherd of Christ’s sheep, doorkeeper of the heavenly kingdom, rock of the faith on which the Catholic Church has been built. For you are Peter-- you are the successor of Peter, whose throne you grace and direct... To you did Christ our God say, "When you have been converted, strengthen your brethren." Now is the time and the place: help us, you who have been established by God for that purpose... [PG 99: 1152-3]


LATERAN COUNCIL [649]

Saint Maximos the Confessor put this council on the same status of the ecumenical councils. He approved of this council. And he stated the following:

"For ever since the Word of God condescended to us and became a man, all the Churches of Christians everywhere have held, and hold the great Church [Rome] there as their sole basis and foundation, because, according to the very promises of the Lord, the gates of hell have never prevailed over her, but rather she has the keys of the orthodox faith and confession; she opens the genuine and only piety to those who approach her piously, but closes every heretical mouth that speaks injustice." [PG 91:137-40].

Now, lets take a look at what the Lateran Council stated. This council was convened to refute the Mo nothelite heresy.

The notary Theophylact welcomed the bishops, explaining that Pope Martin had summoned them to overthrow a new heresy "by his apostolic authority." Then, turning to the pope, Theophylact asked him to address the gathering of the bishops, "over which you are pre-eminent through the great apostolic summit,which is in charge of all preists throught the world."[Mansi X, 867-70].
0A
The conciliar acts contain a letter from Maurus, bishop of Ravenna, "to the most holy and most blessed, apostolic and universal pontiff throughout the world, Pope Martin." [Mansi X,20883-90].

Bishop Stephen of Dora explained the origins of the heresy, and said:

"And for this cause, we sometimes asked for...the wings of a dove..that we might fly away and announce these things to that Chair which rules and presides over all, that is to yours, the head and highest...For this it has been accustomed to do from of old and from the beginning with power by its canonical or spiritual authority, because the truly and great Peter, leader of the apostles, clearly was deemed worthy not only to be entrusted the keys of heaven, alone [and] apart from the rest worthy to open it to believers...." [Mansi X, 893].

A Greek and Armenian delegation of monks was led by John, abbot of St. Sabas, who described the council as meeting " by command of the one divinely presiding over you, priest of priests and father of fathers pre-eminent over all, our Lord Martin, the thrice blessed pope." [Mansi X, 903-5].

John continued."this is why we urge and implore you all, most holy fathers, and the apostolic and highest throne to anathematize heretics. The hearts of all look to you, after God, knowing that you have been established by Christ our God as leader ane head of the churches." [Mansi X, 905-8].
=0 A
The notary Theophylact also stated:

"To my most holy and most blessed and divinely strengthened master, father of fathers, archbishop and ecumenical patriarch...Sergius sends greetings in the Lord. O sacred summit, Christ our God has establisged your apostolic see as a fixed and immovable foundation, and a most luminous pillar of the faith. For you are, as the divine word rightly says, Peter, and upon your foundation have the pillars of the Church been fixed....[Mansi X, 911-14].

Theophylact also read an intervention, which three African councils had sent in 643:

"To the most blessed lord raised to the apostolic summit, the holy father of fathe rs, pope Theodore, supreme pontiff of all bishops, ...[Mansi X, 909].

Pope Martin observed that requests were coming in from all over the Catholic world, "imploring our apostolic and supreme see to arise in condemnation of the new doctrine." Mansi X, 923].

Maximus, primate of Aquileia, remarked that God "has raised up the holy spirit of a m an burning with zeal for the Lord, whose venerable name [is] Martin, who has convoked us in holy fashion, and presides over us by apostolic authority." [Mansi X, 1055].
« Last Edit: March 04, 2009, 04:31:57 AM by David Newman » Logged
David Newman
Moderated
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Kiousis Synod
Posts: 38


BANNED FOR DUPLICATE ACCOUNT - He's also Euthymios


« Reply #16 on: March 04, 2009, 04:33:58 AM »

SAINT MAXIMUS THE CONFESSOR

He was following the events regarding Pope Honorius closely. Writing to an abbot named Thalassius, he described the behavior of the Roman legates:

".....How much more is this the case with the Church and clergy of Rome, which from of old up to this time, as the eldest of all the churches under the sun, has the pre-eminence over all.. Having undoubtedly obtained this canonically, both from the councils and from the apostles as well as from their supreme principality, because of the eminence of her pontificate she is not bound to produce any writings of synodical letters, just as in these matters all are subject to her, in accordance with priestly law.........as firm ministers of the truly solid and i mmovable rock, that is, the greatest apostolic church....." [Mansi X, 677-8].


Saint Maximus also stated:

"....the Apostolic See, which from God the incarnate Word Himself as well as all the holy Councils, according to the sacred canons and definitions, has received and possesses supreme power in all things and for all things, over all the holy churches of God throughout the world, as well as power and authority of binding and loosing. For with this church, the Word, who commands the powers of heaven, binds and looses in heave n...."[ PG 91: 144].

Theodore the Studite wrote to Pope Leo III[795-816]:


...O arch-shepherd of the church... save us now... For if they, usurping an authority which does not belong to them, have dared to convene a heretical council, whereas those who follow ancient custom do not even have the right of convening an orthodox one without your knowledge, it seems absolutely necessary, we dare to say to you, that your divine primacy should call together a lawful council, so that the Catholic dogma may drive out heresy and that your primacy may neither be anathematized by these new voices lacking authority...

It is in order to obey your divine authority as chief pastor that we have set forth these things as it befitted our nothingness... [PG 99: 1017-21]

St. Theodore wrote to Pope Paschal[817-824]:

... O apostolic head, divinely established shepherd of Christ’s sheep, doorkeeper of the heavenly kingdom, rock of the faith on which the Catholic Church has been built. For you are Peter-- you are the successor of Peter, whose throne you grace and direct... To you did Christ our God say, "When you have been converted, strengthen your brethren." Now is the time and the place: help us, you who have been established by God for that purpose... [PG 99: 1152-3]
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
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: 37,963



« Reply #17 on: March 04, 2009, 04:35:42 AM »

Sorry, David. The Orthodox Church has always been conciliar. Every patriarch (and even every bishop, irrespective of rank) has had an equal voice in the life of the Church. The west has distorted the idea of "first among equals" (as in, which patriarch has the casting vote, and little more than this) to support the idea that the Pope of Rome is supreme. Not so. The Head of the whole Orthodox Church is Christ, and the Church is led by the Holy Spirit.

Each bishop and patriarch is responsible for safeguarding doctrinal, liturgical and theological unity. But no one bishop or patriarch has the authority to override all other bishops or patriarchs in such matters, unless all of these had fallen into heresy or other grave error.

You're wrong, just like the other Orthodox I have talked to about this.

LETERAN COUNCIL [649].

Saint Maximus the Confessor put this council on the same level as an Ecumenical council.

He was wrong.

Quote
Pope Martin called this council. The opening of the Acts exist in Latin and Greek and calls it:

"the holy apostolic synod, which occurred in the most celebrated Old Rome, according to the sacred command and canonical procurement of the most holy and thrice blessed Pope Martin, who presided over the entire divine hierarchy under the sun, for the establishment and defense of the dogmas of the fathers and synods of the Catholic and apostolic Church according to the gospel." [Mansi X, 863-64].

The notary Theophylact asked Pope Martin to address the bishops, "over which you are pre-eminent through the great and apostolic summit, which is in charge of all the priests throughout the world." [Mansi X, 867-70].

The conciliar acts contain a letter from Maurus, bishop of Ravenna, "to the most holy and most blessed, apostolic and universal pontiff throughout the whole world, Pope Martin." [Mansi X, 883-90].

Pope Martin allowed Stephen, bishop of Dora to enter, in accordance with his petition.

Bishop Stephen of Dora stated:

"And for this cause, we sometimes asked for...the wings of a dove...that we might fly away and announce these things to that chair which rules and presides over all, that is to yours, the head and highest..." [Mansi X, 893].

Nothing that he had offered his profession of faith "to the all-holy president, the thrice blessed pope Martin...." [Mansi X, 902].

Stephen was followed by a delegation of Greek and Armenian monks led by John, abbot of St. Sabas, who described the council as meeting "by command of the one divinely presiding over you, priest of priests and father of fathers pre-eminent over all, our Lord Martin, the thrice blessed pope...."  And he talked about "this highest and apostolic throne...." [Mansi X, 903-5].

Bishop John continued, "this is why we urge and implore you all, most holy fathers, and the apostolic and highest throne" to anathematize the heretics. "The hearts of all look to you, after God, knowing that you have been established by Christ our God as leader and head of the churches." [Mansi X, 905-8].

The Ecumenical Council (according to the Vatican and us Orthodox.  I don't know about your synod) of Constantinople III condemned Pope Honorius of Rome as a heretic (and praised Patriarch Sophronios of Jerusalem, btw).  Your point?
 
Quote
POPE SAINT GELASIUS

Pope Gelasius wrote the emperer in 494:

"If it is fitting that the hearts of the faithful show submission to a universal gathering of priests rightly handling divine things, how much more should consent be given to the bishop of that see which the supreme divinity willed to be pre-eminent over other priests, and the universal churches' subsequent piety has continually celebrated? In every century, the authority of the Apostolic See has been in charge of the universal church, and is confirmed by the series of canons of the Fathers and by a manifold tradition." [Thiel, 350-56].
 
St. Gelasius wrote to the bishops of Dardania on February 1, 495, defending Rome's right to enforce the decrees of Chalcedon:
 
"The first see both confirms every synod by its authority and guards by its continuous rule, by reason, namely, of its supremacy, which, received by the apostle Peter by the mouth of the Lord, the Church however seconding it, it both has always held, and retains... We will not pass over in silence what ever church throughout the world knows, that the see of blessed apostle Peter has the right to absolve from what has been bound by the sentence of any prelates whatsoever, in that it has the right of judging of the whole Church; neither is it lawful for anyone to pass judgement on its judgement, seeing that the canons have willed that appeals to it may be made from any part of the world, but from it nobody be permitted to appeal." [Theil, 395-9].


Is this the same Pope whose name is associated with the forged Gelasian decrees?
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
Quinault
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 4,518


What about frogs? I like frogs!


« Reply #18 on: March 04, 2009, 04:38:08 AM »

You're wrong, just like the other Orthodox I have talked to about this.

Psst...dude, you just gave yourself away. laugh
Logged
John of the North
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christianity
Jurisdiction: Eparchy of Edmonton and the West
Posts: 3,533


Christ is Risen!

tgild
« Reply #19 on: March 04, 2009, 04:38:53 AM »

Logged

"Christianity is not a philosophy, not a doctrine, but life." - Elder Sophrony (Sakharov)
David Newman
Moderated
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Kiousis Synod
Posts: 38


BANNED FOR DUPLICATE ACCOUNT - He's also Euthymios


« Reply #20 on: March 04, 2009, 04:40:46 AM »


The Christian emperors were never viewed as head of the Church. The emperors were never ordained by God. They don't even exist anymore. Historically, the popes were considered head of the universal Church. Even the emperor Justinian called the pope the head of the Church.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
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: 37,963



« Reply #21 on: March 04, 2009, 04:41:13 AM »

Lets let the Lateran Council [649], Saint Maximus the Confessor and Saint Theodore the Studite explain this to us.

ignoring all context, let's not.

Nice art  Ukiemiester.  And since a picture is worth a thousand words, you've spared us.
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
David Newman
Moderated
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Kiousis Synod
Posts: 38


BANNED FOR DUPLICATE ACCOUNT - He's also Euthymios


« Reply #22 on: March 04, 2009, 04:44:10 AM »

ialmisry,

I saw your comments.

First, who are you to say Saint Maximus the Confessor was wrong? You're supposed to believe him as an Orthodox Christian.

Second, Honorius was condemned for negligence, not heresy. Even Saint Maximus the Confessor spoke highly of Honorius.

Third, modern scholarship favors that the Decree of Damasus comes from Pope Damasus. What is your proof it's a forgery?
Logged
John of the North
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christianity
Jurisdiction: Eparchy of Edmonton and the West
Posts: 3,533


Christ is Risen!

tgild
« Reply #23 on: March 04, 2009, 04:46:15 AM »


The Christian emperors were never viewed as head of the Church. The emperors were never ordained by God. They don't even exist anymore. Historically, the popes were considered head of the universal Church. Even the emperor Justinian called the pope the head of the Church.

Dude....5 years?!!!!
Logged

"Christianity is not a philosophy, not a doctrine, but life." - Elder Sophrony (Sakharov)
John of the North
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christianity
Jurisdiction: Eparchy of Edmonton and the West
Posts: 3,533


Christ is Risen!

tgild
« Reply #24 on: March 04, 2009, 04:48:59 AM »

Lets let the Lateran Council [649], Saint Maximus the Confessor and Saint Theodore the Studite explain this to us.

ignoring all context, let's not.

Nice art  Ukiemiester.  And since a picture is worth a thousand words, you've spared us.

I try....barely two days into the Great Fast and we have Kallikantzaroi....how nice...
Logged

"Christianity is not a philosophy, not a doctrine, but life." - Elder Sophrony (Sakharov)
Quinault
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 4,518


What about frogs? I like frogs!


« Reply #25 on: March 04, 2009, 04:49:01 AM »


 Hello, I am happy to be here.  I hope they allow dialogue and friendly debate here. I hope I am in the right section for this. I am fully Orthodox.....

I am a little confused, if you truly believe that the Pope is the head of the church why aren't you part of a church that recognizes that?
« Last Edit: March 04, 2009, 04:54:47 AM by Quinault » Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
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: 37,963



« Reply #26 on: March 04, 2009, 04:50:31 AM »

ialmisry,

I saw your comments.

First, who are you to say Saint Maximus the Confessor was wrong? You're supposed to believe him as an Orthodox Christian.

If I believed he was infallible, that would make me a heretic.  Vatican moles should know that.

Quote
Second, Honorius was condemned for negligence, not heresy.

This just reeks of Vatican double speak.  Please don't dishonor the Old Calendarists.

Quote
Even Saint Maximus the Confessor spoke highly of Honorius.

And he was wrong.

Quote
Third, modern scholarship favors that the Decree of Damasus comes from Pope Damasus. What is your proof it's a forgery?

It quotes St. Augustine, over thirty years after Pope St. Damasus reposed.

I am a little confused, if you truly believe that the Pope is the head of the church why aren't you part of a church that recognizes that?

Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain.
« Last Edit: March 04, 2009, 04:51:25 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
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
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: 37,963



« Reply #27 on: March 04, 2009, 04:54:59 AM »

You're wrong, just like the other Orthodox I have talked to about this.

Psst...dude, you just gave yourself away. laugh

Love to see the other side of the story.

Hi, I'm new here. I just left a forum from another site that bordered on psychotic. They had to approve all my posts before they posted them. They disaproved of over 99.9% of my posts for the most insane reasons you can imagine. I got tired of dealing with them. And then they had totally ludicrous reasons why they disaproved them. For example,  they didn't like the format. What does that even mean? They didn't like a color I used for a font. Why then even give us the options to color fonts? I wanted to correct and edit a typo in one of the posts they allowed, and even that had to be approved. And then it turns out they didn't like my edit! They didn't approive of my edit/correction of my spelling! Is this crazy or what? And then I quoted a church father with the reference, and they didin't approve it and they didn't mail me any explanation why they didn't approve it! And then they would fill my mailbox with all the reasons why they didn't allow my posts. Their messages would be from an nameless "Administrator." When I clicked the "reply" button to ask questions about what was wrong with my posts (absolutely nothing was ever wrong with them), I got a message back that told me that I couldn't reply to these messages and that I needed to look around the site for an Administrator. Isn't this crazy? If they didn't accept messages, why then did they have a "reply" feature. I can go on and on. That is the most psychotic and controlling forum I have ever seen anywhere on the internet. And they were Orthodox!

I like it here better. I didn't even have to very anything through email conformation. I'm happy to be here.
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
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
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: 37,963



« Reply #28 on: March 04, 2009, 04:58:39 AM »

Quote
I'll be back tomorrow to see how people responded to the little information I gave.
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,20028.msg297882/topicseen.html#msg297882

Information? Must have missed it.  Or was it that little?
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
David Newman
Moderated
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Kiousis Synod
Posts: 38


BANNED FOR DUPLICATE ACCOUNT - He's also Euthymios


« Reply #29 on: March 04, 2009, 05:04:00 AM »


Uh, I just posted a statement that the emperors were never viewed as head of the Church, and that they were not ordained by God. And I stated that the emperor Justinian called the pope head of the Church. My post is gone. I need to know right now if this forum is psychotic like the last one I was at. I am finding more and more that the orthodox are not being honest about Church history. This REALLY freightens me.
Logged
Quinault
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 4,518


What about frogs? I like frogs!


« Reply #30 on: March 04, 2009, 05:06:12 AM »

It was moved onto the thread you already started. Cross posting the same info is a no-no, it is basically spamming. And you will end up moderated or possibly muted if you don't stop cross posting the same information. People are pretty reasonable around here and put up with a lot. But if you don't play nicely and follow the rules you will have no fun.
« Last Edit: March 04, 2009, 05:10:53 AM by Quinault » Logged
David Newman
Moderated
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Kiousis Synod
Posts: 38


BANNED FOR DUPLICATE ACCOUNT - He's also Euthymios


« Reply #31 on: March 04, 2009, 05:07:41 AM »


With all due respect to the people who voted "no," they are clearly not educated in Church history. Here are a few examples from the pre-schism Church showing the popes to be head of the Church. I'm Orthodox and I'm an honest Orthodox. The facts are the facts.



Pope Innocent wrote to the Council of Carthage in 417 and referred to his see as one "incorrupt head." [PL 20:582-3].

Prosper [5th century] called the See of Peter the "head of the pastoral office for the world." [PL. 51:96].

The Priest Philip [5th century].- called the pope the "head". [ACO I: 1: 3:58].

Cyril of Alexandria [5th century] called Pope Celestine "archbishop of the entire habitable world." [PG 77: 1040].

In 450 the empreror Valentinian told Theodosius that the the bishop of Rome holds the principality of the priesthood over all." [Inter epp. S. Leonis, 55. PL 54:859].

At the Council of Chalcedon, the priest Paschasinus stood and made the announcement: "We have in our hands orders from the most blessed and apostolic pope of the city of Rome, which is head of all the churches...." [ACO II, Vol. 3, pt. 1, 40].

He also called Pope Leo "universal pope, Leo." [ACO II, Vol. 3, Pt. 2, 18].

And "universal archbishop and patriarch of Great Rome." [ACO II, Vol. 1, Pt. 2, 15 sq].

At the end of the fifth session of Chalcedon, Emperor Marcian characterized Pope Leo as "the most blessed and apostolic pope of the universal church." [Mansi 7:132-6].

In 451, the bishops wrote to Pope Leo and said Leo "had been in charge as the head.." [Inter epp. S. Leonis, 98. PL 54: 952].

They called him the "head" and "summit." [PL 54:958].

The emperor Marcian said "Leo is the first of the arhchbishops." [Nau, 263-4].

The bishops of second Moesia defended the Council of Chalcedon and called "Leo, bishop of Rome, who is head of bishops." [ACO IV, Vol. 5, 32].

In 485, a Roman synod of 43 bishops met and they wrote to the clergy and archimandrites of Constantinople. saying "the faith of your holiness has been proven to the Apostolic See, which rules over us all." [CSEL 35: 158-9].

In 484, Eugene, primate of Carthage spoke of the pope as "the Roman Church, head of all the churches." PL 58: 215].

In 517, Pope Hormisdas received appeals from the east signed by alomst 200 signatures which refered to the pope as "patriarch of the whole world...Christ our God has constituted you prince of pastors...[you] are head of all." [CSEL 35: 572 sq].

Emperor Justinain wrote the pope saying "...the Lord will bring about through you, as Supreme Shepherd, the salvation of all." [Thiel, 955].

Justinain wrote to Epiphanius saying "...holy pope and patriarch of old Rome, to whom we have written likewise. For we do not allow anything pertaining to ecclesiastical order not to be reported to His Beatitude, since he is head of all the holy priests of God..."[Codex Iustinianus I 1, 7. Ed. P. Krueger, Corpus Iuris Civilis, Berlin 1882, Vol. II, 8].

In 533 Justinian called Pope John II ".....head of all the churches." [Codex Iustianus I 1, 8. Corpus Irus Civilis, Berlin 1882, Vol. II, 11].

Pope Damasus [382]: ".....nevertheless the holy Roman Church has been set before the other churches not by any synodical decrees, but by the evangelical voice of the Lord and Savior, saying "Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church......."[Epp. VII, 34. PL 77:893].

Pope Boniface [418-422] wrote to the bishops of Thessaly and said of the Roman church: "... this Roman church is to the Churches spread through the world, as it were, the head of it's own members, from which whoever cuts himself off is expelled from the Christian religion..." [PL. 20:777-79].

Brief, because I'm tired.

1.  It's Pope Cyril and Archbishop Celestine.  Otherwise, you are being anachronistic.

2. Many/most of your quotes have the pope of Rome or his entourage saying that he's the head.  Not terribly impressive.

One point: today the Vatican has her pope commemorated in the diptychs of every service no matter where in the world.  Any evidence of this in the first millennium?

No, it's Pope Celestine and Bishop Cyril. I even gave the primary source reference.  I don't know of any Pope Cyril. I can quote the east if you want. I've given the primary sources.
Logged
David Newman
Moderated
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Kiousis Synod
Posts: 38


BANNED FOR DUPLICATE ACCOUNT - He's also Euthymios


« Reply #32 on: March 04, 2009, 05:09:41 AM »



One point: today the Vatican has her pope commemorated in the diptychs of every service no matter where in the world.  Any evidence of this in the first millennium?

Are you denying the popes were commeorated universally within the dyptichs of the first millenium?
Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #33 on: March 04, 2009, 05:15:41 AM »

At the Council of Chalcedon, the Roman legate Paschasinus made the following statement:

"We have in our hands orders from the most blessed and apostolic pope of the city of Rome, which is head of all the churches......" [ACO II, Vol. 3, Pt. 1, 40].

Do you agree?


Yes, we agree that he made this statement in the name of the Pope.  Here it is in a fuller version:

"Paschasinus, the most reverend bishop and legate of the Apostolic See, stood up in the midst with his most reverend colleagues and said: We received directions at the hands of the most blessed and apostolic bishop of the Roman city [Pope Leo I], which is the head of all the churches, which directions say that Dioscorus is not to be allowed a seat in this assembly, but that if he should attempt to take his seat he is to be cast out. This instruction we must carry out; if now your holiness so commands let him be expelled or else we leave."

So what did the Council Fathers do?

They rejected the authority of the Pope.  They most certainly did not accept him as their head or the head of "all the churches."

How did they show this rejection of the Pope's claims?  They ignored the Pope's instructions not to allow Discorus to have a seat at the Council.

The Council Fathers gave Dioscorus a seat and allowed him to speak.

They refused to follow the Pope's instructions that he should be cast out if he attempted to speak.

Even the papal legates acted in a dishonest fashion.  After threatening to leave if Dioscorus was allowed to be there and to speak, they did not leave.

The whole incident is NOT proof of papal authority.  It is just the opposite.  It is proof that the Council Fathers did *not* see the Pope as having authority over them or over the activities of the Council.

A resounding and very public defeat for any claims of the Pope.   Roll Eyes



Logged
David Newman
Moderated
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Kiousis Synod
Posts: 38


BANNED FOR DUPLICATE ACCOUNT - He's also Euthymios


« Reply #34 on: March 04, 2009, 05:27:14 AM »

Lets let the Lateran Council [649], Saint Maximus the Confessor and Saint Theodore the Studite explain this to us.

ignoring all context, let's not.

Nice art  Ukiemiester.  And since a picture is worth a thousand words, you've spared us.

Feel free to give us the context.
Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #35 on: March 04, 2009, 05:27:54 AM »


First, who are you to say Saint Maximus the Confessor was wrong? You're supposed to believe him as an Orthodox Christian.

Second, Honorius was condemned for negligence, not heresy. Even Saint Maximus the Confessor spoke highly of Honorius.

From The Life of Our Holy Father St. Maximus the Confessor

The life of Saint Maximus is also instructive for us. Saint Maximus, though only a simple monk, resisted and cut off communion with every patriarch, metropolitan, archbishop and bishop in the East because of their having been infected with the heresy of Monothelitism. During the first imprisonment of the Saint, the messengers from the Ecumenical Patriarch asked him,

"To which church do you belong? To that of Byzantium, of Rome, Antioch,
Alexandria, or Jerusalem? For all these churches, together with the provinces
in subjection to them, are in unity. Therefore, if you also belong to the
Catholic Church, enter into communion with us at once, lest fashioning for
yourself some new and strange pathway, you fall into that which you do not even expect!"

To this the righteous man wisely replied, "Christ the Lord called that Church
the Catholic Church which maintains the true and saving confession of the Faith.
It was for this confession that He called Peter blessed, and He declared that
He would found His Church upon this confession
. However, I wish to
know the contents of your confession, on the basis of which all churches, as you say,
have entered into communion. If it is not opposed to the truth, then neither will
I be separated from it."



The confession which they were proposing to the Saint was not Orthodox, of course, and so he refused to comply with their coercions. Furthermore, they were lying about the See of Rome which, in fact, had remained Orthodox. Some time later, at his last interrogation by the Byzantine authorities, the following dialogue took place:

The Saint said, "They [the Patriarchs of Constantinople and Alexandria and
all the other heretical bishops of the East] have been deposed and deprived
of the priesthood at the local synod which took place recently in Rome.
What Mysteries, then, can they perform? Or what spirit will descend upon
those who are ordained by them?"

"Then you alone will be saved, and all others will perish?" they objected.

To this the Saint replied, "When all the people in Babylon were worshipping
the golden idol, the Three Holy Children did not condemn anyone to perdition.
They did not concern themselves with the doings of others, but took care
only for themselves, lest they should fall away from true piety. In precisely
the same way, when Daniel was cast into the lion's den, he did not condemn
any of those who, fulfilling the law of Darius, did not wish to pray to God,
but he kept in mind his own duty, and desired rather to die than to sin
against his conscience by transgressing the Law of God. God forbid that
I should condemn anyone or say that I alone am being saved! However,
I shall sooner agree to die than to apostatize in any way from the true Faith
and thereby suffer torments of conscience."

"But what will you do," inquired the envoys, "when the Romans are united to
the Byzantines?  Yesterday, indeed, two delegates arrived from Rome and
tomorrow, the Lord's day, they will communicate the Holy Mysteries with the Patriarch."

The Saint replied, "Even if the whole universe holds communion with the
Patriarch, I will not communicate with him. For I know from the writings of
the holy Apostle Paul: the Holy Spirit declares that even the angels would
be anathema if they should begin to preach another Gospel, introducing
some new teaching."


As history has demonstrated, Saint Maximus—who was only a simple monk and not even ordained—and his two disciples were the ones who were Orthodox, and all those illustrious, famous and influential Patriarchs and Metropolitans whom the Saint had written against were the ones who were in heresy.

When the Sixth Ecumenical Synod was finally convened, among those condemned for heresy were four Patriarchs of Constantinople, one Pope of Rome (for even Pope Honorius had fallen into the Monothelite heresy), one Patriarch of Alexandria, two Patriarchs of Antioch and a multitude of other Metropolitans, Archbishops and Bishops.  During all those years, that one simple monk was right, and all those notable bishops were wrong.

http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/ecumenism/ecum_canons.aspx
Logged
Quinault
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 4,518


What about frogs? I like frogs!


« Reply #36 on: March 04, 2009, 05:35:30 AM »


You can learn more about us here ( www.thegreekorthodoxchurch.com).

I'm not technically with them yet, but I am in spirit and faith -- hopefully.

Ok, I ask again what jurisdiction are you a part of? Are you a catechumen? Are you part of another Orthodox jurisdiction and desiring to change? Do you like them but there aren't any close enough to attend? And while I don't know much about the jurisdiction you feel connected to, I am fairly sure that they don't share your views on the Pope.
« Last Edit: March 04, 2009, 05:39:14 AM by Quinault » Logged
Quinault
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 4,518


What about frogs? I like frogs!


« Reply #37 on: March 04, 2009, 05:37:31 AM »

David-what is the goal of this interchange? Do you desire clarity or do you desire to prove you are right even if you are wrong?
« Last Edit: March 04, 2009, 05:40:16 AM by Quinault » Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #38 on: March 04, 2009, 05:39:43 AM »

With all due respect to the people who voted "no," they are clearly not educated in Church history. Here are a few examples from the pre-schism Church showing the popes to be head of the Church. I'm Orthodox and I'm an honest Orthodox. The facts are the facts.


Prosper [5th century] called the See of Peter the "head of the pastoral office for the world." [PL. 51:96].

Cyril of Alexandria [5th century] called Pope Celestine "archbishop of the entire habitable world." [PG 77: 1040].

In 450 the empreror Valentinian told Theodosius that the the bishop of Rome holds the principality of the priesthood over all." [Inter epp. S. Leonis, 55. PL 54:859].

David,

Where are you getting your quote mine from?

I have tried to track down the three quotes above and cannot find them.
Logged
Quinault
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 4,518


What about frogs? I like frogs!


« Reply #39 on: March 04, 2009, 06:10:06 AM »

Ok, for the sake of argument let's say you are right (Although I am sure you are not).

What point is there in fighting for the authority of the Pope in the ancient church? The East and West split, there is no reason to argue for authority before the split-unless of course you are trying to argue for the current authority of the Pope over the Eastern church. Otherwise what is the point?
Logged
David Newman
Moderated
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Kiousis Synod
Posts: 38


BANNED FOR DUPLICATE ACCOUNT - He's also Euthymios


« Reply #40 on: March 04, 2009, 06:14:41 AM »



David,

Where are you getting your quote mine from?

I have tried to track down the three quotes above and cannot find them.


You're not going to find this stuff online.
Logged
David Newman
Moderated
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Kiousis Synod
Posts: 38


BANNED FOR DUPLICATE ACCOUNT - He's also Euthymios


« Reply #41 on: March 04, 2009, 06:18:19 AM »

IRISH STATED: Yes, we agree that he made this statement in the name of the Pope.  Here it is in a fuller version:

"Paschasinus, the most reverend bishop and legate of the Apostolic See, stood up in the midst with his most reverend colleagues and said: We received directions at the hands of the most blessed and apostolic bishop of the Roman city [Pope Leo I], which is the head of all the churches, which directions say that Dioscorus is not to be allowed a seat in this assembly, but that if he should attempt to take his seat he is to be cast out. This instruction we must carry out; if now your holiness so commands let him be expelled or else we leave."

MY RESPONSE: I didn't give the full quote due to time and space. I wanted to highlite the main section. But nothing in your un-referenced quote, contradicts my quote. "apostolic bishop of Rome [Pope Leo1), which is head of all the churches..." That's what I said. That's all I'm claiming in this thread. The popes were viewed as head of the Church. Your quote corroborates my own.

IRISH STATED: So what did the Council Fathers do?

They rejected the authority of the Pope.  They most certainly did not accept him as their head or the head of "all the churches."

MY RESPONSE: That is untrue. Later on Bishop Maximus of Antioch stated:

"Archbishop Flavian of holy memory expounded  the faith in an orthodox manner, and in agreement with the most blessed and most holy Archbishop Leo..." [ACO II, Vol. 3, Pt. 1, 94].

In the Second Session of Chalcedon (Oct. 10), Cecropius, bishop of  Sabastapolis, said:

"Regarding these matters, a decree [typos] has been given by the most holy archbishop of Rome, and we follow it, and all of us have subscribed to it." [ACO II, Vol. 1. Pt. 2, 78].

Florentius, bishop of Sardes stated:

"...the faith of the holy fathers, Cyril and Celestine, and the letter of the most holy Leo...we who have subscribed to the letter of the most holy Leo do not need correction." [ACO II, Vol. 1, Pt. 2, 78-9].

The bishops exclaimed:

"We so believe: pope Leo so believes: anathema to him who divides: this is the faith of Archbishop Leo: Leo so believes: Leo and Anatolius so believe: we all so believe: as Cyril believed, so do we believe: eternal memory to Cyril: as Cyril's letter has it, so do we think, so have we believed and so do we believe: Archbishop Leo so thinks, so believes, and so wrote." [ACO II, Vol. 1, Pt. 2, 81].

Later Leo's "Tomb" was read to the Fathers. The bishops exclaimed:

".......Peter has spoken these things through Leo. The apostles taught thus. Leo taught piously and truly...." [ACO II, Vol. 1, Pt. 2, 81].

The bishops latter stated:

" All of us believe as Leo does--thus do we believe. None of us doubts; we have already subscribed." [ACO II, Vol. 1, Pt. 2, 83].

Pope Leo is venerated as a saint by the Latin and Byzantine churches. The orthodox eastern church, whose tradition venerates his dogmatic tome as a "pillar of orthodoxy," commemorates St. Leo on February 18, eulogizing him in these terms:

"You have acted as heir of the throne of Peter, the coryphaeus...having his mind and...zeal for the faith...as the dawn...O thrice blessed one, you sent your tome of pious dogmas as rays of light to the Church...The successor of Peter, enriched with his presidency and possessed of the grace of his zeal, composes his tome, divinely moved...you wrote the teachings of religion as on tablets divinely engraved, appearing as a second Moses to the people and assembly of venerable teachers." [Menaion, Athens 1966-1980, February, 100-102].




IRISH STATED: How did they show this rejection of the Pope's claims?  They ignored the Pope's instructions not to allow Discorus to have a seat at the Council.

MY RESPONSE: That is not true. At the bidding of the commisioner, Dioscorus took the place of the accused, and Eusebius of Dorylaeum stood in the midst as his accuser, and said "I have been harmed by Dioscorus; the faith has been harmed. The holy bishop Flavian has been killed; I am with tears; he was unjustly condemned along with me." [ACO II, Vol. 3, Pt. 1, 41].



IRISH STATED: Even the papal legates acted in a dishonest fashion.  After threatening to leave if Dioscorus was allowed to be there and to speak, they did not leave.

MY RESPONSE: They didn't leave because Discorus was given the seat of the accused, as I stated above.

IRISH STATED: The whole incident is NOT proof of papal authority.  It is just the opposite.  It is proof that the Council Fathers did *not* see the Pope as having authority over them or over the activities of the Council.

MY RESPONSE: I don't think so. I can extensively elaborate on Pope Leo if you wish.
« Last Edit: March 04, 2009, 06:23:05 AM by David Newman » Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #42 on: March 04, 2009, 06:40:50 AM »

IRISH STATED: Yes, we agree that he made this statement in the name of the Pope.  Here it is in a fuller version:

"Paschasinus, the most reverend bishop and legate of the Apostolic See, stood up in the midst with his most reverend colleagues and said: We received directions at the hands of the most blessed and apostolic bishop of the Roman city [Pope Leo I], which is the head of all the churches, which directions say that Dioscorus is not to be allowed a seat in this assembly, but that if he should attempt to take his seat he is to be cast out. This instruction we must carry out; if now your holiness so commands let him be expelled or else we leave."

MY RESPONSE: I didn't give the full quote due to time and space. I wanted to highlite the main section. But nothing in your un-referenced quote, contradicts my quote. "apostolic bishop of Rome [Pope Leo1), which is head of all the churches..." That's what I said. That's all I'm claiming in this thread. The popes were viewed as head of the Church. Your quote corroborates my own.

The action of the Bishops at the Council showed that they disregarded the commands of Pope Leo I not to allow Dioscorus to be seated and to speak at the Council.  I really do not see how that "corroborates" the contention that it proves the Pope was "head of all thje churches."  Strange head whom no one obeys!


Sorry not to give the refereence.

It is from the 1st session of the Acts of the Council.  You can read it here and you can read the bishops' rejection of the Pope's instructions.

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf214.xi.iii.html
Logged
David Newman
Moderated
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Kiousis Synod
Posts: 38


BANNED FOR DUPLICATE ACCOUNT - He's also Euthymios


« Reply #43 on: March 04, 2009, 06:45:31 AM »


Irish, I would like to stay on topic, but let Saint Maximus speak for himself:

Saint Maximus the Confessor on the bishops of Rome

".....How much more is this the case with the Church and clergy of Rome, which from of old up to this time, as the eldest of all the churches under the sun, has the pre-eminence over all.. Having undoubtedly obtained this canonically, both from the councils and from the apostles as well as from their supreme principality, because of the eminence of her pontificate she is not bound to produce any writings of synodical letters, just as in these matters all are subject to her, in accordance with priestly law.........as firm ministers of the truly solid and immovable rock, that is, the greatest apostolic church....." [Mansi X, 677-8].


Saint Maximus also stated:

"....the Apostolic See, which from God the incarnate Word Himself as well as all the holy Councils, according to the sacred canons and definitions, has received and possesses supreme power in all things and for all things, over all the holy churches of God throughout the world, as well as power and authority of binding and loosing. For with this church, the Word, who commands the powers of heaven, binds and looses in heaven...."( PG 91: 144).

As for Pope Honorius,
 
Pope John the IV [640-642] wrote an "apology for Pope Honorius" [Mansi X, 683).
 
Saint MAXIMUS THE CONFESSOR adopted this defense of Pope Honroius. [PG 91: 328-9).
Logged
David Newman
Moderated
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Kiousis Synod
Posts: 38


BANNED FOR DUPLICATE ACCOUNT - He's also Euthymios


« Reply #44 on: March 04, 2009, 06:47:27 AM »


Irish, I dirproved your assertion and I even supplied the sources.

In addition, you have failed to disprove all the sources I gave showing the popes were viewed as head of the Church. And there are many more.
Logged
Tags: Petrine Primacy 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 »  All   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 0.173 seconds with 72 queries.