OrthodoxChristianity.net
September 16, 2014, 05:32:39 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 »  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: David Newman and the Pope  (Read 12749 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #45 on: March 04, 2009, 06:50:27 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.

As for the other quotes concerning Pope Leo, they concern his Tome and not what Paschasinus said about Dioscorus.   Of course the Bishops at the Council agree with these words of the Pope.  They were a full expresion of the orthodox faith.

There is one point to note about it though.  They did NOT accept the Tome because it came from Rome.  They read it.  They scrutinised it.  And THEY made the decision that it was consonant with the true faith.  Can you imagine a Pope's "infallible" statement being subject to such investigation by a Roman Catholic Council today?  No, my friend, we are speaking of two different eras - the antique times when the place of Rome was correctly and truly understood by the Church, and the modern era when it has boldly and sinfully arrogated to itself a position God never intended for any bishop nor for any Church.
Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #46 on: March 04, 2009, 06:54:37 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.

This is where your credibility starts to slip.

These quotes are such great support for the modern claims of the papacy that every Catholic apologist would have them displayed and highlighted on his website.   WHY aren't they being used by Rome to support its position?
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 #47 on: March 04, 2009, 06:56:05 AM »



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


I didn't see it in that link. But you might be missing the forest for the trees. From that link:

" And he dared to hold a synod without the authority of the Apostolic See, a thing which had never taken place nor can take place."

Sounds like papal jurisdictional primacy to me.
Logged
chrevbel
Site Supporter
High Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 708



« Reply #48 on: March 04, 2009, 06:57:45 AM »

I second Quinault's question.  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 #49 on: March 04, 2009, 06:59:17 AM »


These quotes are such great support for the modern claims of the papacy that every Catholic apologist would have them displayed and highlighted on his website.   WHY aren't they being used by Rome to support its position?

Because I am one of only a few people in the world that have access to this kind of primary source material. Believe it or not. I don't care.
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 #50 on: March 04, 2009, 07:00:35 AM »


Irish,

tomorrow I want to focus on Pope Leo and his supremacy. I already gave some quotes. Lets deal with one thing at a time.
Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #51 on: March 04, 2009, 07:04:59 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.

David,

Answer me this.

From the 5th century the laws governing marriage and diviorce and sacramental second were codified in the Catholic Church of the East.  This Eastern section of the Church even included the Byzantine provinces of southern Italy, taking the authority of the Patriarch of Constanstinople right up to the gates of Rome.

Now, if the Pope were truly head of the Church, the only conclusion is that from the 5th century onwards he gave his apostolic blessing to divorce and sacramental second marriage.  He gave his blessing for this in the greater part of the Church which he headed since the Eastern section of the Catholic Church was more populous than the Western.  This continued up to 1054 when the Catholic Church of the East split with Catholic Rome.

So, is it true?  The Pope allowed divorce and remarriage in his Church, and moreover in the larger part of his church, for 600 years? 
Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #52 on: March 04, 2009, 07:07:24 AM »


These quotes are such great support for the modern claims of the papacy that every Catholic apologist would have them displayed and highlighted on his website.   WHY aren't they being used by Rome to support its position?

Because I am one of only a few people in the world that have access to this kind of primary source material. Believe it or not. I don't care.

Well, you should care.  If you have integrity, you should have made this material available to the Roman Church authorities and not be messing around and playing games with it on a mere internet forum.
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 #53 on: March 04, 2009, 07:10:10 AM »


David,

Answer me this.

From the 5th century the laws governing marriage and diviorce and sacramental second were codified in the Catholic Church of the East.  This Eastern section of the Church even included the Byzantine provinces of southern Italy, taking the authority of the Patriarch of Constanstinople right up to the gates of Rome.

I don't agree with that. The popes even appointed papal vicars in the east who were stationoned in Thessalonica. But I don't know anything about marriage and divorce laws at that time.

Now, if the Pope were truly head of the Church, the only conclusion is that from the 5th century onwards he gave his apostolic blessing to divorce and sacramental second marriage.  He gave his blessing for this in the greater part of the Church which he headed since the Eastern section of the Catholic Church was more populous than the Western.  This continued up to 1054 when the Catholic Church of the East split with Catholic Rome.

So, is it true?  The Pope allowed divorce and remarriage in his Church, and moreover in the larger part of his church, for 600 years? 

I can't answer that. Do you have a source showing divorce was permitted in the east at that time? Thank you.
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 #54 on: March 04, 2009, 07:11:30 AM »


Well, you should care.  If you have integrity, you should have made this material available to the Roman Church authorities and not be messing around and playing games with it on a mere internet forum.

The author of the book is too poor to get it published. He's working on it.
Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #55 on: March 04, 2009, 07:19:01 AM »


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

 
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).

Saint Maximus was in a tight spot. Three Catholic Patriarchs of the East (Constantinople, Antioch, Alexandria) had fallen in with the monothelite heresy. Saint Maximus was so upset that he went and made his residence in Rome. He pinned all his hope on Rome upholding and restoring orthodoxy. But eventually even the Pope of Rome, Pope Honorius, succumbed to the monothelite heresy. So there was a time when four of the five Patriarchs (excluding Jerusalem) were heretical (Catholics shudder to hear that Honorius was a heretic but even the staunchly pro-papal Catholic Encyclopedia says,

"It is clear that no Catholic has the right to defend Pope Honorius. He was a heretic, not in intention, but in fact..."

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07452b.htm
Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #56 on: March 04, 2009, 07:21:07 AM »


Well, you should care.  If you have integrity, you should have made this material available to the Roman Church authorities and not be messing around and playing games with it on a mere internet forum.

The author of the book is too poor to get it published. He's working on it.

If this person is in possession of a whole raft of hitherto unknown patristic writings supporting papal claims, tell him to get in touch with Rome.  The Vatican will shower him with gratitude and he will never have to worry about money again.   Grin
Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #57 on: March 04, 2009, 07:25:59 AM »


David,

Answer me this.

From the 5th century the laws governing marriage and diviorce and sacramental second were codified in the Catholic Church of the East.  This Eastern section of the Church even included the Byzantine provinces of southern Italy, taking the authority of the Patriarch of Constanstinople right up to the gates of Rome.

I don't agree with that. The popes even appointed papal vicars in the east who were stationoned in Thessalonica.

May we dispute that?  Don't you know that for centuries, up until the Normans began to have a major influence in the Western Church, the Archbishops (Popes) of Rome were appointed by the Emperors from Constantinople and often had to pay the Emperors a huge sum for their appointment.    At one time they were even obliged to be subject to the Byzantine Exarch at Ravenna Italy.
Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #58 on: March 04, 2009, 07:30:30 AM »



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


I didn't see it in that link. But you might be missing the forest for the trees. From that link:

" And he dared to hold a synod without the authority of the Apostolic See, a thing which had never taken place nor can take place."

Sounds like papal jurisdictional primacy to me.

Please note that this was said by Lucentius.  Just another Roman legate at the Council.  Naturally he was upholding the authority of his master in Rome.  But the Council Fathers rejected that authority over themselves.
Logged
Innocent
No longer posting on this site
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 440

St. Innocent of Alaska


« Reply #59 on: March 04, 2009, 08:21:16 AM »


These quotes are such great support for the modern claims of the papacy that every Catholic apologist would have them displayed and highlighted on his website.   WHY aren't they being used by Rome to support its position?

Because I am one of only a few people in the world that have access to this kind of primary source material. Believe it or not. I don't care.

LOL! Dude you have got to be kidding?? With the amount of ancient texts the RC & Orthodox Churches have your telling us YOU have these secret texts hidden away??
Logged
Innocent
No longer posting on this site
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 440

St. Innocent of Alaska


« Reply #60 on: March 04, 2009, 08:24:52 AM »


Well, you should care.  If you have integrity, you should have made this material available to the Roman Church authorities and not be messing around and playing games with it on a mere internet forum.

The author of the book is too poor to get it published. He's working on it.

If this material was real and your "friend" showed it to the RC Church they would pay any and all expenses to get it published. The fact that he is only "working on it" tells me a lot.
Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #61 on: March 04, 2009, 08:37:29 AM »

May we dispute that?  Don't you know that for centuries, up until the Normans began to have a major influence in the Western Church, the Archbishops (Popes) of Rome were appointed by the Emperors from Constantinople and often had to pay the Emperors a huge sum for their appointment.    At one time they were even obliged to be subject to the Byzantine Exarch at Ravenna Italy.

For several hundred years secular rulers appointed the Pope of Rome. The Eastern Emperor did this directly and, sometimes, through the Exarch at Ravenna. The Pope also had to pay a considerable sum of money to the Emperor as a "thank you."

The Emperor had not just a right of veto but of outright appointment. Just start reading some of the lives of the Popes.

Moving back into the period when East and West were united...

"In these earlier centuries of the Byzantine Empire, the problem of ecclesiastical polity (government of the church) was rather complex.

"Complicating matters was the fact that the Pope of Rome was subordinate politically to the Byzantine Emperor, who sat in Constantinople. Up until the eighth century (as is usually not noted) the pope was in fact even appointed by the Emperor or, more directly, through his civil governor in [Ravenna] Italy."


http://archons.org/patriarchate/history/pentarchy.asp
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: 37,576



« Reply #62 on: March 04, 2009, 09:13:23 AM »


These quotes are such great support for the modern claims of the papacy that every Catholic apologist would have them displayed and highlighted on his website.   WHY aren't they being used by Rome to support its position?

Because I am one of only a few people in the world that have access to this kind of primary source material. Believe it or not. I don't care.

LOL! Dude you have got to be kidding?? With the amount of ancient texts the RC & Orthodox Churches have your telling us YOU have these secret texts hidden away??

Yes, with the Original Donation of Constantine. LOL.
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
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #63 on: March 04, 2009, 09:19:47 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.
What a remarkable coincidence. Our site and forum owner is a priest of the church you claim to be "fully Orthodox" in. I'm certain he will appreciate your participation here and, lucky for you, you should feel right at home.

BTW, what does "fully Orthodox" mean? One either is Orthodox or one is not.
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
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: 37,576



« Reply #64 on: March 04, 2009, 09:28:55 AM »

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.

You will have to give it in the primary language (I'm quite used to Vatican supporters translating "episcopos" as "pope." when refering to the patriarch of Rome).  The patriarch of Alexandria RECEIVED the title Pope in the 3rd cent., Rome TOOK it centuries later.  So, if you are during history, like I said Pope Cyril and Archbishop Celestine.



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?

Only by the Patriarchs at their DL, not the DL of the average parish.
« Last Edit: March 04, 2009, 09:34:33 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
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,444


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #65 on: March 04, 2009, 11:06:45 AM »


What is a "Kiousis synod?"

That is an overly familiar way of referring to the Greek Old Calendarist Church of Archbishop Chrysostomos II (Kiousis), of which yours truly is a priest.

In Christ,

Fr Anastasios
Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Disclaimer: Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodo
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,444


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #66 on: March 04, 2009, 11:07:35 AM »


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

You're not quite there yet.
Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Disclaimer: Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodo
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,444


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #67 on: March 04, 2009, 11:13:08 AM »

What is a "Kiousis synod?"

The Kiousis synod is one of the various schismatic Greek Old Calendarist groups.

While you are entitled to your opinion, just as we have rules against Eastern Orthodox and Non-Chalcedonians labelling each other schismatics and heretics in the public forum, we also have similar rules against New and Old Calendarists labelling each other schismatics in the public forum.  It opens up all sorts of unwanted passionate debate and endless circles of go-around.  A better way to phrase your statement would have been to say, "one of the Old Calendarist Churches considered schismatic by the standard/mainstream Church of Greece."

Fr Anastasios
« Last Edit: March 04, 2009, 11:14:12 AM by Fr. Anastasios » Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Disclaimer: Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodo
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,444


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #68 on: March 04, 2009, 11:15:18 AM »


These quotes are such great support for the modern claims of the papacy that every Catholic apologist would have them displayed and highlighted on his website.   WHY aren't they being used by Rome to support its position?

Because I am one of only a few people in the world that have access to this kind of primary source material. Believe it or not. I don't care.

This is a discussion forum, not a place to taunt people with your supposed secret knowledge.

Fr Anastasios
Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Disclaimer: Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodo
Innocent
No longer posting on this site
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 440

St. Innocent of Alaska


« Reply #69 on: March 04, 2009, 11:20:24 AM »


These quotes are such great support for the modern claims of the papacy that every Catholic apologist would have them displayed and highlighted on his website.   WHY aren't they being used by Rome to support its position?

Because I am one of only a few people in the world that have access to this kind of primary source material. Believe it or not. I don't care.

This is a discussion forum, not a place to taunt people with your supposed secret knowledge.

Fr Anastasios


I have a picture of "David" in my mind sitting in a cave on top of a mountain with piles of ancient secrete manuscripts around him and typing feversly on his keyboard. This same cave is home to the Yeti and Unicorns!!  Shocked
Logged
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,444


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #70 on: March 04, 2009, 11:24:53 AM »


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

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

THANK YOU.
Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Disclaimer: Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodo
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #71 on: March 04, 2009, 01:52:45 PM »

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

Dear David,

Your claim to have access to all this secret knowledge rings hollow when you seem unaware of even the public evidence available.

Let's look at the position of Pope Honorius...

Can you know more than the Popes and the Councils and the major churchmen who lived at the time of Honorius? They judged him a heretic.

14 Reasons to call Honorius a Heretic

1. His condemnation is found in the Acts of the 13th Session of the 6th Ecumenical Council.

2. His two letters in favour of monothelitism were ordered to be burned at the same Session.

3. In the 17th session of the 6th Ecumenical Council, the Council Fathers proclaimed:

"Anathema to the heretic Sergius, to the heretic Cyrus, to the heretic Honorius,..."

The above really clinches it, unless one wants to argue that an Ecumenical Council and the Popes who ratified them may err but in that case the burden of proof is on the person who opposes the Council and the papal ratification.   

4. In the decree of faith published at the 17th Session it is stated that "the originator of all evil the Devil...found a fit tool for his will in...Honorius, Pope of Old Rome..."

5. The report of the Council to the Emperor says that "Honorius,
formerly bishop of Rome" they had "punished with exclusion and
anathema" because he followed the monothelites.

6. In its letter to Pope Agatho the Council says it "has slain Honorius with an anathema"

7. The imperial decree speaks of the "unholy priests who infected the Church and falsely governed" and mentions among them "Honorius, the Pope of Old Rome, the confirmer of heresy who contradicted himself."

The Emperor goes on to anathematize "Honorius who was Pope of Old Rome, who in everything agreed with them, went with them, and strengthened the heresy."

8. Pope Leo II confirmed the decrees of the Council and expressly says that he too anathematized Honorius.

9. That Honorius was anathematized by the Sixth Council is
mentioned in the Trullan Canons.

10. So too the Seventh Council declares its adhesion to the
anathema in its decree of faith, and in several places in the acts
the same is said.

11. Honorius's name was found in the Roman copy of the Acts. This is evident from Anastasius's life of Leo II. (Vita Leonis II.)

12. The Papal Oath as found in the Liber Diurnus taken by each new Pope from the fifth to the eleventh centuries, in the form probably prescribed by Gregory II:

"smites with eternal anathema the originators of the new heresy, Sergius, together with Honorius because he assisted the base assertion of the heretics."

13. In the lesson for the feast of St. Leo II. in the Roman Breviary the name of Pope Honorius occurs among those excommunicated by the Sixth Synod. This inconvenient reference to Honorius was removed before the definition of papal infallibility.

14. The Catholic Encylopedia says that no Catholic may deny that Pope Honorius was a heretic.

With such an array of proof no conservative historian, it would seem, can question the fact that Honorius, the Pope of Rome, was condemned and anathematized as a heretic by the Sixth Ecumenical Council and that the Popes after him used their authority to uphold the decision against him.
« Last Edit: March 04, 2009, 01:55:14 PM by Irish Hermit » Logged
FrChris
The Rodney Dangerfield of OC.net
Site Supporter
Taxiarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Posts: 7,252


Holy Father Patrick, thank you for your help!


« Reply #72 on: March 04, 2009, 02:06:09 PM »

Irish Hermit----please post the source for your above quote. I happen to know it is pg. 351-352 from Vol. XIV of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, but an electronic link to the proper ccel page is appropriate for forum source listing rules.

Thnaks!

+Fr Chris
Forum Admin
Logged

"As the sparrow flees from a hawk, so the man seeking humility flees from an argument". St John Climacus
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #73 on: March 04, 2009, 02:39:57 PM »

Irish Hermit----please post the source for your above quote. I happen to know it is pg. 351-352 from Vol. XIV of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, but an electronic link to the proper ccel page is appropriate for forum source listing rules.

Thnaks!

+Fr Chris
Forum Admin


This was a summary of several posts which I made up and posted years ago to Catholic Answers Forum in the course of many debates on Pope Honorius.  I searched for the individual posts but did not find them on CAF.  They are spread across several posts.  More than likely CAF deleted them;  they deleted around 17,500 of my posts.  The fact that they missed the above was a big surprise.  I was quite pleased that I found the the various quotes in the complete version. 

I suppose that you are asking for clickable references?   Any help that you and others can provide would be much appreciated.  The quotes are certainly more effective when people can go "click" and there it is..    However if you look at my message you will see that in point of fact the references ARE there for what I wrote - I have given the references to the Sessions and Acts of the Councils etc., but people these days are rather lazy and don't want to go to the books and look them up.  They think that everything should be just a cyber click away.  I am one of the ancients who prefer real books.    So any help in finding the clickable references is truly appreciated.

David also provided "real" references and not clickable ones.  His, on the whole, are pretty much impossible to locate since they seem to be in books unknown to the rest of the world.  Smiley
Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #74 on: March 04, 2009, 02:52:33 PM »

Irish Hermit----please post the source for your above quote. I happen to know it is pg. 351-352 from Vol. XIV of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, but an electronic link to the proper ccel page is appropriate for forum source listing rules.

Thnaks!

+Fr Chris
Forum Admin


I tried to find the Rules so that I won't make mistakes in the future and I just referenced the Rules by using the "Rules" link at the top of the page but I did not see anything about source listing rules.  Is there an expanded version of the Rules and where may I read it them please.

Logged
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,070


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #75 on: March 04, 2009, 03:28:58 PM »

Father,

Irish Hermit----please post the source for your above quote. I happen to know it is pg. 351-352 from Vol. XIV of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, but an electronic link to the proper ccel page is appropriate for forum source listing rules.

Thnaks!

+Fr Chris
Forum Admin

I tried to find the Rules so that I won't make mistakes in the future and I just referenced the Rules by using the "Rules" link at the top of the page but I did not see anything about source listing rules.  Is there an expanded version of the Rules and where may I read it them please.

His reference is to two things:
1. Protecting you (and the forum) from plagiarism & accused plagiarism.
2. Sometimes a moderator will make a formal request for sources, in order to back up claims made by the user and keep the flow of discussion.  It is referenced here:

Being asked to provide clarification, references, or "proof" by a moderator in an official manner:

Occasionally a moderator will make a formal request (i.e. in a colored font, or whatnot, explicitly stating that they're asking as a mod and not a user) for clarification of a point, references to support a point, or "proof" of an assertion made in the course of discussion.  Sometimes this request will come with a "time limit" or other stipulation requesting expediency.  These requests are made in order to facilitate open and honest discussion, without knowingly or unknowingly propagating false information.  Do not be offended by such requests, but do make all haste in fulfilling them, in order to allow productive and edifying discussion to continue.

I think our founder and Administrator explains this best:


We are just trying to meet our responsibility of fairness and remember we will all face the ultimate judge, Christ himself. We really want to make sure that our site is not responsible for advertising mistruth whenever possible. No one on our moderation team is assuming anything you have said is not true. It is just confusing to try and figure out all the details and we are trying to be cautious. This is how Orthodox people are supposed to take all things, with a discerning spirit. Thank you for your understanding. We value your input on this site.

Anastasios
Administrator

In your case, he's figuring you've used sources, so he's asking for the references to keep the discussion moving (i.e. so people don't just assume you've made things up), and to keep everyone's character unsoiled (by accusations or whatnot).
« Last Edit: March 04, 2009, 03:29:18 PM by cleveland » Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
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: 37,576



« Reply #76 on: March 04, 2009, 03:51:51 PM »



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.

You can't believe a tenth of what you read on the internet.

So if you can't find it online, it's credibility has to be worse.



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.

This is where your credibility starts to slip.

These quotes are such great support for the modern claims of the papacy that every Catholic apologist would have them displayed and highlighted on his website.   WHY aren't they being used by Rome to support its position?

Father, didn't we deal with this type of stuff on CAF, with the "quote" of St. Methodius on the supremacy of the pope of Rome?


These quotes are such great support for the modern claims of the papacy that every Catholic apologist would have them displayed and highlighted on his website.   WHY aren't they being used by Rome to support its position?

Because I am one of only a few people in the world that have access to this kind of primary source material. Believe it or not. I don't care.
If you want to know the Truth
                    make it up.
                                        -Dr. Seuss
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: 37,576



« Reply #77 on: March 04, 2009, 04:01:50 PM »


David,

Answer me this.

From the 5th century the laws governing marriage and diviorce and sacramental second were codified in the Catholic Church of the East.  This Eastern section of the Church even included the Byzantine provinces of southern Italy, taking the authority of the Patriarch of Constanstinople right up to the gates of Rome.

I don't agree with that.
So?  Your point?
Quote
The popes even appointed papal vicars in the east who were stationoned in Thessalonica.

They were called apocrisiari, and every patriarch had them, along with the embassy Church (the Vatican calls them titular churches now).  Patriarch Antolius of Constantinople, for instance, started as the apocrisiarius of Pope Dioscorus of Alexandria to New Rome.  St. Peter's in the Vatican, is the metochia of Constantinople.

Quote
But I don't know anything about marriage and divorce laws at that time.

So you are talking about something you admit you don't know.

Now, if the Pope were truly head of the Church, the only conclusion is that from the 5th century onwards he gave his apostolic blessing to divorce and sacramental second marriage.  He gave his blessing for this in the greater part of the Church which he headed since the Eastern section of the Catholic Church was more populous than the Western.  This continued up to 1054 when the Catholic Church of the East split with Catholic Rome.

So, is it true?  The Pope allowed divorce and remarriage in his Church, and moreover in the larger part of his church, for 600 years? 

Quote
I can't answer that. Do you have a source showing divorce was permitted in the east at that time? Thank you.
I'll let Father respond.
« Last Edit: March 04, 2009, 04:19:06 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
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #78 on: March 04, 2009, 04:07:14 PM »

Folks, this is not the first time I've read on an Internet forum a supposedly Orthodox poster claim that he has read a 'secret, not yet published' monograph proving these papal claims. In fact, this instance is exactly what I've seen before. It strains credulity to assert with today's available technology (almost free Internet publishing avenues) and very cheap personal publishing options (such as Lulu Press) that any worthy work cannot be disseminated.
My finely training milarkey detector (my probiscus) has just set off an alarm.
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,070


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #79 on: March 04, 2009, 04:27:13 PM »


These quotes are such great support for the modern claims of the papacy that every Catholic apologist would have them displayed and highlighted on his website.   WHY aren't they being used by Rome to support its position?

Because I am one of only a few people in the world that have access to this kind of primary source material. Believe it or not. I don't care. 

You have read what Christ has to say about hiding light, right?  If it's the truth, it either has been revealed or it must be revealed; take your pick.  If you indeed have primary source material that supports your position, then you do harm to the Church by hiding it.  If you do not have the material, or if your material is of dubious origin or outright false pretense, then you are doing harm to other Christians by questioning their faith and parading around what to them may seem to be "convincing evidence."

My finely training milarkey detector (my probiscus) has just set off an alarm.

LOL.  It seems quite a few folks, appendages or not, have had similar alarms going off.
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
David Newman
Moderated
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Kiousis Synod
Posts: 38


BANNED FOR DUPLICATE ACCOUNT - He's also Euthymios


« Reply #80 on: March 04, 2009, 05:38:54 PM »


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

 
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).

Saint Maximus was in a tight spot. Three Catholic Patriarchs of the East (Constantinople, Antioch, Alexandria) had fallen in with the monothelite heresy. Saint Maximus was so upset that he went and made his residence in Rome. He pinned all his hope on Rome upholding and restoring orthodoxy. But eventually even the Pope of Rome, Pope Honorius, succumbed to the monothelite heresy. So there was a time when four of the five Patriarchs (excluding Jerusalem) were heretical (Catholics shudder to hear that Honorius was a heretic but even the staunchly pro-papal Catholic Encyclopedia says,

"It is clear that no Catholic has the right to defend Pope Honorius. He was a heretic, not in intention, but in fact..."

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07452b.htm

That is not true whatsoever.  Keep in mind that the Freemasons have been trying to discret the Catholic Church for decades. They started to infiltrate the Church in the 1930's. You have to be very carefull what you read. Just listen to the fathers.

Saint Maximus defended Honorius, as I already referenced. Second, Honorius was condemned for NEGLIGENCE. He did not take a position. Third, long after this event, the church at Rome was considered pure all the way up to the 7th Ecumenical Council. It had never fallen into error or heresy. I have all the citations proving this. But this was just a quick response.
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 #81 on: March 04, 2009, 05:40:23 PM »

Folks, this is not the first time I've read on an Internet forum a supposedly Orthodox poster claim that he has read a 'secret, not yet published' monograph proving these papal claims. In fact, this instance is exactly what I've seen before. It strains credulity to assert with today's available technology (almost free Internet publishing avenues) and very cheap personal publishing options (such as Lulu Press) that any worthy work cannot be disseminated.
My finely training milarkey detector (my probiscus) has just set off an alarm.

Oh get over it! I have given the PRIMARY SOURCES supporting my quotes. Dig them up and disprove them if you think you can.
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 #82 on: March 04, 2009, 05:43:15 PM »


IRISH,

if you want to debate Pope Honorius perhaps you can open a new thread on this subject alone. If you do this, let me know. Make your case agaisnt him and I'll give my response.
Logged
Quinault
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 4,516


What about frogs? I like frogs!


« Reply #83 on: March 04, 2009, 05:44:51 PM »

I have a secret manuscript that says my cat is actually the right and worthy leader of the entire free world. Really! He showed it to me!

(I don't mean to derail the thread, but this "secret" documentation stuff is just insulting. If you mods feel this needs to be deleted I will understand)
« Last Edit: March 04, 2009, 05:46:59 PM 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 #84 on: March 04, 2009, 05:47:07 PM »


These aren't secret manuscripts. They have been known to the Church for 2,000 years. They might seem secret to you because you don't deal with primary sources. And you don't deal on a scholarly level.
Logged
Quinault
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 4,516


What about frogs? I like frogs!


« Reply #85 on: March 04, 2009, 05:49:52 PM »

So then where are these "primary sources?" I can say that my cat is leader of the world. But it doesn't mean anything if all I have is my word that I have the document in hand. You need more than illusions to it existing to be believable.

Again, I ask- What is your point? If you think that you should be in communion with the Pope become an Eastern Catholic.
Logged
Innocent
No longer posting on this site
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 440

St. Innocent of Alaska


« Reply #86 on: March 04, 2009, 05:52:01 PM »


These aren't secret manuscripts. They have been known to the Church for 2,000 years. They might seem secret to you because you don't deal with primary sources. And you don't deal on a scholarly level.

And absolutely no scholarly people would ever allow sources (primary or otherwise) to be used in a debate without BOTH sides seeing these sources! It just never happens in any true academic setting, so stop pretending what your doing is scholarly!  
Logged
Quinault
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 4,516


What about frogs? I like frogs!


« Reply #87 on: March 04, 2009, 05:55:10 PM »

As I said before-

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?
« Last Edit: March 04, 2009, 05:55:40 PM by Quinault » Logged
Entscheidungsproblem
Formerly Friul & Nebelpfade
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Machine God
Posts: 4,495



WWW
« Reply #88 on: March 04, 2009, 06:06:47 PM »


These aren't secret manuscripts. They have been known to the Church for 2,000 years. They might seem secret to you because you don't deal with primary sources. And you don't deal on a scholarly level.

And your proof of this being?  There is no need for ad hominems; further use of them will be dealt with more severely.

-- Nebelpfade
Section Moderator
Logged

As a result of a thousand million years of evolution, the universe is becoming conscious of itself, able to understand something of its past history and its possible future.
-- Sir Julian Sorell Huxley FRS
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,469


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #89 on: March 04, 2009, 06:12:56 PM »


That is not true whatsoever.  Keep in mind that the Freemasons have been trying to discret the Catholic Church for decades. They started to infiltrate the Church in the 1930's. You have to be very carefull what you read. Just listen to the fathers.

The Catholic Encyclopedia quoted and linked to above has a copyright date of 1917.
Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
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 0.16 seconds with 72 queries.