OrthodoxChristianity.net
November 27, 2014, 02:05:59 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: First council of Toledo 397 - 400, Filioque  (Read 12832 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Inquisitor
Warned
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 94


« Reply #180 on: December 13, 2011, 03:41:50 PM »

I could say the same in reverse.  In fact, I just did.  We are as Patriarch St. Ignatius of Antioch defined us over 19 centuries.  That since then Rome has redefined itself into the Vatican, and tries to redefine the Church and her Faith to follow suit, isn't our problem.

 Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy

And we'll be beating this dead horse with the same old Chick-like assertions...
...and the same cackling from the hen house it seems.

Patriarch St. Ignatius does not define the Catholic Church by any reference to Rome.  He speaks of the local bishop, and nothing of Rome putting him there, nothing about him commemorating Rome (over Antioch or Alexandria).  So totally unlike the situation of your Ruthenian see of Pittsburgh.

Since I've never seen any evidence that Chick knows the original meaning of "Catholic," but assUmes that it is catholic=Vatican, it seems that you are operating under the same assertions as Jack.



St. Irenaeus. Against Heresies (Book III, Chapter 3) (? - 202)

2. Since, however, it would be very tedious, in such a volume as this, to reckon up the successions of all the Churches, we do put to confusion all those who, in whatever manner, whether by an evil self-pleasing, by vainglory, or by blindness and perverse opinion, assemble in unauthorized meetings; [we do this, I say,] by indicating that tradition derived from the apostles, of the very great, the very ancient, and universally known Church founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul; as also [by pointing out] the faith preached to men, which comes down to our time by means of the successions of the bishops. For it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its preeminent authority, that is, the faithful everywhere, inasmuch as the tradition has been preserved continuously by those [faithful men] who exist everywhere.
« Last Edit: December 13, 2011, 03:50:27 PM by Inquisitor » Logged
Inquisitor
Warned
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 94


« Reply #181 on: December 13, 2011, 03:48:34 PM »

I know Saint Ignatius didn't speak of the Church Of Rome as the center of catholicism, however other saints of the same century of him did.

from Saint Ignatius we can see that he never called himself "Patriarch", he describes Bishops, Presbiters and Deacons. but not nationalistic patriarchs.

From the Epistle of Ignatius to the Smyrnaeans:

See that you all follow the bishop, even as Jesus Christ does the Father, and the presbytery as you would the apostles; and reverence the deacons, as being the institution of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper Eucharist, which is [administered] either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude [of the people] also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church. It is not lawful without the bishop either to baptize or to celebrate a love-feast; but whatsoever he shall approve of, that is also pleasing to God, so that everything that is done may be secure and valid.



Now ¿where can we read or guess the idea of a patriarchs of national churches?
« Last Edit: December 13, 2011, 03:54:55 PM by Inquisitor » Logged
mike
Warned
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,476


« Reply #182 on: December 13, 2011, 03:54:47 PM »

I know Saint Ignatious didn't speak of the Church Of Rome as the center of catholicism, however other saints of the same centory of him did.

Such as...
Logged
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,594


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #183 on: December 13, 2011, 04:15:49 PM »

Quote
it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its preeminent authority, that is, the faithful everywhere, inasmuch as the tradition has been preserved continuously by those [faithful men] who exist everywhere
Because Rome was the stalwart of the time for Orthodoxy, used as a benchmark, not because it was simply the Church of Rome.

PP
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
Inquisitor
Warned
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 94


« Reply #184 on: December 13, 2011, 05:20:50 PM »

I know Saint Ignatious didn't speak of the Church Of Rome as the center of catholicism, however other saints of the same centory of him did.

Such as...

St. Irenaeus
Logged
Inquisitor
Warned
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 94


« Reply #185 on: December 13, 2011, 05:23:24 PM »

Quote
it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its preeminent authority, that is, the faithful everywhere, inasmuch as the tradition has been preserved continuously by those [faithful men] who exist everywhere
Because Rome was the stalwart of the time for Orthodoxy, used as a benchmark, not because it was simply the Church of Rome.

PP

Because all heresies came form east, in his timelife gnosticism, and after his dead, Arianism, Nestorianism, etc.
Logged
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,973


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #186 on: December 13, 2011, 05:27:59 PM »

Quote
it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its preeminent authority, that is, the faithful everywhere, inasmuch as the tradition has been preserved continuously by those [faithful men] who exist everywhere
Because Rome was the stalwart of the time for Orthodoxy, used as a benchmark, not because it was simply the Church of Rome.

PP

Because all heresies came form east, in his timelife gnosticism, and after his dead, Arianism, Nestorianism, etc.

Lol.
Logged

Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,594


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #187 on: December 13, 2011, 05:52:53 PM »

Quote
it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its preeminent authority, that is, the faithful everywhere, inasmuch as the tradition has been preserved continuously by those [faithful men] who exist everywhere
Because Rome was the stalwart of the time for Orthodoxy, used as a benchmark, not because it was simply the Church of Rome.

PP

Because all heresies came form east, in his timelife gnosticism, and after his dead, Arianism, Nestorianism, etc.

There was no other big game in town in the west, so the heresy thing is not surprising. Rome was known for its Orthodoxy. Unfortunately, as there was no other church in the west to keep them in check, the hat size got big and well......

PP
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
Inquisitor
Warned
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 94


« Reply #188 on: December 13, 2011, 06:05:06 PM »

Quote
it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its preeminent authority, that is, the faithful everywhere, inasmuch as the tradition has been preserved continuously by those [faithful men] who exist everywhere
Because Rome was the stalwart of the time for Orthodoxy, used as a benchmark, not because it was simply the Church of Rome.

PP

Because all heresies came form east, in his timelife gnosticism, and after his dead, Arianism, Nestorianism, etc.

There was no other big game in town in the west, so the heresy thing is not surprising. Rome was known for its Orthodoxy. Unfortunately, as there was no other church in the west to keep them in check, the hat size got big and well......

PP

What about Hippo?
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 #189 on: December 13, 2011, 06:31:38 PM »

Quote
it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its preeminent authority, that is, the faithful everywhere, inasmuch as the tradition has been preserved continuously by those [faithful men] who exist everywhere
Because Rome was the stalwart of the time for Orthodoxy, used as a benchmark, not because it was simply the Church of Rome.

PP

Because all heresies came form east, in his timelife gnosticism, and after his dead, Arianism, Nestorianism, etc.
All the Orthodoxy, including himself, came from the East as well, and after his death, Pope St. Athanasius, Pope St. Cyril, etc.

Don't be bashful: the West had its Donatists, Pelagians, etc.
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 #190 on: December 13, 2011, 06:35:49 PM »

Quote
it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its preeminent authority, that is, the faithful everywhere, inasmuch as the tradition has been preserved continuously by those [faithful men] who exist everywhere
Because Rome was the stalwart of the time for Orthodoxy, used as a benchmark, not because it was simply the Church of Rome.

PP

Because all heresies came form east, in his timelife gnosticism, and after his dead, Arianism, Nestorianism, etc.

There was no other big game in town in the west, so the heresy thing is not surprising. Rome was known for its Orthodoxy. Unfortunately, as there was no other church in the west to keep them in check, the hat size got big and well......

PP

What about Hippo?
It was the capital of the Arian Vandals.  New Rome conquored it and restored it to Orthodoxy.
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 #191 on: December 13, 2011, 06:46:40 PM »

I could say the same in reverse.  In fact, I just did.  We are as Patriarch St. Ignatius of Antioch defined us over 19 centuries.  That since then Rome has redefined itself into the Vatican, and tries to redefine the Church and her Faith to follow suit, isn't our problem.

 Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy

And we'll be beating this dead horse with the same old Chick-like assertions...
...and the same cackling from the hen house it seems.

Patriarch St. Ignatius does not define the Catholic Church by any reference to Rome.  He speaks of the local bishop, and nothing of Rome putting him there, nothing about him commemorating Rome (over Antioch or Alexandria).  So totally unlike the situation of your Ruthenian see of Pittsburgh.

Since I've never seen any evidence that Chick knows the original meaning of "Catholic," but assUmes that it is catholic=Vatican, it seems that you are operating under the same assertions as Jack.



St. Irenaeus. Against Heresies (Book III, Chapter 3) (? - 202)

2. Since, however, it would be very tedious, in such a volume as this, to reckon up the successions of all the Churches, we do put to confusion all those who, in whatever manner, whether by an evil self-pleasing, by vainglory, or by blindness and perverse opinion, assemble in unauthorized meetings; [we do this, I say,] by indicating that tradition derived from the apostles, of the very great, the very ancient, and universally known Church founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul; as also [by pointing out] the faith preached to men, which comes down to our time by means of the successions of the bishops. For it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its preeminent authority, that is, the faithful everywhere, inasmuch as the tradition has been preserved continuously by those [faithful men] who exist everywhere.

Was there a point in there?  Ah, yes, that St. Paul founded the Church at Rome.  And other points:
Rome, no.

Are we talking about the same Rome of which was said in the early second century?

Quote
Since, however, it would be very tedious, in such a volume as this, to reckon up the successions of all the Churches, we do put to confusion all those who, in whatever manner, whether by an evil self-pleasing, by vainglory, or by blindness and perverse opinion, assemble in unauthorized meetings; [we do this, I say,] by indicating that tradition derived from the apostles, of the very great, the very ancient, and universally known Church founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul; as also [by pointing out] the faith preached to men, which comes down to our time by means of the successions of the bishops. For it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its preeminent authority, that is, the faithful everywhere, inasmuch as the tradition has been preserved continuously by those [faithful men] who exist everywhere.
yeah, that's the one.  Rome was the draw of all the Christians, Orthodox Catholic and heretic alike, so it was a crucible where all the gold ore from around the world in heated exchange with heretics from around the world confronted each other and burned off the dross of the later by drawing on the resources of the former.  It was not the sun dispensing its apostolic rays, it was a prism concentrating the lights from all over focusing there. 

Btw, St. Irenaeus goes on
Quote
In this order, and by this succession, the ecclesiastical tradition from the apostles, and the preaching of the truth, have come down to us. And this is most abundant proof that there is one and the same vivifying faith, which has been preserved in the Church from the apostles until now, and handed down in truth.  But Polycarp also was not only instructed by apostles, and conversed with many who had seen Christ, but was also, by apostles in Asia, appointed bishop of the Church in Smyrna, whom I also saw in my early youth, for he tarried [on earth] a very long time, and, when a very old man, gloriously and most nobly suffering martyrdom, departed this life, having always taught the things which he had learned from the apostles, and which the Church has handed down, and which alone are true. To these things all the Asiatic Churches testify, as do also those men who have succeeded Polycarp down to the present time,— a man who was of much greater weight, and a more steadfast witness of truth, than Valentinus, and Marcion, and the rest of the heretics. He it was who, coming to Rome in the time of Anicetus caused many to turn away from the aforesaid heretics to the Church of God, proclaiming that he had received this one and sole truth from the apostles—that, namely, which is handed down by the Church. There are also those who heard from him that John, the disciple of the Lord, going to bathe at Ephesus, and perceiving Cerinthus within, rushed out of the bath-house without bathing, exclaiming, Let us fly, lest even the bath-house fall down, because Cerinthus, the enemy of the truth, is within. And Polycarp himself replied to Marcion, who met him on one occasion, and said, Do you know me? I do know you, the first-born of Satan. Such was the horror which the apostles and their disciples had against holding even verbal communication with any corrupters of the truth; as Paul also says, A man that is an heretic, after the first and second admonition, reject; knowing that he that is such is subverted, and sins, being condemned of himself. Titus 3:10 There is also a very powerful Epistle of Polycarp written to the Philippians, from which those who choose to do so, and are anxious about their salvation, can learn the character of his faith, and the preaching of the truth. Then, again, the Church in Ephesus, founded by Paul, and having John remaining among them permanently until the times of Trajan, is a true witness of the tradition of the apostles.  (Chap. 4) Since therefore we have such proofs, it is not necessary to seek the truth among others which it is easy to obtain from the Church; since the apostles, like a rich man [depositing his money] in a bank, lodged in her hands most copiously all things pertaining to the truth: so that every man, whosoever will, can draw from her the water of life. Revelation 22:17 For she is the entrance to life; all others are thieves and robbers. On this account are we bound to avoid them, but to make choice of the thing pertaining to the Church with the utmost diligence, and to lay hold of the tradition of the truth. For how stands the case? Suppose there arise a dispute relative to some important question among us, should we not have recourse to the most ancient Churches with which the apostles held constant intercourse, and learn from them what is certain and clear in regard to the present question? For how should it be if the apostles themselves had not left us writings? Would it not be necessary, [in that case,] to follow the course of the tradition which they handed down to those to whom they did commit the Churches?
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103303.htm

There is an Orthodox way of understanding the bolded part (Apostolic Canon 34). This was based on the preaching of the apostles and Romes steadfastness in maintaining the teaching of those apostles. This wasn't decided in a council. It wasn't voted. It wasn't based on the government's (who was persecuting the Church at the time) secular order.
yeah, it was.

Besides the fact that the order Rome-Alexandria-Antioch mirrored the secular order (why else would Alexandria, a see founded by a disciple of St. Peter, outrank Antioch, his first see and equal to maintaining the teaching that the Apostles preached there. None of the 12 Apostles preached in Alexandria), many Church fathers, before and after Nicea, refer to Rome's importance from being near the seat of the empire, e.g.
Quote
Finally, though never at Rome, on authority he [he St. John Chrysostom] knows that the census papers of the Holy Family are still there. [This appeal to Roman archives is as old as Justin Martyr (First Apology 34-35) and Tertullian (Adv. Marc., IV, 7, 19).
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03724b.htm
and it should be noted that St. Justin Martyr addresses his apology to the Caesar, as did other apologists (e.g. Athenagoras).  Persecution didn't stop the Apostles from centering the Church in Jerusalem, it didn't stop it at Rome either.  Pope St. Victor had access to the Emperor Commodus, throught the latter's Christian concubine, and Pope St. Victor was the first to try to assert a supremacy, and the first to be rebuked by the Church for it.  The Novatians sued before the Emperor Aurelian over the possession of the Church of Rome, cf.
Quote
Quote
During the early years of his reign Aurelian exhibited remarkable justice and tolerance towards the Christians. In 272, when he had gained possession of Antioch, after defeating Zenobia in several battles, he was appealed to by the Christians to decide whether the "Church building" in Antioch belonged to the orthodox bishop Domnus, or to the party represented by the favourite of Zenobia, Paul of Samosata, who had been deposed for heresy by a synod held three or four years before. His decision, based probably on the Edict of Gallienus, was that the property belonged to those who were in union with the bishops of Italy and of the city of Rome (Eusebius, Church History VII.27-30).
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02108b.htm

It wasn't decided by any emporer.
According to the Edict of Gallienus, yes, it was.

When Rome's primacy (not supremacy) was proclaimed in council, it was only acknowledging something that was already in place. Rome never lost that place of primacy until the schism. The only other city to hold that place was Constantinople, which gained honor from nothing but secular politics and was never formally relieved of that place.
When it submitted to the Vatican at Florence, it was.

Claiming that Rome never had preeminence based on apostolic doctrine is just as historically unsound as claiming that every father who said something positive about Rome was an ultramontanist.
The claims of pre-eminence based on apostolic doctrine isn't advanced until the middle third century.

On the later point:
Quote
But for a time the whole Church was torn by the question of the rival popes. We have few details. St. Cyprian writes that Novatian "assumed the primacy" (Ep. lxix, Cool, and sent out his new apostles to many cities to set new foundations for his new establishment; and, though there were already in all provinces and cities bishops of venerable age, of pure faith, of tried virtue, who had been proscribed in the persecution, he dared to create other false bishops over their heads (Ep. lv, 24) thus claiming the right of substituting bishops by his own authority as Cornelius did in the case just mentioned. There could be no more startling proof of the importance of the Roman See than this sudden revelation of an episode of the third century: the whole Church convulsed by the claim of an antipope; the recognized impossibility of a bishop being a Catholic and legitimate pastor if he is on the side of the wrong pope; the uncontested claim of both rivals to consecrate a new bishop in any place (at all events, in the West) where the existing bishop resisted their authority. Later, in the same way, in a letter to Pope Stephen, St. Cyprian urges him to appoint (so he seems to imply) a new bishop at Arles, where the bishop had become a Novatianist. St. Dionysius of Alexandria wrote to Pope Stephen that all the Churches in the East and beyond, which had been split in two, were now united, and that all their prelates were now rejoicing exceedingly in this unexpected peace — in Antioch, Caesarea of Palestine, Jerusalem, Tyre, Laodicea of Syria, Tarsus and all the Churches of Cilicia, Caesarea and all Cappadocia, the Syrias and Arabia (which depended for alms on the Roman Church), Mesopotamia, Pontus and Bithynia, "and all the Churches everywhere", so far did the Roman schism cause its effects to be felt.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11138a.htm
Nonsense.  A century later the Meletian schism at Antioch had a similar effect.  The fact that the Novations were not only schismatic but also heretical explains the setting up of rival bishops throughout the world, as the gnostics, Marcionites, Montanists, etc. had done before.
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 #192 on: December 13, 2011, 06:51:24 PM »

I know Saint Ignatius didn't speak of the Church Of Rome as the center of catholicism, however other saints of the same century of him did.

from Saint Ignatius we can see that he never called himself "Patriarch", he describes Bishops, Presbiters and Deacons. but not nationalistic patriarchs.
Doesn't say a thing about "supreme pontiffs," "popes" or even bishops of Rome either.

From the Epistle of Ignatius to the Smyrnaeans:

See that you all follow the bishop, even as Jesus Christ does the Father, and the presbytery as you would the apostles; and reverence the deacons, as being the institution of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper Eucharist, which is [administered] either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude [of the people] also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church. It is not lawful without the bishop either to baptize or to celebrate a love-feast; but whatsoever he shall approve of, that is also pleasing to God, so that everything that is done may be secure and valid.



Now ¿where can we read or guess the idea of a patriarchs of national churches?
Where can we read or guess the idea of a pope as supreme pontiff?
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
witega
Is it enough now, to tell you you matter?
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Diocese of the South
Posts: 1,614


« Reply #193 on: December 13, 2011, 07:18:01 PM »

St. Irenaeus. Against Heresies (Book III, Chapter 3) (? - 202)

<snip>For it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its preeminent authority, that is, the faithful everywhere, inasmuch as the tradition has been preserved continuously by those [faithful men] who exist everywhere.

That translation needs some work to get to grammatical English, but the gist is clear enough. People should agree with Rome 'inasmuch as the tradition has been preserved continuously'. And when St. Irenaeus wrote in the 2nd century that was very true. On the other hand, the obvious corollary (particularly given the context of the preceding paragraph) is that when Rome stops preserving the tradition, the 'faithful everywhere' should stop agreeing with it.

Which is, in fact, the modus operandi of the Fathers. When Rome taught the truth, agree with it and fulsomely praise it. When Rome stepped beyond the Apostolic tradition, disagree with it.
Logged

Ariel Starling - New album

For it were better to suffer everything, rather than divide the Church of God. Even martyrdom for the sake of preventing division would not be less glorious than for refusing to worship idols. - St. Dionysius the Great
Inquisitor
Warned
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 94


« Reply #194 on: December 13, 2011, 07:20:29 PM »

Quote
it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its preeminent authority, that is, the faithful everywhere, inasmuch as the tradition has been preserved continuously by those [faithful men] who exist everywhere
Because Rome was the stalwart of the time for Orthodoxy, used as a benchmark, not because it was simply the Church of Rome.

PP

Because all heresies came form east, in his timelife gnosticism, and after his dead, Arianism, Nestorianism, etc.
All the Orthodoxy, including himself, came from the East as well, and after his death, Pope St. Athanasius, Pope St. Cyril, etc.

Don't be bashful: the West had its Donatists, Pelagians, etc.

Orthodoxy comes from the apostles, the most important of whom are in Rome. The west.
Logged
Inquisitor
Warned
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 94


« Reply #195 on: December 13, 2011, 07:23:21 PM »

...
« Last Edit: December 13, 2011, 07:24:42 PM by Inquisitor » Logged
Inquisitor
Warned
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 94


« Reply #196 on: December 13, 2011, 07:24:23 PM »

Quote
it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its preeminent authority, that is, the faithful everywhere, inasmuch as the tradition has been preserved continuously by those [faithful men] who exist everywhere
Because Rome was the stalwart of the time for Orthodoxy, used as a benchmark, not because it was simply the Church of Rome.

PP

Because all heresies came form east, in his timelife gnosticism, and after his dead, Arianism, Nestorianism, etc.

There was no other big game in town in the west, so the heresy thing is not surprising. Rome was known for its Orthodoxy. Unfortunately, as there was no other church in the west to keep them in check, the hat size got big and well......

PP

What about Hippo?
It was the capital of the Arian Vandals.  New Rome conquored it and restored it to Orthodoxy.
the question was to answer thother question, your answer makes no point
Logged
Inquisitor
Warned
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 94


« Reply #197 on: December 13, 2011, 07:26:51 PM »

I know Saint Ignatius didn't speak of the Church Of Rome as the center of catholicism, however other saints of the same century of him did.

from Saint Ignatius we can see that he never called himself "Patriarch", he describes Bishops, Presbiters and Deacons. but not nationalistic patriarchs.
Doesn't say a thing about "supreme pontiffs," "popes" or even bishops of Rome either.

From the Epistle of Ignatius to the Smyrnaeans:

See that you all follow the bishop, even as Jesus Christ does the Father, and the presbytery as you would the apostles; and reverence the deacons, as being the institution of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper Eucharist, which is [administered] either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude [of the people] also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church. It is not lawful without the bishop either to baptize or to celebrate a love-feast; but whatsoever he shall approve of, that is also pleasing to God, so that everything that is done may be secure and valid.



Now ¿where can we read or guess the idea of a patriarchs of national churches?
Where can we read or guess the idea of a pope as supreme pontiff?


What about petrine supremacy in Saint John Chrisostome?
Logged
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,365


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #198 on: December 13, 2011, 07:39:50 PM »

Inquisitor,
I suggest toning it down a bit. From your posts so far, it just looks like you are trying to stir the pot. If I have misunderstood you, then I am sorry. However, this is what it looks like.
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
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 #199 on: December 15, 2011, 01:37:47 PM »

I know Saint Ignatius didn't speak of the Church Of Rome as the center of catholicism, however other saints of the same century of him did.

from Saint Ignatius we can see that he never called himself "Patriarch", he describes Bishops, Presbiters and Deacons. but not nationalistic patriarchs.
Doesn't say a thing about "supreme pontiffs," "popes" or even bishops of Rome either.

From the Epistle of Ignatius to the Smyrnaeans:

See that you all follow the bishop, even as Jesus Christ does the Father, and the presbytery as you would the apostles; and reverence the deacons, as being the institution of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper Eucharist, which is [administered] either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude [of the people] also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church. It is not lawful without the bishop either to baptize or to celebrate a love-feast; but whatsoever he shall approve of, that is also pleasing to God, so that everything that is done may be secure and valid.



Now ¿where can we read or guess the idea of a patriarchs of national churches?
Where can we read or guess the idea of a pope as supreme pontiff?


What about petrine supremacy in Saint John Chrisostome?
You mean Antioch, receiving ordination from Pat. St. Meletios of Antioch when Rome condemned him and supported as the "Patriarch of Antioch" Paulinus, which Paulinus ordained St. Jerome and whom none of the Vatican's "patriarchs of Antioch" claim as a predecessor, claiming St. Meletios instead?

Btw, you didn't answer the question "Where can we read or guess the idea of a pope as supreme pontiff?" PM or send email if you can answer that.
« Last Edit: December 15, 2011, 01:39:01 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
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,487


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #200 on: December 15, 2011, 02:05:15 PM »

I think he got banned due to multiple accounts, so he won't be answering anything, at least not as Inquisitor.
« Last Edit: December 15, 2011, 02:05:43 PM by Schultz » Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
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 #201 on: December 15, 2011, 02:40:31 PM »

I think he got banned due to multiple accounts, so he won't be answering anything, at least not as Inquisitor.
Are all his personas banned?  I had first thought he was our old friend Alonso Castillo "the happy catholic," but maybe not.

I've gotten PMs from the banned before.
« Last Edit: December 15, 2011, 02:41:20 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
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,594


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #202 on: December 15, 2011, 02:41:58 PM »

I think he got banned due to multiple accounts, so he won't be answering anything, at least not as Inquisitor.
Are all his personas banned?  I had first thought he was our old friend Alonso Castillo "the happy catholic," but maybe not.

I've gotten PMs from the banned before.
I thought he was a sock puppet for a currently posting RC. No names, but I have an idea.

PP
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
Wieliczkowski
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6


« Reply #203 on: May 14, 2012, 04:27:14 AM »

He's a saint in the Eastern Orthodox Church. As far as I know, Roman Catholics do not consider him a saint.

yes I know. I just can't find his sainthood.

"There is nothing wrong with venerating Patriarch Photius I the Great of Constantinople as a saint, or else Rome would not have expressly permitted his veneration by Greek Byzantine Catholics every February 6 (see the Byzantine Menaion). We must trust the judgments of the Magisterium and preach the reasons why they are prudent and right. "
http://thebananarepublican.blogspot.fr/2008/07/sainthood-of-photius-great-of.html

Your Magisterium does, too bad  Grin
Logged
Wieliczkowski
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6


« Reply #204 on: May 14, 2012, 04:36:54 AM »

Where are his merits. he divided the church of the east from the Catholic Church and from him the nationalistic pride of east grew.

He preserved the Catholic Church from falling into heresy.

What heresy? Filioque, yet you proclaim that Saint Agustine is a Saint, don't you?

We don't glorify saints solely based on their Dogmatic Theology test scores.

Well that is why we can undestand palamas as a saint among of you. another schismatic.

I guess you will soon call your magisterium an heretical and schismatic office:

"Frs. Alphonse Raes, S.J., Georges Gharib, and Olivier Raquez, O.S.B. were in charge of inserting the service to St. Gregory Palamas into the Greek Anthologion.{3} The service in the book published by a Roman dicastery with the Vatican's approval is to be found in Anthologion, vol. II, Sacred Oriental Congregation, Rome 1974, pp. 1607-1616"
"Most Rev. +Basil H. Losten, Eparch of Stamford. Our Paschal Pilgrimage: On the Journey of the Great Fast. Eastern Christian Publications, 1996. p. 43. "
http://thebananarepublican.blogspot.fr/2010/06/catholic-cult-of-st-gregory-palamas.html

 Cheesy
Logged
Tags: filioque 
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5  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 0.134 seconds with 53 queries.