Are they infallible?

[w_stewart]

Are the Orthodox Churches still infallible when:

1. they rejected the doctrine of papal infallibility and supremacy?
2. they rejected the doctrine of purgatory?
3. they opposed the doctrine of Immaculate Conception?

 

[dosdog]

Are the Orthodox Churches still infallible when:

1. they rejected the doctrine of papal infallibility and supremacy?
2. they rejected the doctrine of purgatory?
3. they opposed the doctrine of Immaculate Conception?

Short answer “NO” - are sure you are not talking about 99% of American Churches?

 

[Mickey]

1. they rejected the doctrine of papal infallibility and supremacy?
2. they rejected the doctrine of purgatory?
3. they opposed the doctrine of Immaculate Conception?

P. Infallibility, IC, and purgatory are Latin Catholic post schism innovations.

 

[scylla]

P. Infallibility, IC, and purgatory are Latin Catholic post schism innovations

So is that an infallible statement?
If you can claim it is you accept infallibility, if it isn’t then you have conceded the claim.

Either way everyone must accept infallibility as necessary for Christianity. They just might not accept certain positions held, but every branch of Christianity that rejects infallibility rejects the necessity of truth for Salvation.

If you have any objections to this post feel free to respond, but no Christian can reject infallibility without rejecting that truth is necessary for Salvation or without insulting Christ.

God Bless
Scylla

 

[Mickey]

P. Infallibility, IC, and purgatory are Latin Catholic post schism innovations.

So is that an infallible statement?

No. It is an unfortunate part of Church history.

 

[scylla]

No. It is an unfortunate part of Church history.

I am not sure I understood you right, is your assertion that infallibility is an innovation an infallible statment on your part?

Scylla

 

[Mickey]

I am not sure I understood you right

I will attempt to clarify for you.

Papal Infallibility was not known in the early undivided Church of the first millennium. The councils knew nothing of it, nor did the early Church Fathers. It was a doctrine which was promulgated and championed by the Ultramontanists of post schism Rome. It was rejected by the Latin Catholic councils of Constance and Basel. Finally, it was defined by Pius IX in 1870 at the first Vatican council amongst considerable opposition. It has widened the schism between East and West ever since.

You can continue to respond with sarcasm and accuse me of attempting to be infallible if that is your retort of choice.

May our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ bless you abundantly.

 

[scylla]

I will attempt to clarify for you.

Papal Infallibility was not known in the early undivided Church of the first millennium. The councils knew nothing of it, nor did the early Church Fathers. It was a doctrine which was promulgated and championed by the Ultramontanists of post schism Rome. It was rejected by the Latin Catholic councils of Constance and Basel. Finally, it was defined by Pius IX in 1870 at the first Vatican council amongst considerable opposition. It has widened the schism between East and West ever since.

You can continue to respond with sarcasm and accuse me of attempting to be infallible if that is your retort of choice.

May our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ bless you abundantly.

I am not using sarcasm at all, infallibility is tied directly to the notion that truth exists and can be known. As such I can affirm that certain parts of our faith can be infallibly defined.

You do not have to answer my question if you do not want to as it will start to prove my point.

My question again is, is your statement an infallible one. I am not talking about the various details which we can discuss if they are worthy of discussion. I am talking about your assertion that infallibility is an innovation. Is that an infallible statement?

I am not being sarcastic, this is an honest question and is directly related to the need for truth in Christianity.

God Bless
Scylla

 

[Mickey]

I am talking about your assertion that infallibility is an innovation.

And once again, here is my answer. Papal infallibility is an innovation of the post schism Latin Church. That is Church history.

 

[ralphinal]

Would it not be fair to say that the Orthodox accept infallibilty from those first Church councils that we both recognize?

 

[Mickey]

Would it not be fair to say that the Orthodox accept infallibilty from those first Church councils that we both recognize?

THE ECUMENICAL CHARACTER OF THE ORTHODOX CHURCH

The Orthodox Church maintains undefiled the dogmas of teaching and the rules of administration formulated and taught by the Synods of the One Undivided Ecumenical Church of the first millennium of the Christian era. The Orthodox Church continuously and without interruption is the true keeper of the truths of the Undivided Church, without omissions or additions. This Church has never created or added officially any new teaching after the Great Schism of the One Undivided Church. The teachings of this Church are ecumenical in character and in fact. It has introduced no innovations. It does not believe in the primacy of any one leader of the Church, nor in the infallibility of any Church leader. It does not believe in the filioque (“and of the Son”) phrase inserted in the Nicene Creed by the Church in the West, nor in communion by only one element of the Holy Eucharist for the layman. It does not believe in compulsory celibacy of clergymen, purgatory, the immaculate conception of the Virgin Mary, nor in other innovations proclaimed in the West after the separation of the Church. The Orthodox Church continues on the original road, keeping undefiled both the teaching and the type of administration of the venerable, Undivided and Ecumenical Church.

THE SEVEN ECUMENICAL SYNODS

The highest authority for the interpretation and protection of the truths of the Revelation of God and for the preserving of those which were disputed is the Ecumenical Synod, the official council of bishops. The synods were modeled after the gathering of the Apostles who came together to discuss the truths which were disputed at that time (cf. Acts 15:22 ff). The bishops of the One Undivided Church were summoned in synods to discuss and decide on matters of faith as well as rules of discipline; the former are called “oroi” - dogmas, and require unanimous decision, while the latter are called “canons”. The Orthodox Church recognizes the Seven Ecumenical Synods (Councils) of the bishops of the One Undivided Ecumenical Church which took place between the 4th and 8th centuries. This includes decisions and canons of provincial synods, canons of the Apostles and of the Fathers which have been adopted by an Ecumenical Synod. The Seven Ecumenical Synods pronounced various statements of Faith (dogmas) stating Christian Truths in answer to heresies and disputes, and also issued many canons for discipline and administration.
goarch.org/en/ourfaith/articles/article7063.asp

 

[ralphinal]

THE ECUMENICAL CHARACTER OF THE ORTHODOX CHURCH

The Orthodox Church maintains undefiled the dogmas of teaching and the rules of administration formulated and taught by the Synods of the One Undivided Ecumenical Church of the first millennium of the Christian era. The Orthodox Church continuously and without interruption is the true keeper of the truths of the Undivided Church, without omissions or additions. This Church has never created or added officially any new teaching after the Great Schism of the One Undivided Church. The teachings of this Church are ecumenical in character and in fact. It has introduced no innovations. It does not believe in the primacy of any one leader of the Church, nor in the infallibility of any Church leader. It does not believe in the filioque (“and of the Son”) phrase inserted in the Nicene Creed by the Church in the West, nor in communion by only one element of the Holy Eucharist for the layman. It does not believe in compulsory celibacy of clergymen, purgatory, the immaculate conception of the Virgin Mary, nor in other innovations proclaimed in the West after the separation of the Church. The Orthodox Church continues on the original road, keeping undefiled both the teaching and the type of administration of the venerable, Undivided and Ecumenical Church.
THE SEVEN ECUMENICAL SYNODS

The highest authority for the interpretation and protection of the truths of the Revelation of God and for the preserving of those which were disputed is the Ecumenical Synod, the official council of bishops. The synods were modeled after the gathering of the Apostles who came together to discuss the truths which were disputed at that time (cf. Acts 15:22 ff). The bishops of the One Undivided Church were summoned in synods to discuss and decide on matters of faith as well as rules of discipline; the former are called “oroi” - dogmas, and require unanimous decision, while the latter are called “canons”. The Orthodox Church recognizes the Seven Ecumenical Synods (Councils) of the bishops of the One Undivided Ecumenical Church which took place between the 4th and 8th centuries. This includes decisions and canons of provincial synods, canons of the Apostles and of the Fathers which have been adopted by an Ecumenical Synod. The Seven Ecumenical Synods pronounced various statements of Faith (dogmas) stating Christian Truths in answer to heresies and disputes, and also issued many canons for discipline and administration.
goarch.org/en/ourfaith/articles/article7063.asp

I will take that as a yes. Those first seven Ecumenical Synods produced dogmas which cannot be wrong.

This is not the same as what seems to be the intent of the op. Orthodox do accept the concept of the infallible Church. They do not accept the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church that the Pope has a special protection of the Holy Spirit.

Is that correct Micky?

 

[Mickey]

I will take that as a yes. Those first seven Ecumenical Synods produced dogmas which cannot be wrong.

This is not the same as what seems to be the intent of the op. Orthodox do accept the concept of the infallible Church. They do not accept the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church that the Pope has a special protection of the Holy Spirit.

Is that correct Micky?

As my friend Hesychios once stated:
"It must be proven that Popes in the undivided Church were able to establish dogmas apart from a council."

 

[ralphinal]

As my friend Hesychios once stated:
"It must be proven that Popes in the undivided Church were able to establish dogmas apart from a council."

Ah, you have jumped ahead of my line of thought. We can say that you accept infallibilty in the form of Ecuminical Councils. So, yes, there is the concept of infallibilty in the E.O. Church. We also accept that concept of infallibilty. Now, as to the specific question of papal infallibilty, it is another issue.

Not to derail the thread, what is the issue with purgatory? I thought that the E.O. accepted purgatory as a part of the deposit of faith.

 

[wisdomseeker]

I will attempt to clarify for you.

Papal Infallibility was not known in the early undivided Church of the first millennium. The councils knew nothing of it, nor did the early Church Fathers. It was a doctrine which was promulgated and championed by the Ultramontanists of post schism Rome. It was rejected by the Latin Catholic councils of Constance and Basel. Finally, it was defined by Pius IX in 1870 at the first Vatican council amongst considerable opposition. It has widened the schism between East and West ever since.

You can continue to respond with sarcasm and accuse me of attempting to be infallible if that is your retort of choice.

May our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ bless you abundantly.

Infallibility! who holds infallibility? the one who denies or the one who affirms? this is the question.

 

[Mickey]

I thought that the E.O. accepted purgatory as a part of the deposit of faith.

Greetings my brother in Christ:

No they do not accept purgatory.
We pray for the dead, but we leave it at that. There is no speculation about an intermediate place.

 

[ralphinal]

Greetings my brother in Christ:

No they do not accept purgatory.
We pray for the dead, but we leave it at that. There is no speculation about an intermediate place.

Then I have been misinformed. I was under the impression that there was an understanding of a place (or period) of purgation for those who were not guilty of mortal sin. Some of the understanding of that place was different than RC, but there is the understanding.

 

[Mickey]

Then I have been misinformed. I was under the impression that there was an understanding of a place (or period) of purgation for those who were not guilty of mortal sin. Some of the understanding of that place was different than RC, but there is the understanding.

You may have been informed about a theological speculation called “tollhouses” which is bounced around in some circles. It is not dogma. I suppose it could be compared to the Latin Church’s one time speculation on limbo. But purgatory is not accepted by Holy Orthodoxy.

 

[anthony022071]

Mickey:

Papal Infallibility was not known in the early undivided Church of the first millennium. The councils knew nothing of it, nor did the early Church Fathers.

Ignatius of Antioch,Letter to the Romans:
…who are filled inseparably with the grace of God, and are purified from every strange taint

, * abundance of happiness unblameably, in Jesus Christ our God.

Cyprian of Carthage:
“Would heretics dare to come to the very seat of Peter whence apostolic faith is derived and whither no errors can come” (Epistulae 59 (55), 14, [256 A.D.]).

Pope Sixtus III
…“all know that to assent to [the Bishop of Rome’s] decision is to assent to St. Peter, who lives in his successors and whose faith fails not.”

St. Peter Chrysologus (449 A.D.):
“We exhort you in every respect, honorable brother, to heed obediently what has been written by the most blessed pope in the city of Rome, for blessed Peter, who lives and presides in his own see, provides the true faith* to those who seek it. For we … cannot try cases on the faith without the consent of the bishop of Rome.”

St. Fulgentius of Ruspe (A.D. 465-533):
“That which the Roman Church, which has the loftiest place on the earth, teaches and holds, so does the whole Christian world believe without hesitation for their justification, and does not delay to confess for their salvation”
(Letter 17, 21, A.D. 519).

Signatories of the “Formula of Hormisdas” (519 AD) to restore union after the Acacian Schism (484 AD):
“[We agree that] in the Apostolic See the Catholic Religion is always kept immaculate. . . . We receive and approve all the letters of the blessed Pope Leo . . . and, as we have said, we follow the Apostolic See in everything and teach all its laws. Therefore, I hope that I may deserve to be with you [Pope Hormisdas] in that one Communion taught by the Apostolic See, in which Communion is the whole, real and perfect solidity of the Christian Religion. And I promise that in the future I will not say in the holy Mysteries the names of those who are banished from the Communion of the Catholic Church, that is, who do not agree with the Apostolic See.”

Theodore the Studite:
“I witness now before God and men, they [the Iconoclasts] have torn themselves away from the Body of Christ, from the Supreme See [Rome], in which Christ placed the keys of the Faith, against which the gates of hell (I mean the mouth of heretics) have not prevailed, and never will until the Consummation, according to the promise of Him Who cannot lie. Let the blessed and Apostolic Paschal [Pope St. Paschal I] rejoice therefore, for he has fulfilled the work of Peter.”
(Theodore Bk. II. Ep. 63).

“…a manifest successor of the prince of the Apostles presides over the Roman Church. We truly believe that Christ has not deserted the Church here [in Constantinople], for assistance from you has been our one and only aid from of old and from the beginning by the providence of God in the critical times. You are, indeed the untroubled and pure fount of orthodoxy from the beginning, you the calm harbor of the whole Church, far removed from the waves of heresy, you the God-chosen city of refuge."
(Letter of St. Theodor & Four Abbots to Pope Paschal).

 

[anthony022071]

Papal Infallibility was not known in the early undivided Church of the first millennium. The councils knew nothing of it, nor did the early Church Fathers.

Ignatius of Antioch,Letter to the Romans:
…who are filled inseparably with the grace of God, and are purified from every strange taint, * abundance of happiness unblameably, in Jesus Christ our God.

Cyprian of Carthage:
“Would heretics dare to come to the very seat of Peter whence apostolic faith is derived and whither no errors can come” (Epistulae 59 (55), 14, [256 A.D.]).

Pope Sixtus III
…“all know that to assent to [the Bishop of Rome’s] decision is to assent to St. Peter, who lives in his successors and whose faith fails not.”

St. Peter Chrysologus (449 A.D.):
“We exhort you in every respect, honorable brother, to heed obediently what has been written by the most blessed pope in the city of Rome, for blessed Peter, who lives and presides in his own see, provides the true faith to those who seek it. For we … cannot try cases on the faith without the consent of the bishop of Rome.”

St. Fulgentius of Ruspe (A.D. 465-533):
“That which the Roman Church, which has the loftiest place on the earth, teaches and holds, so does the whole Christian world believe without hesitation for their justification, and does not delay to confess for their salvation”
(Letter 17, 21, A.D. 519).

Signatories of the “Formula of Hormisdas” (519 AD) to restore union after the Acacian Schism (484 AD):
“[We agree that] in the Apostolic See the Catholic Religion is always kept immaculate. . . . We receive and approve all the letters of the blessed Pope Leo . . . and, as we have said, we follow the Apostolic See in everything and teach all its laws. Therefore, I hope that I may deserve to be with you [Pope Hormisdas] in that one Communion taught by the Apostolic See, in which Communion is the whole, real and perfect solidity of the Christian Religion. And I promise that in the future I will not say in the holy Mysteries the names of those who are banished from the Communion of the Catholic Church, that is, who do not agree with the Apostolic See.”

Theodore the Studite:
“I witness now before God and men, they [the Iconoclasts] have torn themselves away from the Body of Christ, from the Supreme See [Rome], in which Christ placed the keys of the Faith, against which the gates of hell (I mean the mouth of heretics) have not prevailed, and never will until the Consummation, according to the promise of Him Who cannot lie. Let the blessed and Apostolic Paschal [Pope St. Paschal I] rejoice therefore, for he has fulfilled the work of Peter.”
(Theodore Bk. II. Ep. 63).

“…a manifest successor of the prince of the Apostles presides over the Roman Church. We truly believe that Christ has not deserted the Church here [in Constantinople], for assistance from you has been our one and only aid from of old and from the beginning by the providence of God in the critical times. You are, indeed the untroubled and pure fount of orthodoxy from the beginning, you the calm harbor of the whole Church, far removed from the waves of heresy, you the God-chosen city of refuge."
(Letter of St. Theodor & Four Abbots to Pope Paschal).*