Byzantine Catholics, where is this place?

  • Thread starter Thread starter BVMFatima
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Cyrillic said:
Why then did the union collapse within a few years? Why then did most of the Orthodox bishops repudiate the union as soon as they got back?
Click to expand...
I suppose are many answers to those questions Cyrillic. But your questions clearly show there was nothing ¨false¨ about the Union of Florence.
 
Cyrillic said:
Why then did the union collapse within a few years? Why then did most of the Orthodox bishops repudiate the union as soon as they got back?
Click to expand...
The truth is that at the time of the sack of Constantinople that the most if not all present day Byzantine Catholics were in union with Rome. And so was the Emperor, and the Cathedral and its clergy. At the liturgy just before the sack, communion was shared East and West.

The union collapsed in Constantinople only after the sack, when the Sultan appointed Patriarchs of his choosing.
 
dvdjs said:
The truth is that at the time of the sack of Constantinople that the most if not all present day Byzantine Catholics were in union with Rome. And so was the Emperor, and the Cathedral and its clergy. At the liturgy just before the sack, communion was shared East and West.

The union collapsed in Constantinople only after the sack, when the Sultan appointed Patriarchs of his choosing.
Click to expand...
The Orthodox will vehemently deny this, but this is much closer to reality than the standard history that the schism started in AD 1054.
 
WetCatechumen said:
The Orthodox will vehemently deny this, but this is much closer to reality than the standard history that the schism started in AD 1054.
Click to expand...
Since the ecumenical council in 787 A.D. there has never been an ecumenical council agreed upon by both Rome and Constantinople. This means that they could no longer work together as one church. This was long before 1054. The issues over which Constantinople removed the Pope from the diptychs since the Second Council of Nicaea in 787 A.D., that I am aware of, have been:
  • 879 Papal jurisdiction, opposed at the Orthodox recognized Fourth Council of Constantinople (Pope John VIII)
  • 903 anti-pope Christopher used the filioque
  • 1006 Pope John XVIII (1003-9) used the filioque, then the next Pope added it in the creed (Pope Sergius IV 1009-12)
  • 1054 Latin Church replacement of artos with azymes and removal of epiclesis (St. Pope Leo IX)
All of these things were not to be done (even in the Latin Church) according to the Patriarchs of Constantinople.
 
Vico said:
Since the ecumenical council in 787 A.D. there has never been an ecumenical council agreed upon by both Rome and Constantinople. This means that they could no longer work together as one church.
Click to expand...
:confused:
That inference is a bit of a stretch. After all, the EOC has not had a “ecumenical” council since then either. And people have been on and off diptychs within the East as well.
 
dvdjs said:
:confused:
That inference is a bit of a stretch. After all, the EOC has not had a “ecumenical” council since then either. And people have been on and off diptychs within the East as well.
Click to expand...
The ecumenical council of Constantinople in 869–870 was rejected by the Eastern Orthodox Church.
The ecumenical council of Constantinople in 879–880 was rejected by the Catholic Church, and only accepted by some Eastern Orthodox.

Are you thinking of the Old Believers and Patriarch Nikon?

The diptychs have the names of the heads of the autocephalous Orthodox Churches. Can you think of a specific instance of one of these being removed from the diptychs?

Albania
Alexandria
America
Antioch
Bulgaria
Constantinople
Cyprus
Czech Lands and Slovakia
Georgia
Greece
Jerusalem
Poland
Romania
Russia
Serbia
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top