Did the Orthodox Churches ever submit to the Pope's Authority?

[joe370]

Right smack in middle of the bull’s eye! With Orthodox laity in the mix, there will never, ever be a reunion of our two Churches.

Sadly, I agree.

 

[brb3]

Right smack in middle of the bull’s eye! With Orthodox laity in the mix, there will never, ever be a reunion of our two Churches.

So, the Eastern Patriarchs see the matter correctly, Peter’s Primacy, but, their flocks will not accept ?
Then, they and we Western Catholics have the solemn responsibility to advise, educate, and encourage them to give up the fight & accept unification !

 

[dzheremi]

Understood. Since you seem to know, perhaps you could share with me a reliable source regarding the context of the dialogue between Leo and Dioscoros? Thanks.

You seem pretty knowledgeable so I thought I would ask: prior to the east - west schism, is there any evidence showing that the Eastern Churches (patriarchate), via letter, expected the leaders of Rome (patriarchate) to conform its practices to theirs?

I normally wouldn’t link to another site to answer this kind of question, but since it is the first result on Google and I need to leave soon, the text of the letter, and speculations surrounding its context (i.e., what would’ve prompted Pope Leo to write such a letter to begin with) can be found on this Orthodox message board, along with discussion of what it might mean. I agree with the poster who says that it might be that Leo simply thought that Dioscoros and Alexandria should conform their practices to the Roman way because it was what he thought was right (in other words, I wouldn’t assume malicious intent), but still, the fact of the matter is that the letter was ignored. Alexandria did not do as Leo had suggested. Also interesting is the comment by user “Mina Soliman”, with supporting documentation, that Dionysus of Alexandria was the arbiter in a conflict between St. Cyprian and the Roman Pope in his day. Hmm.

As to your second question, I don’t know. I haven’t seen any evidence of that. I don’t know why they’d want to, just like I don’t really know why Pope Leo saw fit to write the letter in the first place (the text of the letter doesn’t explain why, either). As I wrote before, the practice of the Roman Pope asserting prerogatives over Sees outside of his own is rather old…but my point in bringing up the letter from Pope Leo to HH Pope St. Dioscoros is that the practice of ignoring or otherwise resisting such overreaching is likewise ancient.

 

[joe370]

I normally wouldn’t link to another site to answer this kind of question, but since it is the first result on Google and I need to leave soon, the text of the letter, and speculations surrounding its context (i.e., what would’ve prompted Pope Leo to write such a letter to begin with) can be found on this Orthodox message board, along with discussion of what it might mean. I agree with the poster who says that it might be that Leo simply thought that Dioscoros and Alexandria should conform their practices to the Roman way because it was what he thought was right (in other words, I wouldn’t assume malicious intent), but still, the fact of the matter is that the letter was ignored. Alexandria did not do as Leo had suggested. Also interesting is the comment by user “Mina Soliman”, with supporting documentation, that Dionysus of Alexandria was the arbiter in a conflict between St. Cyprian and the Roman Pope in his day. Hmm.

As to your second question, I don’t know. I haven’t seen any evidence of that. I don’t know why they’d want to, just like I don’t really know why Pope Leo saw fit to write the letter in the first place (the text of the letter doesn’t explain why, either). As I wrote before, the practice of the Roman Pope asserting prerogatives over Sees outside of his own is rather old…but my point in bringing up the letter from Pope Leo to HH Pope St. Dioscoros is that the practice of ignoring or otherwise resisting such overreaching is likewise ancient.

I will check it out.

It sounds like what you are suggesting is that each ancient See was autonomous, perhaps?

 

[joe370]

I agree with the poster who says that it might be that Leo simply thought that Dioscoros and Alexandria should conform their practices to the Roman way because it was what he thought was right (in other words, I wouldn’t assume malicious intent), but still, the fact of the matter is that the letter was ignored. Alexandria did not do as Leo had suggested.

Dioscorus of Alexandria was deposed by the Council of Chalcedon in 451 due to violations of canon law rather than heresy - correct? If so then why does it matter that he ingnored the letter? When you say, Alexandria ignored the letter, are you referring to Dioscorus, as a representative of Alexandria?

 

[Maron_Ignatius]

I agree that the Holy Father to have this sort of position within the whole Church. However I don’t see this position as in the same manner of military but in service. Jesus stated the greatest of you must be the one who serves. He said this because even though He is the acting “admiral” He is the one who acts more as the one who serves that is He is willing to take “commands and orders” to serve better. This is my opinion of what the Office and Ministry of St. Peter upholds. It is therefore a ministry of service. That is what I believe the Eastern Orthodox will accept. And it may be coming to that. Definations and opinions are getting to that time when the Pope’s ministry will be more defined and acceptable to all the Church. Patience must be there for more understanding men and women to be able to arrive to the Pastoral authority which the Pope can give. It is coming.

I think we just found a lot of common ground! When giving my opinion on the Pope as the head of the Church, I was explaining my view as to the structure of the Pope’s position.
I want to express that I view the Ministry of all bishops and especially the Holy Father,
as the head of the Church, as one of service as you said. And I agree with you, much more patience is needed, it is imperative to our churches reconciling and unifying.

I also feel that the laity on both sides need to be more understanding of each others churches.

 

[joe370]

I think we just found a lot of common ground! When giving my opinion on the Pope as the head of the Church, I was explaining my view as to the structure of the Pope’s position.
I want to express that I view the Ministry of all bishops and especially the Holy Father,
as the head of the Church, as one of service as you said. And I agree with you, much more patience is needed, it is imperative to our churches reconciling and unifying.

I also feel that the laity on both sides need to be more understanding of each others churches.

 

[chimo]

Right smack in middle of the bull’s eye! With Orthodox laity in the mix, there will never, ever be a reunion of our two Churches.

It depends on what is meant by unity. It seems to me we are going about it the wrong way. From this perspective it may be telling us there is another route to discover and take. I do not believe the course of actions from the past 1000 years have been any friutful at all. In only recent times have a real discussion to what is needed have pointed to a real attempt towards understanding who each other is and to what each other believes. Understandings must come forth first before any real unity to exist. In fact the real cause of our disunity is nothing more than our own ignorance. We do not know each other. Plain and simple.

It is by getting to know each other that will bring down the divisons of discord and mutual misunderstanding. Since our Bishops have proven their weakness in bringing out this unity in a way approved by everyone and of God then it must point out to the laity to step in and carry this through. It will be the Laity who will bring out this because the Bishops have terriblied failed us. God showing their weakness in carrying out what is good and beneficial for His Church wants the Laity to step in. This however will take time because the Laity are now just coming into their own. Once the younger generation will be able to discern what each Church can teach to it then this possible unity will no longer be a problem. God has willed the Laity to be the motivating force to bring this about because history has shown that Bishops cannot do this.

Everything works in God’s time. More and more of the younger generation will come and enter into this direction and once our generation goes the next one will find it less difficult to engage into a unified relationship. Ignorance will be replaced by knowledgable people who will know both teachings of East and West. It is just simply we know our own but we do not know the other. If you do not want to know the other then who is to blame for this ignorance. God is waiting for us the Laity to take charge and learn what the other can teach and give to us and once this discovering is over than there is nothing else to prevent us embracing each other. We are only at the beginning stage of this discovery. The Pope and the Patriarchs need our help for God I believe has willed this will come that is our unity when the Laity will come into the field. He does not want this unity without our help. He wants us to be included alongside His Bishops.

 

[GaryTaylor]

“Consequently, we have given this letter to our son Possidonius, a presbyter, on his return, that he may bear it to you, brother; he has so often taken part in our ceremonials and ordinations, and has been sent to us [so many times that he knows quite well what Apostolic authority we possess in all things]”.

Short of the long is if indeed Cyril used a monophysite term he was Orthodox in heart and mind. Dioscurus was fully monophysite. Course he succeeded Cyril.

Philip Schaff, evangelical. I use Jurgens, Catholic

In that the letter wasn’t responded to, I don’t how much can be read into that. I seen the Eastern sights and the forum above, read them. The last sentence quoted above certainly shows Leos state of mind though.

 

[GaryTaylor]

It depends on what is meant by unity. It seems to me we are going about it the wrong way. From this perspective it may be telling us there is another route to discover and take. I do not believe the course of actions from the past 1000 years have been any friutful at all. In only recent times have a real discussion to what is needed have pointed to a real attempt towards understanding who each other is and to what each other believes. Understandings must come forth first before any real unity to exist. In fact the real cause of our disunity is nothing more than our own ignorance. We do not know each other. Plain and simple.

It is by getting to know each other that will bring down the divisons of discord and mutual misunderstanding. Since our Bishops have proven their weakness in bringing out this unity in a way approved by everyone and of God then it must point out to the laity to step in and carry this through. It will be the Laity who will bring out this because the Bishops have terriblied failed us. God showing their weakness in carrying out what is good and beneficial for His Church wants the Laity to step in. This however will take time because the Laity are now just coming into their own. Once the younger generation will be able to discern what each Church can teach to it then this possible unity will no longer be a problem. God has willed the Laity to be the motivating force to bring this about because history has shown that Bishops cannot do this.

Everything works in God’s time. More and more of the younger generation will come and enter into this direction and once our generation goes the next one will find it less difficult to engage into a unified relationship. Ignorance will be replaced by knowledgable people who will know both teachings of East and West. It is just simply we know our own but we do not know the other. If you do not want to know the other then who is to blame for this ignorance. God is waiting for us the Laity to take charge and learn what the other can teach and give to us and once this discovering is over than there is nothing else to prevent us embracing each other. We are only at the beginning stage of this discovery. The Pope and the Patriarchs need our help for God I believe has willed this will come that is our unity when the Laity will come into the field. He does not want this unity without our help. He wants us to be included alongside His Bishops.

Right the Church works from inside and out. We have to be able to view this with an open mind. Which by large I believe is happening. Just a fact of life, if you and I watch a ballgame, you’ll see aspects I didn’t see, and visa-versa.

In fact Pope Benedict was asked about the Unity of the Church and his response was that the only aspect missing was for each other to grow in understanding and love.

 

[BVMFatima]

Right the Church works from inside and out. We have to be able to view this with an open mind. Which by large I believe is happening. Just a fact of life, if you and I watch a ballgame, you’ll see aspects I didn’t see, and visa-versa.

In fact Pope Benedict was asked about the Unity of the Church and his response was that the only aspect missing was for each other to grow in understanding and love.

I agree, I believe we should focus on what we as Catholics have in common with the Eastern Orthodox Church than our differences.

 

[BVMFatima]

The church should focus on having times we can pray and worship together with the Orthodox, it would be like unity in a sense.

 

[steve_b]

Yes, I saw ConstantineTG’s post. But I would point out that he didn’t say “No Eastern Church has ever submitted to Rome’s administration.” (If he had said that, then what would be in order is not so much a response but rather a good slap to bring him to his senses. )

actually he invited someone to prove the following

" no one has ever proven that the Eastern Churches ever submitted to Rome’s administration. "

So I showed that one of them did.

 

[dzheremi]

Dioscorus of Alexandria was deposed by the Council of Chalcedon in 451 due to violations of canon law rather than heresy - correct? If so then why does it matter that he ingnored the letter?

I’m not sure what you’re getting at here. The letter was written 445, several years before Chalcedon/the deposition of St. Dioscoros. HH Pope Dioscoros was still recognized by everyone as the sole legitimate patriarch of Alexandria at that time, having become Pope one year earlier in 444.

When you say, Alexandria ignored the letter, are you referring to Dioscorus, as a representative of Alexandria?

Yes, as it was to St. Dioscoros that the letter was written. The opening salutation reads “Leo, the bishop, to Dioscorus, bishop of Alexandria, greeting”.

 

[steve_b]

It seems that on this thread, the Orthodox say no and the Catholics say yes. Just want to say: I’ve seen a lot of evidence by the Catholics on this thread that shows that yes the Orthodox acknowledge the Pope’s Authority at one point, people just don’t want to acknowledge that evidence - I am seeing that the people on this thread both Catholics and Orthodox agree on that the Church was once united. So lets tackle one issue I am seeing pop up, who left who? The Catholics are saying the Orthodox left and the Orthodox are saying the Catholics left. Here is what I am saying: Sadly we separated from each other because of groups on both sides.

Another thing I want to give my opinion on is the Pope and how I view him as the Head of the Church. - For any of those who were in the military, are from military families or familiar with the military will more than likely understand this. - In the military you will have people of the same rank but have a different position that puts them above another person of the same rank for example: You can have 3 four star Generals, one is in charge of intel, the other logistics and the other in charge of both. You render the same honor to all three(Salute, call them Sir and so on) but one has more responsibilities and will have special honor shown to him. My view of the is kinda like that, the Pope is a bishop in charge of bishops. Also the Orthodox acknowledge the Pope as a first among equals but only in honor not jurisdiction.

Just my :twocents:

A former poster here who is an Orthodox priest said the following

Re: 1st among equals" forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=1587677&postcount=129

Re:: “only in honor not in jurisdiction”, that sounds like the EO system.

 

[Maron_Ignatius]

A former poster here who is an Orthodox priest said the following

Re: 1st among equals" forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=1587677&postcount=129

Re:: “only in honor not in jurisdiction”, that sounds like the EO system.

For the first Re:Here is what I’ve read and heard by Orthodoxy, at least Eastern:

catholicnewsagency.com/news/orthodox_recognize_pope_first_among_equals_disagreements_remain/

antiochian.org/node/17076

oca.org/questions/romancatholicism/the-pope-christian-unity

For the second re: Yeah, I gave brief explanation on what the EO system believes - or what I’ve heard at least. That is why I said “Also the Orthodox acknowledge the Pope as a first among equals but only in honor not jurisdiction.”

 

[chimo]

I think we just found a lot of common ground! When giving my opinion on the Pope as the head of the Church, I was explaining my view as to the structure of the Pope’s position.
I want to express that I view the Ministry of all bishops and especially the Holy Father,
as the head of the Church, as one of service as you said. And I agree with you, much more patience is needed, it is imperative to our churches reconciling and unifying.

I also feel that the laity on both sides need to be more understanding of each others churches.

Yes it is so true. I believe we are heading towards that and I kind of look at our past as part of our “growing up” experiences and growing up can involve pain and misunderstood feelings. May be it was good we had to expeience this. When we give to God our pain so does He envelope us with His Peace. So to in time will the Churches exercise this principal and understand that Our Lord is ever so patient, ever so understanding waiting for our own maturity to be developed and shown for its worth.

 

[dcointin]

As an Eastern Orthodox I can offer some very general thoughts on this subject.

I have no disagreement with the Bishop of Rome having primacy among the bishops. Where I would disagree is that this would entail jurisdictional authority over the eastern churches. I would limit that authority to the right to ratify ecumenical councils, hear appeals, and serve as a spokesman (I would be open to discussing others). I would have to strongly disagree that he has the rights traditionally enumerated by Catholics as in the following article:

newadvent.org/cathen/12260a.htm#IV

The devil is in the details as they say.

 

[dzheremi]

Dioscurus was fully monophysite.

That’s funny, because that’s not why he was deposed at Chalcedon.

The last sentence quoted above certainly shows Leos state of mind though.

Echoing Schism Hater’s post a while ago, it is no great matter that a Roman Pope should say such things. Given the context of the discussion in this thread, it is extremely unwise to disregard the Alexandrian bishops (both OO and EO), and I think the fact that they were not, either before or after the letter, “like Rome in all things” says a lot more than the wishful prose of Leo. Sure, he (or anyone) can write whatever he wants, but if he is ignored, and the Eastern patriarchates continue on as before, then I really don’t see how the fact that he wrote it (whether 1600 years ago or 6 weeks ago) is proof of anything at all.

 

[Paul_theApostle]

So, the Eastern Patriarchs see the matter correctly, Peter’s Primacy, but, their flocks will not accept ?

I dont think they accept his Supremacy but many of the EO flock have broken communion with Constantinople and the other Patriarchates over the last century because of the Ecumenical endevours of the Patriarchs and the desire to work towards union and better relations with Rome.

They create “Traditional” Orthodox groups ,they re’confirm and re’baptise sometimes newcomers from the Patriarchates who leave because they believe there is apostasy happening