Honorius the Heretic

  • Thread starter Thread starter SiempreFiel
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
ASimpleSinner said:
Before being definatively defined, it isn’t problematic.

Can any four Orthodox bishops ever be found to be in error?

Were their orthodox parties (saints no less) that sided with error before it was condemed as such in the first councils?
Click to expand...
I’m not sure what you are refering to in the last paragraph.

As for bishops in error: yes it is possible. But then we don’t have this much vaunted unity, i.e. conformity, and a centralized head, now do we? Your magisterium missed what your pope would, 17 yearsm, later promulgate as a dogma, as a “Protestant Invention.”
 
Isa_Almisry said:
I’m not sure what you are refering to in the last paragraph.

As for bishops in error: yes it is possible. But then we don’t have this much vaunted unity, i.e. conformity, and a centralized head, now do we? Your magisterium missed what your pope would, 17 yearsm, later promulgate as a dogma, as a “Protestant Invention.”
Click to expand...
Isa what I am referring to in the last paraprah is simply that before a concilar definition even in the early church it may well have been possible to find four bishops who were never censured for espousing error before that error was formerly defined as such.

(Incidentally, we are talking about a supposed text that I would actually like to see - so far we have second hand reference to writings from 1854 that haven’t been shown, by four bishops.)

To give weight to the opinions of four bishops supposedly writing this before the council as though it were daming evidence that should cause us to say “a-ha! proof positive this is an innovation no one saw coming” is specious reasoning at the very best.

When you offer “But then we don’t have this much vaunted unity, i.e. conformity, and a centralized head, now do we? Your magisterium missed what your pope would, 17 yearsm, later promulgate as a dogma, as a ‘Protestant Invention.’” I find that an essentially flawed red herring at a number of levels:


  1. *]It seems to imply that the Vatican - in the much beloved image presented by Chic tracks - had an army of persons reviewing all texts at all times
    *]That our “vaunted unity” would work perfectly always and everywhere to suppress such writings… when in fact if these bishops (who supposedly wrote this unsourced unshown text) lived another 17 years, their error would have been roundly demonstrated in the teachings of the council
    *]One is left to wonder if you are of the thinking that even under the concilar autocephalous polyarchy model you vaunt it would be impossible at any time for four bishops to be in error before a concilor definition is pronounced. Should the day come when the much heralded '8th Ecumenical Council of Orthodoxy" occurs and so much of the contradistinction popularly taught or percieved is made official, there will be any number of bishops from Constantinople to Kiev who have made positve assessments of things more commonly objected to now (the scholasticism and devotion to the Immaculate Conception of St. Isadore of Kiev comes immediately to mind) back mining for those who taught that which contradicted something before a definition is not terribly hard

    But having put the cart FAR before the horse on this one already, I would rather like to see the source of these claims and examine them a bit more.
 
SiempreFiel said:
:rotfl:

You shouldn’t forget! What does my Profile say? Archidioecesis Chicagoensis! 🙂
Click to expand...
Yes, but I’m always paying attention to the signature.

Btw, because of you I had to go to Giordano’s and get a stuffed pepperoni (Last weekend, stock up now) onion and black olive.
 
Can a council alter what another council has said? Can a council teach something in error?
 
I see none of our EO posters have been able to respond to or refute the “positive proof” I gave. Thank you brothers. Your silence is a blessing. Now I only request that you not repeat your misconceptions about the papacy elsewhere.

Blessings,
Marduk
 
mardukm said:
I see none of our EO posters have been able to respond to or refute the “positive proof” I gave. Thank you brothers. Your silence is a blessing. Now I only request that you not repeat your misconceptions about the papacy elsewhere.

Blessings,
Marduk
Click to expand...
What silence? they’ve been answered, which is why this thread has been buried.

~B~U~M~P~
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top