Quite frankly Josie Pope Leo’s supposed “veto” of the 28th canon doesn’t prove much. First of all the rest of the Church continued to behave as thought the canon were in effect, even going so far as to reaffirm it at the Council of Trullo. Even today the canon is still in effect in the Orthodox Church. If it had been vetoed at what point after the schism did we add it back into the canons?
Second, and most importantly, just the fact that the canon was added in the first place completely undercuts the claims of the Roman Catholic Church. If, as Rome says, it has always been accepted that the Roman Church governs by divine right, even one instance of the Church behaving otherwise completely disproves that claim. Do you think that the bishops at Chalcedon just pulled the ideas in the 28th canon out of thin air? What about the bishops at Trullo?
The scenario that you put forward to us is this; that the bishops of the Church at Chalcedon put forward the idea that Rome’s position was because of the city’s secular power, and that because of Constantinople’s position as the capital it should have “equal privliges” with Old Rome; and that the Bishop of Rome vetoed that idea. What it seems to me is that instead of Rome’s authority by divine right always being accepted, as modern Catholics would have us believe, the only person who had such an exalted view of the papacy was the pope himself!
The bishops to which you refer to were but 160 or so (out of 600) that were present at Chalcedon during the last session, and they all coincidentally were connected to Constantinople or thereabouts, the actual words spoken by Anatolius (patriarch of Constantinople) conveys the reality of the situation during Chalcedon:
As for those things which the universal Council of Chalcedon recently ordained in favor of the church of Constantinople, let Your Holiness be sure that there was no fault in me, who from my youth have always loved peace and quiet, keeping myself in humility.
It was the most reverend clergy of the church of Constantinople who were eager about it, and they were equally supported by the most reverend priests of those parts, who agreed about it. Even so, the whole force of confirmation of the acts was reserved for the authority of Your Blessedness. Therefore, let Your Holiness know for certain that I did nothing to further the matter, knowing always that I held myself bound to avoid the lusts of pride and covetousness. – Patriarch Anatolius of Constantinople to Pope Leo, Ep 132 (on the subject of canon 28 of Chalcedon).
The fact of the matter is that those bishops who concocted canon 28 did so probably at the behest of the emperor, moreover, they erred in believing that Rome had the primacy because of political reasons (Ravenna and Milan were also capitals of emperors yet they never were given a special place within the Church). What you fail to see is that Pope St. Leo did veto (he even wrote a letter to the empress) the canon, and it was accepted, as such even historians and Church fathers wrote about 27 canons rather than 28. Here is a list of them:
This is supported by all the Greek historians, such as Theodore the Lector (writing in 551 AD), John Skolastikas (writing in 550 AD), Dionysius Exegius (also around 550 AD); and by Roman Popes like Pope St. Gelasius (c. 495) and Pope Symmachus (c. 500) – all of whom speak of only 27 Canons of Chalcedon.
bringyou.to/apologetics/a35.htm
Moreover, if Rome’s primacy was based solely on political reasons why then did Constantinople still remain second to Rome? You would think that Constantinople would have superceded Rome if based primarily on political stature, but it isn’t, and that is why it will always remain second to Rome, i.e., it was Peter who was chief amongst the apostles, it is Rome who will be chief see within the Church. If you cannot accept that then it is you who deny Tradition/Scripture not I.
Furthermore, Trullo (which was presided over by Emperor Justinian II) was not accepted by the West, although the emperor went to great lenghts to have him confirm it:
Pope Sergius I protested the council, and refused to sign the canons. At Sergius’s refusal, Justinian dispatched a military delegation to Rome to induce Sergius to sign; the imperial army at Ravenna, however, composed mainly of native Italians, rallied to support the Roman Pontiff, marching on Rome.757–768).[2]
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quinisext_Council
The Trullo council quite frankly is a farce, and it is a prime example of the Emperor’s power in the East.
