Papal Problems...:(

  • Thread starter Thread starter Alexius
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Isa_Almisry said:
Honorius was Pope of Rome 625-638, so New Rome was not the only one embroiled in the Monothelite heresy.
Click to expand...
Rome was not embroiled in the Monothelite heresy because Honorius didn’t teach it from his office as head of the Church. He was implimented from a private letter to a schismatic group, after he was dead.
 
Isa_Almisry said:
Yes, the West was once Orthodox.
Click to expand...
The West is orthodox, in teaching. Always was, always will be. It’s guided and protected by the Holy Spirit.

It was never Western Orthodox or Eastern Orthodox or Russian Orthodox or Serbian Orthodox or Indian Orthodox or Oriental Orthodox or Greek Orthodox etc. etc.
Whichever name you choose to pick in which to distance yourself from the Catholic Church.
 
jam070406 said:
The West is orthodox, in teaching. Always was, always will be. It’s guided and protected by the Holy Spirit.

It was never Western Orthodox or Eastern Orthodox or Russian Orthodox or Serbian Orthodox or Indian Orthodox or Oriental Orthodox or Greek Orthodox etc. etc.
Whichever name you choose to pick in which to distance yourself from the Catholic Church.
Click to expand...
They never lost the name “Catholic.” The Holy Orthodox Catholic Apostolic Eastern Church. The Orthodox would only contend that Rome once held doctrines in line with theirs…
 
Alexius said:
They never lost the name “Catholic.” The Holy Orthodox Catholic Apostolic Eastern Church. The Orthodox would only contend that Rome once held doctrines in line with theirs…
Click to expand...
Can I, as a Latin rite Catholic, commune with them?
 
qui_est_ce said:
Considering the huge list to which you are replying, your response is rather paltry for a history teacher.
Click to expand...
It’s Lent. I will be cutting down on my polemics for the next months, and using that time for more useful and necessary things, like prayer and scripture.
 
wisdomseeker said:
"The patriarch often attempted to bolster his position in the universal Church to give himself more leverage in dealing with the emperor, and this usually brought him into conflict with Rome.

During the years of conflict between East and West, the Roman pontiff remained firm, defending the Catholic faith against heresies and unruly or immoral secular powers, especially the Byzantine emperor. The first conflict came when Emperor Constantius appointed an Arian heretic as patriarch. Pope Julian excommunicated the patriarch in 343, and Constantinople remained in schism until John Chrysostom assumed the patriarchate in 398.

Ironically, in the Church’s eighth-century struggle against the Iconoclastic heresy (which sought to eliminate all sacred images), it was the pope and the Western bishops mainly who fought for the Catholic practice of venerating icons, which is still very much a part of Orthodox liturgy and spirituality. The patriarch of Constantinople sided with the heretical, iconoclastic emperors."

the Filioque is not the real reason for the break of the Church.
Click to expand...
It appears that you are quoting something, but what??? Please cite.
 
As a Catholic I take offense to the direction that this thread has taken. The list of heresies that seeks to show, as I read it, that the East has always been the problem child of the Church and unable to stay on the path of right doctrine. This is A) absurd and B), if I have read the intention correctly, in poor taste. The presence of more heresies in the East than West - if indeed there are more - was due to the fact that in the time in question, in general, there was more education (specifically Classical) available in the East than in the West {for example - the Academy was open until Justinian closed it I believe}, and with that more speculative thinking was present leading both to the development of heterodoxy and the orthodox responses to it. This is not really a bad thing.

Moving on…
wisdomseeker said:
these heresies and their hunger for power made very difficult for the Godly patriarchs to stand with the catholic church. then excuses were made like the Filioque to give them reason to break away. according to the Council on the Creed the catholic church has not committed any heresy against the Creed.

PEAVE AND LOVE
Click to expand...
The filioque was NOT an excuse for anyone to break away form anything. I am too tired to go into any details. This is an inaccurate statement which will never help to engender unity of communion!

BTW the list of heresies is a poor polemical tool that purposely seeks to distort history in favor of a skewed view of the Church. There have been plenty of heresies in the West, another poster noted the rise of Protestantism.

Also suggesting, as a blanket statement, that the Holy Patriarchs of the East were all power hungry is not a good apologetic tool, etc. They were are all human yes, but not all power seekers, so why pick about being human.

Side Point: Even if you hold to Papal Supremacy and Papal Infallibility, you must acknowledge the humanity of each man who is Pope. Being Pope does not come with some sort of supernatural perfection in EVERY THING that you do as Pope. Infallibility - as it has been defined - is very limited!!!

God Bless,
R.

I am tired, so I will return when I am fresher in mind.
 
Allyson said:
As a Catholic I take offense to the direction that this thread has taken. The list of heresies that seeks to show, as I read it, that the East has always been the problem child of the Church and unable to stay on the path of right doctrine. This is A) absurd and B), if I have read the intention correctly, in poor taste. The presence of more heresies in the East than West - if indeed there are more - was due to the fact that in the time in question, in general, there was more education (specifically Classical) available in the East than in the West {for example - the Academy was open until Justinian closed it I believe}, and with that more speculative thinking was present leading both to the development of heterodoxy and the orthodox responses to it. This is not really a bad thing.

Moving on…

The filioque was NOT an excuse for anyone to break away form anything. I am too tired to go into any details. This is an inaccurate statement which will never help to engender unity of communion!

BTW the list of heresies is a poor polemical tool that purposely seeks to distort history in favor of a skewed view of the Church. There have been plenty of heresies in the West, another poster noted the rise of Protestantism.

Also suggesting, as a blanket statement, that the Holy Patriarchs of the East were all power hungry is not a good apologetic tool, etc. They were are all human yes, but not all power seekers, so why pick about being human.

Side Point: Even if you hold to Papal Supremacy and Papal Infallibility, you must acknowledge the humanity of each man who is Pope. Being Pope does not come with some sort of supernatural perfection in EVERY THING that you do as Pope. Infallibility - as it has been defined - is very limited!!!

God Bless,
R.

I am tired, so I will return when I am fresher in mind.
Click to expand...
Actually, your post is among the freshest in a very tired thread.
 
qui_est_ce said:
Considering the huge list to which you are replying, your response is rather paltry for a history teacher.
Click to expand...
The huge list of heretics in the East and the fact that the Orthodox Church holds to none of those heresies is pretty clear evidence that the gates of Hades cannot prevail against the Church, no matter what they throw at her.

Glory to God!

John
 
jam070406 said:
Rome was not embroiled in the Monothelite heresy because Honorius didn’t teach it from his office as head of the Church. He was implimented from a private letter to a schismatic group, after he was dead.
Click to expand...
Let the Council speak for itself.

“And with these we define that there shall be expelled from the holy Church of God and anathematized Honorius who was some time Pope of Old Rome, because of what we found written by him to Sergius, that in all respects he followed his view and confirmed his impious doctrines.” (Sixth Ecumenical Council: Constantinople III, 680-681; Session XIII)
 
prodromos said:
The huge list of heretics in the East and the fact that the Orthodox Church holds to none of those heresies is pretty clear evidence that the gates of Hades cannot prevail against the Church, no matter what they throw at her.

Glory to God!

John
Click to expand...
Amen!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top