Questions from an Eastern Orthodox Christian.

[ConstantineTG]

It’s a meaningless tautology. When all who agree on the right belief agree on the right belief, then you know it is the right belief.

Would you rather have someone arbitrarily decide, like the Pope? The conundrum there is, anyone who objects, how do you know that person is not right? Today more than half of Roman Catholics agree to divorce and use of contraception. We tell them, “the truth is not democratic.” Yet when determining what is true doctrine, we will accept democracy (that is, majority wins)?

We believe our bishops are guided by the Holy Spirit. So it is important that they are all in agreement. There is only one truth, therefore bishops cannot be in disagreement and then we point out what is truth and what is not. Does one bishop have more Holy Spirit over another so he has a right to tell that bishop he is wrong? It does not work that way.

 

[Zekariya]

I have said time and again, bishops who are still within the Church (in communion) are the ones that matter. It does not have to be the same bishops who attended the council. It does not have to be the day the council ended or any set amount of time since then. As long as a council is accepted by all canonical bishops at a given date and time and moving forward, then it is ecumenical.

My statements do reconcile. I think you have some perceived notions that are not consistent with how the Fathers themselves conducted the councils.

I’m sorry for my confusion. My questions were not so much what I considered Church practice as much as trying to find out what you meant. I believe that I understand what you are saying now. After the Council (at a later point in time) if all of the bishops of the Communion (EOC for example) decide it is an Ecumenical Council, it is hence known as one.

 

[Reuben_J]

I’m sorry for my confusion. My questions were not so much what I considered Church practice as much as trying to find out what you meant. I believe that I understand what you are saying now. After the Council (at a later point in time) if all of the bishops of the Communion (EOC for example) decide it is an Ecumenical Council, it is hence known as one.

Look like this is trying trying to address question #1 of the OP.

1. Suppose we say, “ratification by a subsequent council.” This raises issues:

I’m fairly sure there have been heretical councils subsequently ratified by other heretical councils. yet we don’t count those as ecumenical.
Is this a question of “oomph,” or can any piddly local council basically create ecumenical councils by fiat? If it’s “oomph” that counts, how do we determine whether it’s sufficient, without running into the infinite causes dilemma?

Of course it can be abrogated by a later council if the bishops would then decide otherwise.

 

[Jacob50]

You’re setting up requirements that the Fathers themselves never set up. There was no requirement that the bishops who attended the council be the ones to accept or reject them to make it ecumenical. The only requirement is that all bishops accept a council and recognize it as ecumeinical. If this happens 500 years later when all bishops from the original council has long since been dead, then it still works. The only requirement is that at a certain point in time, all Orthodox who are alive at that time and are in communion with one another do universally accept that council they wish to deem as ecumenical.

Arius never accepted the First Ecumenical Council either.

Alright, with that paragraph, you answered the original question I asked. You just didn’t explain it as you did above. You had not mentioned the “one point in time” argument.

Would you mind, citing a document of the Church that says that the above is the only requirement?

 

[joe370]

Look like this is trying trying to address question #1 of the OP.1. Suppose we say, “ratification by a subsequent council.” This raises issues:

I’m fairly sure there have been heretical councils subsequently ratified by other heretical councils. yet we don’t count those as ecumenical.
Is this a question of “oomph,” or can any piddly local council basically create ecumenical councils by fiat? If it’s “oomph” that counts, how do we determine whether it’s sufficient, without running into the infinite causes dilemma?
Of course it can be abrogated by a later council if the bishops would then decide otherwise.

And that quote is coming from a very intelligent Christian belonging to the EOC. I of course believe that the Holy Eucharist can be found in both churches, east and west, and in no way am I attempting to suggest anything other than my hope and desire to resolve post #1. So far, no luck. But maybe I am the one missing something.

 

[ConstantineTG]

Look like this is trying trying to address question #1 of the OP.

1. Suppose we say, “ratification by a subsequent council.” This raises issues:

I’m fairly sure there have been heretical councils subsequently ratified by other heretical councils. yet we don’t count those as ecumenical.
Is this a question of “oomph,” or can any piddly local council basically create ecumenical councils by fiat? If it’s “oomph” that counts, how do we determine whether it’s sufficient, without running into the infinite causes dilemma?

Of course it can be abrogated by a later council if the bishops would then decide otherwise.

There have been heretical councils for sure, and there have been heretical Popes. So in that regard, one really isn’t better than the other.

 

[joe370]

There have been heretical councils for sure, and there have been heretical Popes. So in that regard, one really isn’t better than the other.

I know this is off topic but I will ask anyway: could you please identify those Popes who taught heretical doctrine (exhaustive list) and I will start a new thread to assess your claims? It would be an interesting thread, if it remains amicable, both Catholic Christians and Eastern Orthodox Christians. If you are right and a Pope is guilty of ratifying doctrinal error, then papal infallibility goes right out the window. Pope Honorius, after much research did not teach erroneously but I will add him to the list anyway.