Yes, this is the step back I was talking about!
I should have realized I was just opening the door to a flippant response. I truly don’t understand how some titular patriarchs in Rome were analagous… Did Rome make a claim to a recreated Pentarchy?
And?
Fun trivia, I think you had mentioned it a few dozen times before. So they called them Pope. And…?
That is the most that needs to be made. Thought it is a sweet and pleasant thing to know or believe that the rupture between the East and the Orient is almost invisible and about to be a thing of the past…
So it could come to pass, but as yet, picking the legitimate Pentarch is still in the air…
Go for it, set up a Patriarch in Rome if you please. See how it goes. And no, it was not so hard in pixels… The reality? Show me the united Pentarchy sans Rome, please.
I have. In “The Catholic Encyclopedia” and reputable sources.
Not necessary.
Christy,
Yes, because you are one confused soul.
Thanks. Anything online?
just the truth.
Not titular as I said. Just for Antioch:
Yes. She made a Latin Pentarcy and tried (and in part succeeded) imposing it by the (Crusaders’) sword. (the one for Antioch after almost two centuries was expelled in 1268, and titular for nearly 7 centuries before being abolished in 1968.
…you still haven’t explained having the overlap of Eastern and Oriental patriarchs who have submitted to the “unity” of the Vatican’s throne. The question of who would legitimately compose the pentarchy is still out there.
Looks like 5,000+ and counting.
We ask the same of the Vatican. At least the Church conferred the title on Alexandria. Rome took it. Hebrews 5:4.
Do you feel closer to the Anglicans? Swedish and Finnish Lutherans? How about the rest of your Protestant kin? Can they commune at your altar? Would you commune theirs?
Only for us. You’ve abolished the episcopacy, except for THE bishop’s acolytes.
Show me the united Pentarchy (or West, for that matter) sous Rome, period.
Oops.
Peter,Paul,Linus,Cletus,Clement and Evaristus were killed before Ignatius.And Ignatius was imported in chains from Syria, which would mean the persecusion started there. Was their a shortage of martyrs in Rome?
Even if you think that the bishops really rebuked Victor,they had no authority over Victor,just as Paul had no authority over Kephas (Rock). Victor had authority over them.
The condemnation of Nestorianism is a matter of faith,so it is infallible.
The Church doesn’t consign people to hell.
So they were disobedient to the head of the priesthood,and preferred the authority of the Emporer.
The Council of Florence was intended to unite the Eastern and Western churches. It defined the seven sacraments,purgatory and the filioque. Vatican 2 spelled out the nature and mission of the Church,the nature of the liturgy,and Catholic social doctrine.
The filioque doesn’t refer to the meaning of ekpoeusis.
The Son has all that the Father has from eternity. One in being means that they are existentially one. They share the Spirit from eternity. The Son eternally shares in the Father,and so the Son shares in the procession of the Spirit. The Father as cause of the Spirit is not something distinct from the Father as person.
Catechisms do not define doctrines - Popes do. For example, we know exactly which Pope defined the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception, and on what date; which Pope defined the doctrine of Papal Infallibility, and on what date; etc.
This is an interesting comment. The same thought had occasionally crossed my mind I but declined to mention it before. I know very little about Mormons but was thinking about a similarity to the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society.
I did, and I agree with adstrinity. That being said, telling a Catholic “Just go read history” (the implication it will be BLARINGLY OBVIOUS how errant they are, and how right you are) is somewhat insulting from the point of view that all 1.3 B of us are no more dirty illiterate unwashed peasants who are just ignorant of history than your next random sample.
Neither does Ott, neither does Aquinas, neither does Augustine. None of these have the authority to define doctrine for the church by themselves.
No, which tells me something. My history (doctorate) was at the University of Chicago.
OK
OK. I’m waiting.
you’re begging the question to it being history.
I know about apostate scandals in the East and West. For instance the fact that the two Auxentius’ led the Arians and made Milan the base of the sect, from whence it was spread to the Germans, and survived in the West (including Italy) until the emperor from the East came and crushed them.
I’ve never heard of it. I’ve skimmed the article in the “Catholic Encyclopedia,” (you’d be hard pressed to find a more ultramontanist/anti-Eastern Orthodox work) on Ambrose, and evidently they never heard of it either, or they are keeping it to themselves.
Sounds like you are confusing St. Ambrose with the argument between St. Cyprian and Pope St. Stephen. St. Cyprian was talking about heretics in the West (Rome in fact), and St. Cyprian sought, and received support from the bishops of the East against the Pope of Rome’s opinion.
You said it, I didn’t.
OK
.
At least not con.s
?
Have we had any recorded history here for me to reject?
so far we don’t have two histories to compare.
His first chair in the first century and in the Bible remains in Antioch.
Alexandria
No. St. Mark was buried there, where he was martyred, until the the Venetians stole his relics and brought them to Veince, where San Marco’s Basilica was built (a mosaic on the ceiling shows them stealing the relics).
Technically no: St. Peter is buried in Vatican city, and St. Paul in St. Pauls Outside-the-Walls [of Rome].
History knows more about Pope Alexander VI 1492-1503, more than we care to know. He used to poison cardinals to seize their properties. He lost track dining with one cardinal and got himself poisoned. The next pope forbade saying that mass, that you speak of below, for him, saying “It is blasphemous to pray for the damned”.
Actually all the early Popes of Rome were Orthodox.
His Divine Beatitude Theodore II
The 123rd successor to sit on the Throne of St. Mark the Apostle and Evangelist.
Well, this may be a start: ocf.org/OrthodoxPage/reading/ortho_cath.html
LOLOLOLNo, which tells me something. My history (doctorate) was at the University of Chicago.
OK
OK. I’m waiting.
you’re begging the question to it being history.
I know about apostate scandals in the East and West. For instance the fact that the two Auxentius’ led the Arians and made Milan the base of the sect, from whence it was spread to the Germans, and survived in the West (including Italy) until the emperor from the East came and crushed them.
I’ve never heard of it. I’ve skimmed the article in the “Catholic Encyclopedia,” (you’d be hard pressed to find a more ultramontanist/anti-Eastern Orthodox work) on Ambrose, and evidently they never heard of it either, or they are keeping it to themselves.
newadvent.org/cathen/01383c.htm
Sounds like you are confusing St. Ambrose with the argument between St. Cyprian and Pope St. Stephen. St. Cyprian was talking about heretics in the West (Rome in fact), and St. Cyprian sought, and received support from the bishops of the East against the Pope of Rome’s opinion.
newadvent.org/cathen/06080b.htm
You said it, I didn’t.
OK
.
The record is where? I missed that.
At least not con.s
?
Have we had any recorded history here for me to reject?
so far we don’t have two histories to compare.
His first chair in the first century and in the Bible remains in Antioch.
Alexandria
No. St. Mark was buried there, where he was martyred, until the the Venetians stole his relics and brought them to Veince, where San Marco’s Basilica was built (a mosaic on the ceiling shows them stealing the relics).
Technically no: St. Peter is buried in Vatican city, and St. Paul in St. Pauls Outside-the-Walls [of Rome].
Actually all the early Popes of Rome were Orthodox.
Don’t have to imagine it. The canon we have is the same as St. Justin Martyr described it in the second century.
His Divine Beatitude Theodore II
Pope and Patriarch of the Great City of Alexandria, Libya, the Pentapolis, Ethiopia, All of Egypt and All Africa
Father of Fathers
Shepherd of Shepherds
Archpriest of Archpriests
The Thirteenth Apostle
Judge of the Universe
The 123rd successor to sit on the Throne of St. Mark the Apostle and Evangelist.
I started reading your link, but I was puzzled by one of the first paragraphs.
The Vatican II council was held in 1962-65. The new Code of Canon Law was not promulgated until 1983.
Not so fast there, pal.Neither does Ott, neither does Aquinas, neither does Augustine. None of these have the authority to define doctrine for the church by themselves.
But we can count the number of Papally define dogmas on one hand, so the rest of the belief system must have come from somewhere.
Catechisms, when approved by bishops of the church in union with the Pope represent the current magisterial teaching of the church, do they not? Are they safe to give the kids?
You and Christy keep insisting, against all the evidence provided you, that “Limbo” is an infallible teaching of the Church which must be believed by Catholics.