Request for Clarification about Orthodox Teachings/History

At this point it is clear to me that you are reading what you wish to see into works by Fr. Schmeman (which we have previously addressed) et al and are now merely arguing to argue. I have repeated myself multiple times and no longer have the inclination to participate in what I hoped was an unbiased examination of history but has descended into a defense of Roman heterodoxy with such a variety of topics that it is impossible to address them all at length (nor is it appropriate on this site). I tried addressing subjects one at a time, but to no avail.

Take care.

you say: It does appear that neither of us has evidence that Honorius--though he failed seriously--defined Monothelitism as binding on the Church.


If he had, I doubt that St. Maximus the Confessor would have defended him, or that same Ecumenical Council would have agreed with Pope Agatho's claim that the Roman See had always been orthodox.

it doesn't matter. he was anathematized, and you only get anathematized for perpetuating heresy. and I said that at the time Rome had always been Orthodox, even if her Popes were not.

you say: The dogma of Papal Infallibility does not mean that Popes will always be good leaders, or that they will have all the answers, but only that they will never define an error in their role as the Successor of St. Rock.

Is that your understanding? Or do you have a different one?

I know, but they have defined errors. just because you cannot find Honorius' error does not mean he did not make them. if he hadn't, he would not have been anathematized. and it's St Peter, not St Rock.

you say:As far as Athanasius and Cyril, I don't know that they themselves ever recanted the "One Nature Incarnate" phrase. But given their deference to Rome, I'm sure they would have if they were asked to.

you are right, they were not recanted because they did not need to be. they were defined.

you say: I don't see how that refutes the claim that Rome had a stellar record of Catholic Orthodoxy compared to the Eastern Sees; or the related claim that 10 of the Patriarchs of Constantinople were Monophysite or Monothelite; or the related claim that between 341 to 681 at least 2 of the three great Eastern Patriarchates were simultaneously heterodox for 112 years; or the claim that the Eastern Church split off from Rome and the Catholic Church for 220 years between 343 and 843 because the East was following the heresies of Arianism, Monophysitism, Monothelitism, and Iconoclasm

we are not discussing that. I know they had a stellar record. that does not mean they had direct authority over the Churches. folks have posted canons that refute that claim already.

seriously, please stop trying to sneak in what has already been delt with. and stop using Rock for St Peter

I honestly just want this thread to end. ignoring what has already been discussed and bringing it up over and over is just a waste of time

Pat is getting this info from the Primacy of Peter book; as a Catholic I read this collection of essays put together by Father Meyendorff, and it blew me away. The book is very intellectually honest, fair about how some Orthodox over-do their downplaying the papal primacy of honor/Coryphaeus role, but the book also extensively shows us that universal primacy, infallibility, supremacy, and the modern views of the papacy are utterly foreign notions. Any conclusions to the contrary show a misreading of this book.

isshinwhat said:

At this point it is clear to me that you are reading what you wish to see into works by Fr. Schmeman (which we have previously addressed) et al and are now merely arguing to argue. I have repeated myself multiple times and no longer have the inclination to participate in what I hoped was an unbiased examination of history but has descended into a defense of Roman heterodoxy with such a variety of topics that it is impossible to address them all at length (nor is it appropriate on this site). I tried addressing subjects one at a time, but to no avail.

Take care.

Click to expand...

This thread is goofy.