• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.
  3. Please note there is a new rule regarding the posting of videos. It reads, "Post a summary of the videos you post . An exception can be made for music videos.". Unless you are simply sharing music, please post a summary, or the gist, of the video you wish to share.
  4. There have been some changes in the Life Stages section involving the following forums: Roaring 20s, Terrific Thirties, Fabulous Forties, and Golden Eagles. They are changed to Gen Z, Millennials, Gen X, and Golden Eagles will have a slight change.
  5. CF Staff, Angels and Ambassadors; ask that you join us in praying for the world in this difficult time, asking our Holy Father to stop the spread of the virus, and for healing of all affected.
  6. We are no longer allowing posts or threads that deny the existence of Covid-19. Members have lost loved ones to this virus and are grieving. As a Christian site, we do not need to add to the pain of the loss by allowing posts that deny the existence of the virus that killed their loved one. Future post denying the Covid-19 existence, calling it a hoax, will be addressed via the warning system.

3 Preschism Popes: Disproves Claims of Orthodoxy?

Discussion in 'St. Justin Martyr's Corner: Debate an Orthodox Chr' started by TheLostCoin, Jul 28, 2018.

  1. TheLostCoin

    TheLostCoin A Lonesome Coin Supporter

    +784
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Single
    US-Republican
    So, I've been searching for the Truth for about a year now, but pre-schism texts have come to my attention which have helped to scatter any said confidence I have in Orthodoxy, and that is pre-schism Popes who seem to blatantly declare Supremacy and Infallibility. Of course, we could say they are Theologumenons, but how could they have developed this early in the Church, and how can they be pre-schism Saints, when they have done something so "wrong?"

    From the Letter of Pope Saint Agatho to the 6th Ecumenical Council:

    This is the living tradition of the Apostles of Christ, which his Church holds everywhere, which is chiefly to be loved and fostered, and is to be preached with confidence, which conciliates with God through its truthful confession, which also renders one commendable to Christ the Lord, which keeps the Christian empire of your Clemency, which gives far-reaching victories to your most pious Fortitude from the Lord of heaven, which accompanies you in battle, and defeats your foes; which protects on every side as an impregnable wall your God-sprung empire, which throws terror into opposing nations, and smites them with the divine wrath, which also in wars celestially gives triumphal palms over the downfall and subjection of the enemy, and ever guards your most faithful sovereignty secure and joyful in peace. For this is the rule of the true faith, which this spiritual mother of your most tranquil empire, the Apostolic Church of Christ, has both in prosperity and in adversity always held and defended with energy; which, it will be proved, by the grace of Almighty God, has never erred from the path of the apostolic tradition, nor has she been depraved by yielding to heretical innovations, but from the beginning she has received the Christian faith from her founders, the princes of the Apostles of Christ, and remains undefiled unto the end, according to the divine promise of the Lord and Saviour himself, which he uttered in the holy Gospels to the prince of his disciples: saying, Peter, Peter, behold, Satan has desired to have you, that he might sift you as wheat; but I have prayed for you, that (your) faith fail not.


    Formula of Pope Saint Hormisdas:
    The first condition of salvation is to keep the norm of the true faith and in no way to deviate from the established doctrine of the Fathers. For it is impossible that the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, who said, "Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church," [Matthew 16:18], should not be verified. And their truth has been proved by the course of history, for in the Apostolic See the Catholic religion has always been kept unsullied. From this hope and faith we by no means desire to be separated and, following the doctrine of the Fathers, we declare anathema all heresies...

    Following, as we have said before, the Apostolic See in all things and proclaiming all its decisions, we endorse and approve all the letters which Pope St. Leo wrote concerning the Christian religion. And so I hope I may deserve to be associated with you in the one communion which the Apostolic See proclaims, in which the whole, true, and perfect security of the Christian religion resides. I promise that from now on those who are separated from the communion of the Catholic Church, that is, who are not in agreement with the Apostolic See, will not have their names read during the sacred mysteries. But if I attempt even the least deviation from my profession, I admit that, according to my own declaration, I am an accomplice to those whom I have condemned. I have signed this, my profession, with my own hand, and I have directed it to you, Hormisdas, the holy and venerable pope of Rome.


    From the Council of Chalcedon, on the Council of Ephesus II (449):

    "it is clearly pointless to read out the proceedings there...the proceedings there have been made null by the most blessed and apostolic bishop of the city of Rome."





    It seems to me that we have the Bishop of Rome proclaiming authority from the 5th century to annul entire "Ecumenical Councils", and we have from the 6th Century two documents which seem to lay down in explicit and plain terms, the dogma of Papal Infallibility.


    How does the Orthodox respond to such evidence, that Papal Supremacy and Infallibility existed back then? How can you say that the Roman Church, from this point, was in good standing and promoted Saints, nor was this topic addressed as a point of controversy, in the East?

    Ignore Honorius, ignore Vigilius - how do you reconcile this with the position that the Pope was only Primus inter Pares, with Appellate Jurisdiction at best?
     
    We teamed up with Faith Counseling. Can they help you today?
  2. TheLostCoin

    TheLostCoin A Lonesome Coin Supporter

    +784
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Single
    US-Republican
    Also, didn't see the debate section; mods, if you want, feel free to move my thread.
     
  3. Ioustinos

    Ioustinos Veteran

    +156
    Eastern Orthodox
    Private
    US-Libertarian


    How does this passage refer to Papal Infallibility? It speaks of the fact that the Christian faith will remain undefiled until the end for God will protect it, His Church, just as He did Peter when Satan sought to destroy him.


    Two things in regards to this passage:
    1) Catholic here does not mean Roman Catholic but rather universal - so he speaks of the Universal Church (just as we recite in the Nicene Creed).
    2) Again, where does this passage speak of Papal Infallibility and Supremacy? A See is the seat of the apostolic bishops. So what we read is that those who are not in communion with the Universal Church and the Apostolic Tradition shall not be remembered at the mysteries because they have broken off from the Body of Christ.



    It is difficult to touch on this quote because it has been lifted from its context. I would have to read the context of what is being said. As it sits it is a spliced quote.
     
  4. ArmyMatt

    ArmyMatt Regular Member Supporter

    +15,229
    United States
    Eastern Orthodox
    Married
    1st point: One of the heretics at the 6th council was a Pope. so that's proves our position that the Pope only has any authority insofar as he is correctly believing, not just by default because he is Pope.

    2nd point: the formula of Hormisdas was never affirmed by the Church as a whole.

    3rd point: same as the first. it presupposes a non-heretical Pope.

    none of these points affirm supremacy or infallibility, and you gotta ignore a lot more than Honorius and Vigilius to try to make your case
     
  5. Davidnic

    Davidnic Well-Known Member Staff Member Site Advisor Supporter

    +11,085
    United States
    Catholic
    Married
    US-American-Solidarity
    MOD HAT

    Moved to St. Justins.

    MOD HAT
     
  6. TheLostCoin

    TheLostCoin A Lonesome Coin Supporter

    +784
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Single
    US-Republican
    For the 3rd point, those were said by the Roman legates in Chalcedon.

    The Roman legates insisted, “it is clearly pointless to read out the proceedings there...the proceedings there have been made null by the most blessed and apostolic bishop of the city of Rome.”

    This was about the trial of Ibas in Ephesus II.
     
    Last edited: Jul 29, 2018
  7. ArmyMatt

    ArmyMatt Regular Member Supporter

    +15,229
    United States
    Eastern Orthodox
    Married
    what is your point? this still doesn't prove universal jurisdictional headship and doesn't even touch on infallibility.
     
  8. Ioustinos

    Ioustinos Veteran

    +156
    Eastern Orthodox
    Private
    US-Libertarian
    I am not familiar with this dialogue, regarding the trial of Ibas, however, there is still no evidence of Papal Infallibility or Supremacy being demonstrated.

    The question you must ask is: for whom were the "proceedings made null"? It seems as if, if I take the statement at face value, it was only for those Christians in Rome, not the Catholic (Universal) Church. This could be a case of a bishop in error which happens. We do not hold to the view that if a person is a saint that they were never in error - that is not a viewpoint held by the Church. Many of the Fathers disagreed on various points, yet that does not in any way delegitimize their sanctity. Our faith is conciliar not individual.
     
  9. prodromos

    prodromos Senior Veteran Supporter

    +7,748
    Australia
    Eastern Orthodox
    Married
    What was the response of the father's at the council? Did they agree with the legates or did they ignore them?
     
  10. buzuxi02

    buzuxi02 Veteran

    +2,197
    Eastern Orthodox
    Single
    Patriarchs have always made grandeur statements about themselves, but other bishops just ignore them.
    If the Roman pope had infallibility then why did the Copts break away and to this day have pronounce anathema upon Leo?
    Also on the letter of Agatho read Session 8 of the 6th Council. The council required the Patriarchs of Constantinople and Antioch to convene with their synod to analyze the papal legates requests and teachings and confirm them as Orthodox or reject them as wrong belief. In Session 13 of said council numerous bishops including Honorios were anathematized based on the epistles of St. Sophronios of Jerusalem as representing right teaching, Jerusalem being the only See that upheld Orthodoxy.
     
  11. ArmyMatt

    ArmyMatt Regular Member Supporter

    +15,229
    United States
    Eastern Orthodox
    Married
    at Chalcedon, Bythinian legates who ended up being very pro-Chalcedon, were among the first to call for the writings of St Cyril to be read because they feared that St Leo's Tome was Nestorian. it was only after they checked him against St Cyril did they accept what St Leo said.

    so even at the council where the Pope of Rome was the great champion, no one simply accepted anything from him just because he was the Pope.
     
  12. dzheremi

    dzheremi Coptic Orthodox non-Egyptian

    +11,160
    Oriental Orthodox
    Private
    Do you have a source for this? I am unaware of where we pronounce anathema upon the person of Leo.
     
  13. buzuxi02

    buzuxi02 Veteran

    +2,197
    Eastern Orthodox
    Single
    Sorry Dzheremi. Should have said he is viewed as holding heretical teaching and was excommunicated.
     
  14. dzheremi

    dzheremi Coptic Orthodox non-Egyptian

    +11,160
    Oriental Orthodox
    Private
    Ah. Okay.

    I was thinking I had missed something fairly major in our liturgies or somewhere else!
     
  15. TheLostCoin

    TheLostCoin A Lonesome Coin Supporter

    +784
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Single
    US-Republican
    Before the Tome, why was Leo excommunicated by Dioscorus? Associating with Theodoret?
     
  16. dzheremi

    dzheremi Coptic Orthodox non-Egyptian

    +11,160
    Oriental Orthodox
    Private
    The following paper by Fr. John Romanides (Greek Orthodox), presented as part of the EO-OO dialogues, may help you to understand this event. There is a bit of background to know behind either Leo's association with THeodoret or for that matter Dioscorus' association with Eutyches to make sense of the patriarchs' mutual excommunication.

    https://orthodoxjointcommission.wordpress.com/2013/12/14/leo-and-theodoret-dioscorus-and-eutyches/
     
Loading...