I have a question for you all....and I come in peace

[Matthias]

I agree. Whenever I have had a question Philip has helped me 100% and then some. You need to show him some respect.

 

[Orthodox Andrew]

I agree. Whenever I have had a question Philip has helped me 100% and then some. You need to show him some respect.

China, anyone?

 

[Michael G]

Ok now you all are really throwing me off here part of the doctrines that we do go by have been established by the Papacy....and have remained in effect and sound ...so then why have a problem with it? I am so totally confused....From the current studies I have done so far nothing the Pope has said was ever without Biblical backing especially when it came ot doctrinal issues. Am I missing something here?????Help again.....So IOWs if He wasn't calling himself the Vicar then it would be OK am I correct? BTW these are genuine questions they are NOT meant to start an argument or get anyone mad at me I am confused.....On one hand you are telling me that the Church is wrong and then on the other you say it is right too....you just used the same argument that we use to prove the validity of the Church by saying that because it has withstood the test of time and still stands and because it has reamined sound in it's Teachings that it is the True Church. Ok I am baffled.....

Debi,
As a former Catholic, I can tell you there are many things which the Pope has said which really have no solid biblical ground to them. There is no biblical ground for saying the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son, the only biblical ground for the Trinity says the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father. The Pope has very recently said that the Theotokus (the Mother of God) is the Mediatrix of all Graces. There is no biblical ground for that teaching on Mary. Nor is there any biblical basis for the idea of Mary being Co-Redmptrix. Nor is there biblical grounds for the teaching of the Immaculate Conception, which is taught to justify the Roman Catholic Church's view of Original Sin. Do you really believe that Mary was born without the free will to stay sinless so that she could bear the Christ? If so, wouldn't her mother have had to been born free of Original Sin as well? As so on down the line? We believe she free and willingly lived a sinless life because of her deep love of God and holiness. Also, Papal infallibility has no biblical ground to it, nor does his universal jurisdiction.

Michael

 

[Sergius_Lucius]

There was Pope Honorius (sp?), who was condemned for the heresy of monothelitism (that Christ has only God's will and no human will) by 6th Ecumenical Council in 680 AD and all the following Popes were agree with this anathema.

The quotation from St. Simeon of Thessaloniki (15 c.) summarizes the position of Orthodox: "We don't reject the Pope. We recognize him as father and shepherd. In Christ we are in the indissoluble communion with the Pope: with Peter, with Linus, with Clement. But the current Pope is not a successor of their see because he is not a successor of their faith." (Sorry if my translation from Russian is awkward)

If any Pope returns to the Orthodox faith he will receive his honorable position as the first among the Patriarchs as it was before the schism. We just don't think he is without any theological error because of his position.

 

[Sergius_Lucius]

double post deleted

 

[Philip]

All,

Take it easy on Debi. She truly is confused by the differences between Catholicism and Orthodoxy. The confusion is, quite naturally, causing her frustration.

 

[Rilian]

There was Pope Honorius (sp?), who was condemned for the heresy of monothelitism (that Christ has only God's will and no human will) by 6th Ecumenical Council in 680 AD and all the following Popes were agree with this anathema.

The quotation from St. Simeon of Thessaloniki (15 c.) summarizes the position of Orthodox: "We don't reject the Pope. We recognize him as father and shepherd. In Christ we are in the indissoluble communion with the Pope: with Peter, with Linus, with Clement. But the current Pope is not a successor of their see because he is not a successor of their faith." (Sorry if my translation from Russian is awkward)

If any Pope returns to the Orthodox faith he will receive his honorable position as the first among the Patriarchs as it was before the schism. We just don't think he is without any theological error because of his position.

Sergius_Lucius, it may be the language difference, but I'm having trouble understanding exactly what you're trying to say. My impression has always been that in regards to monothelitism, it was actually a heresy born in the East and it was supported by the byzantine emperor. The Popes after Honorius, especially Martin I, condemned it in the strongest terms and I think may have saved the church as a whole from adopting this view.

 

[Sergius_Lucius]

Sergius_Lucius, it may be the language difference, but I'm having trouble understanding exactly what you're trying to say. My impression has always been that in regards to monothelitism, it was actually a heresy born in the East and it was supported by the byzantine emperor. The Popes after Honorius, especially Martin I, condemned it in the strongest terms and I think may have saved the church as a whole from adopting this view.

Oh, I'm sorry my post wasn't clear. I mean that the Popes were agree with the condemnation of Honorius as a heretic so they obviously didn't hold the view that the Papacy guarantees infallibility.

Sergey

 

[Philip]

There was Pope Honorius (sp?), who was condemned for the heresy of monothelitism (that Christ has only God's will and no human will) by 6th Ecumenical Council in 680 AD and all the following Popes were agree with this anathema.

Was he condemned by name, or were the Monothelitists condemned and Honorius was considered one of them?

 

[Sergius_Lucius]

He was condemned by name in very strong terms such as "the pillar of heresy" etc. and later Pope Leo II repeated the anathema (I got this information from Anton Kartashev's Ecumenical Councils). He wasn't an inventor of monothelitism, however, and perhaps was deceived by the Eastern Patriarchs-heretics but he agreed with Sergius of Constantinople's letter with the teaching of "one will" and so approved the heresy.

 

[Matthias]

I just don't want Philip getting picked on. He's a great guy, I just don't want to see him upset/crying.