Login Register

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic Page 3 of 6   [ 105 posts ]   Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Vadim - Orthodox Papal Issues
PostPosted: Wed Dec 14, 2011 4:51 pm 
Offline
Citizen
Citizen
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2011 10:43 am
Posts: 276
Location: Kiev
Religion: Orthodox
Bagheera wrote:
Quote:
Some suspicion has arisen with regard to how far the acts of the Fifth Ecumenical Council may be relied upon. <...>


By the way, in "A history of the councils of the church, from the original documents" by Hefele this passage is distorted. Compare the correct passage:

The Fifth Ecumenical Council, THE SENTENCE OF THE SYNOD

    ... Nevertheless, in order that they who thus calumniate the holy council of Chalcedon may have no further opportunity of doing so, we ordered to be recited the decisions of the holy Synods, to wit, of first Ephesus, and of Chalcedon, with regard to the Epistles of Cyril of blessed memory and of Leo, of pious memory, sometime Pope of Old Rome. And since we had learned from these that nothing written by anyone else ought to be received unless it had been proved to agree with the orthodox faith of the holy Fathers, we interrupted our proceedings so as to recite also the definition of the faith which was set forth by the holy council of Chalcedon, so that we might compare the things in the epistle with this decree.

... and how it is quoted in the book by Hefele:

    ... In order to put aside all objections, we also caused to be read utterances of S. Cyril and Pope Leo (the Epistola dogmatica), and also presented the declaration of faith of Chalcedon, in order to show that the letter of Ibas was in entire contradiction to this.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vadim - Orthodox Papal Issues
PostPosted: Wed Dec 14, 2011 8:16 pm 
Offline
Sons of Thunder
Sons of Thunder
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2002 12:30 am
Posts: 4625
Location: The carrefour of ignorance is bliss & knowledge is power.
Religion: The One with All the Marks.
Vadim,

I'm getting a little lost in all the citations. Are you saying that a particular canon, or action of the 5th Ecumenical Council invalidates the later primacy of the roman pontiff (the Pope), or invalidates the Roman Catholic Church as a church at all?

If yes, what is that canon or action?

If no, what is the significance of the 5th Ecumenical Council?

Thank you.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vadim - Orthodox Papal Issues
PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2011 2:35 pm 
Offline
Citizen
Citizen
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2011 10:43 am
Posts: 276
Location: Kiev
Religion: Orthodox
Greg wrote:
Vadim,

I'm getting a little lost in all the citations. Are you saying that a particular canon, or action of the 5th Ecumenical Council invalidates the later primacy of the roman pontiff (the Pope), or invalidates the Roman Catholic Church as a church at all?

Yes. :(

Greg wrote:
If yes, what is that canon or action?


1) Fragment of the Sentence of the Fifth Ecumenical Council, which was read in its Eighth Session, which I quoted in my previous post;
2) explanation on the same matter made by the Fifth Ecumenical Council during its Sixth Session, which I quoted several posts before,
3) more detailed explanation is given in this book;
4) Here is a good example. After Pope Vigilius decided to make his decision separately from the Fifth Ecumenical Council, he in result made wrong decision on the matter of the letter of Ibas, because he didn't follow this rule of making decisions. You can read this in the book by Hefele here, p. 321:

    Finally, the Pope says he had instituted inquiries with respect to the letter of the venerable Ibas, and, as he was not himself acquainted with Greek, he had caused those who were about him to look out this subject in the Acts of Chalcedon.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vadim - Orthodox Papal Issues
PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2011 7:07 pm 
Offline
Sons of Thunder
Sons of Thunder
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2002 12:30 am
Posts: 4625
Location: The carrefour of ignorance is bliss & knowledge is power.
Religion: The One with All the Marks.
OK. So..., if I may restate what I think you are saying:

1. The Roman Catholic Church is not a part of the historic Christian Church, i.e., the Orthodox Church, because her doctrine has not been "proved to agree with the orthodox faith of the holy Fathers," or her doctrine is not "in all things agreeable to the exposition and doctrine of the holy Fathers."

2. The issue first surfaced with Pope Vigilus in the mid-500's.

Are these two statements a correct summary of what you are saying?

Thank you.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vadim - Orthodox Papal Issues
PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2011 8:09 pm 
Offline
King of Cool

Joined: Sun May 11, 2003 1:30 pm
Posts: 70850
Religion: Anticukite Catholic
Greg wrote:
OK. So..., if I may restate what I think you are saying:

1. The Roman Catholic Church is not a part of the historic Christian Church, i.e., the Orthodox Church, because her doctrine has not been "proved to agree with the orthodox faith of the holy Fathers," or her doctrine is not "in all things agreeable to the exposition and doctrine of the holy Fathers."

2. The issue first surfaced with Pope Vigilus in the mid-500's.

Are these two statements a correct summary of what you are saying?

Thank you.



The canon that he is referring to is the 28th canon, which was rejected by Pope Leo the Great.....he's forgetting that a council's actions are not valid unless ratified by the Pope, the one he is talking about was not ratified so it doesn't count.

Now I'm sure he'll probably say that ratification by the Pope is not necessary blah blah blah...but here's the thing.....the Orthodox have absolutely no way of determining which councils are, and are not, ecumenical. Some Orthodox Churches accept more councils than others, and there is no way to settle the question. Ratification by the Pope is pretty much the only criteria that ha sever been proposed which actually 'works'.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vadim - Orthodox Papal Issues
PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2011 11:00 pm 
Offline
Sons of Thunder
Sons of Thunder
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2002 12:30 am
Posts: 4625
Location: The carrefour of ignorance is bliss & knowledge is power.
Religion: The One with All the Marks.
I'm just trying to understand what his concern/issue/point is, and what he bases his conclusions on. I saw a lot of quoting sources, but not much discussion from him as to his understanding of the significance of the citations.

I figure if I can restate what I think he's saying, and then allow him to comment, that will give me an idea of how he understands the sources he is quoting. I haven't seen anything on "Canon 28" yet. Perhaps that is to come.

Having briefly reviewed the information he cited about "The Fifth Ecumenical Council" in The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, I hope he will comment on: The Decretal Letter of Pope Vigilius (Scroll to the bottom.)

****************

Edited to Add: The Character of Pope Vigilius. An article from CLIO – Journal of Ancient and Medieval History at Dickson College. The circumstances of his pontificate should be taken into account in evaluating why he did what he did.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vadim - Orthodox Papal Issues
PostPosted: Fri Dec 16, 2011 3:18 am 
Offline
Citizen
Citizen
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2011 10:43 am
Posts: 276
Location: Kiev
Religion: Orthodox
Doom wrote:
The canon that he is referring to is the 28th canon, which was rejected by Pope Leo the Great.....

No. 28th canon was on the Fourth Ecumenical Council, but I'm talking about Fifth Council.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vadim - Orthodox Papal Issues
PostPosted: Fri Dec 16, 2011 4:02 am 
Offline
Citizen
Citizen
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2011 10:43 am
Posts: 276
Location: Kiev
Religion: Orthodox
Greg wrote:
OK. So..., if I may restate what I think you are saying:

1. The Roman Catholic Church is not a part of the historic Christian Church, i.e., the Orthodox Church, because her doctrine has not been "proved to agree with the orthodox faith of the holy Fathers," or her doctrine is not "in all things agreeable to the exposition and doctrine of the holy Fathers."

2. The issue first surfaced with Pope Vigilus in the mid-500's.

Are these two statements a correct summary of what you are saying?

Thank you.

Yes. Pope Vigilius, as he himself describes in his Constitutum, — you can read it in the book by Hefele, — didn't make careful inquiry whether letter of Ibas "agree with the orthodox faith of the holy Fathers" or not, and, since that, made wrong final decision, which contradicted to the decision of the Fifth Ecumenical Council. Exactly in the same way was situation (and still continues) with doctrines that divide us: Filioque and the teaching of the primacy of the Pope. And the portraits of Alexander V and John XXIII are visible signs, that careful inquiry whether Pope has greater power than Ecumenical Council, wasn't made. These portraits were made in the XIX century, i. e. 400 years after the Western Schism. And during these 400 years the question whether Gregory XII could be deposed by the Council of Pisa, i. e. whether Ecumenical Council has greater power than the Pope, wasn't studied. And also the name of Alexander VI is another visible sign of the same, because although Alexander VI was elected in the time when Western Schism was already healed, and after the Council of Florence, decision of which was quoted by the Vatican Council as a proof for the infallibility of the Pope, — nevertheless, Alexander V was considered as a legal Pope by Alexander VI, i. e. Gregory XII was legally deposed, i. e. Ecumenical Council had greater power than the Pope.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vadim - Orthodox Papal Issues
PostPosted: Fri Dec 16, 2011 7:02 am 
Offline
Adept
Adept
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2006 3:37 pm
Posts: 5377
Location: Bergen, Norway
Religion: High Church Lutheran
Church Affiliations: Church of Norway
Greg wrote:
I'm just trying to understand what his concern/issue/point is, and what he bases his conclusions on. I saw a lot of quoting sources, but not much discussion from him as to his understanding of the significance of the citations.
Thank you. I wanted to point this out, but didn't want to seem rude. I haven't seen much argumentation, but loads of citations.

Vadim wrote:
And the portraits of Alexander V and John XXIII are visible signs, that careful inquiry whether Pope has greater power than Ecumenical Council, wasn't made.
No, this is only a 'problem' for thos who want it to be a problem.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vadim - Orthodox Papal Issues
PostPosted: Fri Dec 16, 2011 8:34 am 
Offline
Citizen
Citizen
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2011 10:43 am
Posts: 276
Location: Kiev
Religion: Orthodox
Closet Catholic wrote:
Thank you. I wanted to point this out, but didn't want to seem rude. I haven't seen much argumentation, but loads of citations.


Because there is no need for lengthened discussion and arguments, as St. Cyprian wrote in "On the Unity of the Church":

    4. If any one consider and examine these things, there is no need for lengthened discussion and arguments. There is easy proof for faith in a short summary of the truth.

Just consider and examine these things, which can be formulated in a short summary. I briefly formulated my views in five previous posts, beginning with quotation from memoirs of Pius II; all other my posts were, and will be consequences and examples.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vadim - Orthodox Papal Issues
PostPosted: Fri Dec 16, 2011 11:02 am 
Offline
Citizen
Citizen
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2011 10:43 am
Posts: 276
Location: Kiev
Religion: Orthodox
Closet Catholic wrote:
Vadim wrote:
And the portraits of Alexander V and John XXIII are visible signs, that careful inquiry whether Pope has greater power than Ecumenical Council, wasn't made.
No, this is only a 'problem' for thos who want it to be a problem.


Than how will you comment what Catholic Encyclopedia says on this matter? Even after the Vatican Council, the question still remained whether Gregory XII was legally deposed or not:
viewtopic.php?p=2328201#p2328201


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vadim - Orthodox Papal Issues
PostPosted: Fri Dec 16, 2011 2:02 pm 
Offline
Citizen
Citizen
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2011 10:43 am
Posts: 276
Location: Kiev
Religion: Orthodox
Doom wrote:
This is not complicated....and I wish to remind you that you are dealing with knowledgeable Catholics here, not the kind of people who will find your trivial revelations 'shocking'.

By the way, this is very important question. How do you know that you are "knowledgeable"? According to the Sentence of the Fifth Ecumenical Council, in order to be knowledgeable, you need to investigate arguments of both sides, — than "the light of truth expels the darkness of falsehood":

    But also the Holy Fathers, who from time to time have met in the four holy councils, following the example of the ancients, have by a common discussion, disposed of by a fixed decree the heresies and questions which had sprung up, as it was certainly known, that by common discussion when the matter in dispute was presented by each side, the light of truth expels the darkness of falsehood.

But on the matter of primacy of the Pope, Popes always avoided such discussion. For example, on the Council of Florence a discussion whether Ecumenical Council has more power than Pope, started only after departure of Greeks. And when Greeks were still present on the Council, they said that they think that Ecumenical Council has more power than the Pope — immediately before signing the final decree. Also on the Vatican Council the open discussion of infallibility was forbidden.

Than, if open discussion of infallibility never took place, — how can you be sure that you are "knowledgeable" until you investigate arguments of both sides?

And if someone wants to make such investigation of arguments of both sides — which books does he need to read?

I have full Russian translation of Acts of Seven Ecumenical Councils. And there is even no need to read them completely to make sure they are true. It is enough to read several pages of each volume, and you will see, how careful the investigation always was. But that is not so in case of primacy of the Pope.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vadim - Orthodox Papal Issues
PostPosted: Sat Dec 17, 2011 2:32 pm 
Offline
Sons of Thunder
Sons of Thunder
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2005 9:15 am
Posts: 4621
Religion: Catholic
Vadim wrote:
Doom wrote:
This is not complicated....and I wish to remind you that you are dealing with knowledgeable Catholics here, not the kind of people who will find your trivial revelations 'shocking'.

By the way, this is very important question. How do you know that you are "knowledgeable"? According to the Sentence of the Fifth Ecumenical Council, in order to be knowledgeable, you need to investigate arguments of both sides, — than "the light of truth expels the darkness of falsehood":

    But also the Holy Fathers, who from time to time have met in the four holy councils, following the example of the ancients, have by a common discussion, disposed of by a fixed decree the heresies and questions which had sprung up, as it was certainly known, that by common discussion when the matter in dispute was presented by each side, the light of truth expels the darkness of falsehood.

But on the matter of primacy of the Pope, Popes always avoided such discussion. For example, on the Council of Florence a discussion whether Ecumenical Council has more power than Pope, started only after departure of Greeks. And when Greeks were still present on the Council, they said that they think that Ecumenical Council has more power than the Pope — immediately before signing the final decree. Also on the Vatican Council the open discussion of infallibility was forbidden.

Than, if open discussion of infallibility never took place, — how can you be sure that you are "knowledgeable" until you investigate arguments of both sides?

And if someone wants to make such investigation of arguments of both sides — which books does he need to read?

I have full Russian translation of Acts of Seven Ecumenical Councils. And there is even no need to read them completely to make sure they are true. It is enough to read several pages of each volume, and you will see, how careful the investigation always was. But that is not so in case of primacy of the Pope.


A lot of what you're saying is highly debateable. The discussion of the pope's authority at Lyons II was fairly lengthy, which is understandable given how much of the prior proceedings were devoted to papal election and such. Granted, the question of infallibility didn't really come up so much as jurisdiction. That the question of pope vs. conciliar authority wasn't a big deal at Florence makes sense, given that this was settled from the Catholic point of view at Constance (despite what schismatics at Pisa/Basel/and so forth might have said).

Vatican I was hardly a model of tranquility, precisely because of the infallibility question. If it was such closed case, then the definition sought by guys like Cardinal Manning would have been a fait accompli. You talk about getting all sides of the story, yet your view of Vatican I seems to come right out of an Old Catholic polemic.

Your comment above

Quote:
When the Church was already cut into two parts during thirty years, so that people in one part were out of the Church, no one of two Popes arrived to the Council to Pisa in order to heal the Schism, to stop a half of their flock being out of the Church. This was a legitimate reason for deposing both of them, because, according to the sentence of the Fifth Ecumenical Council, "not only the impious man himself is condemned, but also he who when he has the power to correct impiety in others, neglects to do so":

Our Great God and Saviour Jesus Christ, as we learn from the parable in the Gospel, distributes talents to each man according to his ability, and at the fitting time demands an account of the work done by every man. And if he to whom but one talent has been committed is condemned because he has not worked with it but only kept it without loss, to how much greater and more horryble judgment must he be subject who not only is negligent concerning himself, but even places a stumbling-block and cause of offence in the way of others? Since it is manifest to all the faithful that whenever any question arises concerning the faith, not only the impious man himself is condemned, but also he who when he has the power to correct impiety in others, neglects to do so. 1

1 This, of course, refers to Pope Vigilius.


Your footnote is an extrapolation as there is nothing in the acts of the Council itself that indicates this is a shot at Pope Vigilius. In fact, if you keep reading, the Council is quite deferential to him calling him things like "most religious" and "his reverence" and saying how much was done to persuade him of the badness in the writings of Theodore. If the Council is the supreme authority, why did Vigilius specifically need convincing? I don't recall language like that in any other council about any other patriarch. The emperor was already on board, which was clear from his persecution of western clergy. Yet still Vigilius delayed and all other parties waited for his confirmation of what had been decreed. Why? The answer, of course, is because Vigilius wanting to make sure that whatever decision was rendered would conform with Chalcedon (hence his second "Constitution").

On another note, why bother specifically singling out the fact that it's ok to condemn heretics posthumously because that's what Rome has done? What makes Rome special?

Let me conclude by saying that I don't consider myself all that knowledgeable. I know a bunch of Eastern Orthodox and Eastern Catholics. When my wife was Protestant, she considered converting to Orthodoxy for a long time. We went to the Divine Liturgy in both Greek and Antiochian churches. My point is that I've been exposed to what a lot of Easterners have to say about things.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vadim - Orthodox Papal Issues
PostPosted: Mon Dec 19, 2011 4:22 pm 
Offline
Sons of Thunder
Sons of Thunder
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2002 12:30 am
Posts: 4625
Location: The carrefour of ignorance is bliss & knowledge is power.
Religion: The One with All the Marks.
Vadim wrote:
4) Here is a good example. After Pope Vigilius decided to make his decision separately from the Fifth Ecumenical Council, he in result made wrong decision on the matter of the letter of Ibas, because he didn't follow this rule of making decisions. You can read this in the book by Hefele here, p. 321:


Where on page 321 does it say that Pope Vigilius didn't follow the rules of making decisions and, thus, made a wrong decision on the matter of the letter of Ibas?

Also, do you have any other examples of Pope Vigilius acting in disagreement "with the orthodox faith of the holy Fathers," or the Ecumenical Councils?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vadim - Orthodox Papal Issues
PostPosted: Tue Dec 20, 2011 12:27 pm 
Offline
Citizen
Citizen
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2011 10:43 am
Posts: 276
Location: Kiev
Religion: Orthodox
Greg wrote:
Also, do you have any other examples of Pope Vigilius acting in disagreement "with the orthodox faith of the holy Fathers," or the Ecumenical Councils?

Yes — on page 318 of Hefele's book it is described that Vigilius tried to prove in his Constitutum that it was not right to anathematize the dead. He appeals to some quotations from St. Cyril and from St. Proclus. But Fifth Ecumenical Council proved that some of these quotations were out of context, others were spurious. In particular, quotation from Cyril which is quoted on page 318, which was quoted in Vigilius's Constitutum, was proved to be spurious.

The Fifth Ecumenical Council, THE SENTENCE OF THE SYNOD

    But since the disciples of Theodore and of his impiety, who are so manifestly enemies of the truth, have attempted to bring forward certain passages of Cyril of holy memory and of Proclus, as though they had been written in favour of Theodore, <...> For these, evilly receiving the things which have been well and opportunely written by the holy Fathers, and making excuses in their sins, quote these words. <...> So in these very words of economy the Fathers shew their intention on this point, that Theodore should be anathematized, as has been abundantly demonstrated by us in our acts from the writings of Cyril and Proclus of holy memory with regard to the condemnation of Theodore and his impiety. <...> But we found that that which heretics were wont to do, the defenders of Theodore had done also. For cutting out certain of the things which the holy Fathers had written, and placing with them and mixing up certain false things of their own, they have tried by a letter of Cyril of holy memory as though from a testimony of the Fathers, to free from anathema the aforesaid impious Theodore: in which very passages the truth was demonstrated, when the parts which had been cut off were read in their proper order, and the falsehood was thoroughly evinced by the collation of the true.

In the same way quotations from the Church Fathers which were given as a proof for primacy of the Pope and for Filioque during the history of the Church, were out of context or spurious. Therefore, they could not be considered as a proof for Papacy by the Greeks — at least, without convoking the General Council, where these quotations could be studied more thoroughly.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vadim - Orthodox Papal Issues
PostPosted: Tue Dec 20, 2011 8:19 pm 
Offline
Sons of Thunder
Sons of Thunder
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2005 9:15 am
Posts: 4621
Religion: Catholic
Which was nothing new, as the Council itself states that it was the custom of Rome to anathematize the dead. It's given as a reason why such a practice is appropriate. Nothing about the customs of any other see. Vigilius's reluctance had a lot to do with maintaining the integrity of Chalcedon, which did not take this step regarding those parties.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vadim - Orthodox Papal Issues
PostPosted: Wed Dec 21, 2011 4:41 am 
Offline
Citizen
Citizen
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2011 10:43 am
Posts: 276
Location: Kiev
Religion: Orthodox
HalJordan, I mean, pay your attention to the way how Vigilius tried to prove his decision that Theodore must not be anathematized. He quoted Church Fathers, but Fifth Ecumenical Council proved that some of quotations were out of context, others were spurious. This sentence even sounds somewhat prophetic: "But we found that that which heretics were wont to do, the defenders of Theodore had done also. For cutting out certain of the things which the holy Fathers had written, and placing with them and mixing up certain false things of their own <...>".

So, bringing forward some quotations doesn't necessary mean that the doctrine is proved to agree "with the orthodox faith of the holy Fathers". Since many of quotations which were used in the past to prove the doctrine of primacy of the Pope were spurious, but now most of them are genuine, — we ought to be aware of another possibility: bringing quotations out of context.

For example, quotation from St. Irenaeus (the one which was brought forward in the topic about salvation), when its context is considered, rather contradicts to the teaching of primacy of the Pope.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vadim - Orthodox Papal Issues
PostPosted: Wed Dec 21, 2011 10:27 am 
Offline
Citizen
Citizen
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2011 10:43 am
Posts: 276
Location: Kiev
Religion: Orthodox
HalJordan wrote:
Let me conclude by saying that I don't consider myself all that knowledgeable. I know a bunch of Eastern Orthodox and Eastern Catholics. When my wife was Protestant, she considered converting to Orthodoxy for a long time. We went to the Divine Liturgy in both Greek and Antiochian churches. My point is that I've been exposed to what a lot of Easterners have to say about things.


I think the best starting point would be to read St. Vincent of Lerins' treatise, Commonitorium, written in 434, which is completely devoted to the question which divides our Churches. Because when we read only polemical articles about what Church Fathers thought about the Pope — it's like reading articles about Bible without reading the Bible itself. Although I myself haven't read this treatise yet, but am going to do this. It is not too long nor too complicated:

St. Vincent of Lerins, The Commonitory

This treatise was used as an one of arguments by Old Catholics in "Janus", p. 89:

    ... So again with the famous Commonitorium of St. Vincent of Lerins, composed in 434. If the view of Roman infallibility had existed anywhere in the Church at that time, it could not have been possibly passed over in a book exclusively concerned with the question of the means for ascertaining the genuine Christian doctrine. But the author keeps to the three notes of universality, permanence, and consent, and to the Œcumenical Councils.

I haven't found reply to this argument in Card. Hergenröther's "Anti-Janus", although he quotes this treatise of St. Vincent of Lerins several times.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vadim - Orthodox Papal Issues
PostPosted: Wed Dec 21, 2011 10:57 am 
Offline
Defender
Defender
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2002 11:59 am
Posts: 12042
There are a couple of books discussing on the papal issues:

1. The Orthodox Church, by Timothy Ware, published by Penguin Books in 1997. Timothy Ware is an Orthodox bishop, Bishop Kallistos of Diokleia. He discusses about the schisms and also militant atheism in Russia.

2. Rome and the Eastern Churches - A Study in Schism, by Aidan Nichols, O.P., a Dominican theologian. Published by Ignatius in 2010.

3. A Light from the East - The Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I, by Michael O'Carroll, C.S.Sp., published by the Queen Publishing in 1998. This discusses relations between the pope and the patriarch and has a chapter on Russian Orthodox Church. It has a two-page appendix on the Church councils.

4. The Pope Encyclopedia, by Matthew Bunson, published by Crown Trade Paperbooks in 1995. This contains a list of popes involved in the Western Schism.

Thanks


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vadim - Orthodox Papal Issues
PostPosted: Wed Dec 21, 2011 1:07 pm 
Offline
Sons of Thunder
Sons of Thunder
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2002 12:30 am
Posts: 4625
Location: The carrefour of ignorance is bliss & knowledge is power.
Religion: The One with All the Marks.
Greg wrote:
Vadim wrote:
4) Here is a good example. After Pope Vigilius decided to make his decision separately from the Fifth Ecumenical Council, he in result made wrong decision on the matter of the letter of Ibas, because he didn't follow this rule of making decisions. You can read this in the book by Hefele here, p. 321:
Where on page 321 does it say that Pope Vigilius didn't follow the rules of making decisions and, thus, made a wrong decision on the matter of the letter of Ibas?

Vadim,

Where on page 321 does it say that Pope Vigilius didn't follow the rules of making decisions and, thus, made a wrong decision on the matter of the letter of Ibas?


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic Page 3 of 6   [ 105 posts ]   Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


Jump to:  
cron