Catholic have more than 1 Bible ?
-
Originally posted by Icemoon:
The Emperors have coerced teh East to adopt heretical lines like Arianism and NO to Icons throughout history. It is Rome who usually step in to save them haha
Your date is off. I'm pretty sure the [b]Battle of Milvian Bridge happened after 300AD.
Your logic is also off. If you say the Roman Patriarch was free from secular interference, then you are downplaying the various councils convened by the Emperor like Nicea, Chalcedon etc.
So is the Roman Patriarch really free from secular interference?[/b] -
I'm sure Catholic history is longer than the Roman Empire.Originally posted by Pope Nicholas:Thats a common misconception. There was no Emperor in the West since 300AD. The Byzantine Emperors are based in the East. The Eastern Sees were under the Emperor's influence which can be rather bad especially during Iconalasm.
Read what happens subsequently, the Canossa incident, Pope Gregory, how Popes were selected, how Popes were disposed, papal states, blah blah .. -
well .. if the Empire did not shift the capital to Constantinople .. guess what will happen.Originally posted by Pope Nicholas:The Emperors have coerced teh East to adopt heretical lines like Arianism and NO to Icons throughout history. It is Rome who usually step in to save them haha
Rome will be the first to adopt Arianism and NO to Icons? LOL -
Below are writings of the early Church Fathers of the Eastern part of the Catholic Church -- all of whom supported the primacy of the Petrine Ministry.
Jerusalem :
St. Sophronius, Patriarch of Jerusalem (c. 63
Teaching us all orthodoxy and destroying all heresy and driving it away from the God-protected halls of our holy Catholic Church. And together with these inspired syllables and characters, I accept all his (the pope's) letters and teachings as proceeding from the mouth of Peter the Coryphaeus, and I kiss them and salute them and embrace them with all my soul ... I recognize the latter as definitions of Peter and the former as those of Mark, and besides, all the heaven-taught teachings of all the chosen mystagogues of our Catholic Church. (Sophronius, Mansi, xi. 461)
Transverse quickly all the world from one end to the other until you come to the Apostolic See (Rome), where are the foundations of the orthodox doctrine. Make clearly known to the most holy personages of that throne the questions agitated among us. Cease not to pray and to beg them until their apostolic and Divine wisdom shall have pronounced the victorious judgement and destroyed from the foundation ...the new heresy. (Sophronius, [quoted by Bishop Stephen of Dora to Pope Martin I at the Lateran Council], Mansi, 893
Stephen, Bishop of Dora in Palestine (645)
And for this cause, sometimes we ask for water to our head and to our eyes a fountain of tears, sometimes the wings of a dove, according to holy David, that we might fly away and announce these things to the Chair (the Chair of Peter at Rome) which rules and presides over all, I mean to yours, the head and highest, for the healing of the whole wound. For this it has been accustomed to do from old and from the beginning with power by its canonical or apostolic authority, because the truly great Peter, head of the Apostles, was clearly thought worthy not only to be trusted with the keys of heaven, alone apart from the rest, to open it worthily to believers, or to close it justly to those who disbelieve the Gospel of grace, but because he was also commissioned to feed the sheep of the whole Catholic Church; for 'Peter,' saith He, 'lovest thou Me? Feed My sheep.' And again, because he had in a manner peculiar and special, a faith in the Lord stronger than all and unchangeable, to be converted and to confirm his fellows and spiritual brethren when tossed about, as having been adorned by God Himself incarnate for us with power and sacerdotal authority .....And Sophronius of blessed memory, who was Patriarch of the holy city of Christ our God, and under whom I was bishop, conferring not with flesh and blood, but caring only for the things of Christ with respect to your Holiness, hastened to send my nothingness without delay about this matter alone to this Apostolic see, where are the foundations of holy doctrine.
Constantinople
St. John Chrysostom, Patriarch of Constantinople (c. 387)
And why, then, passing by the others, does He converse with Peter on these things? (John 21:15). He was the chosen one of the Apostles, and the mouth of the disciples, and the leader of the choir. On this account, Paul also went up on a time to see him rather than the others (Galatians 1:1. And withal, to show him that he must thenceforward have confidence, as the denial was done away with, He puts into his hands the presidency over the brethren. And He brings not forward the denial, nor reproches him with what had past, but says, 'If you love me, preside over the brethren ...and the third time He gives him the same injunction, showing what a price He sets the presidency over His own sheep. And if one should say, 'How then did James receive the throne of Jerusalem?,' this I would answer that He appointed this man (Peter) teacher, not of that throne, but of the whole world. (Chrysostom, In Joan. Hom. 1xxxviii. n. 1, tom. viii)
John Cassian, Monk (c. 430)
That great man, the disciple of disciples, that master among masters, who wielding the government of the Roman Church possessed the principle authority in faith and in priesthood. Tell us, therefore, we beg of you, Peter, prince of Apostles, tell us how the Churches must believe in God (Cassian, Contra Nestorium, III, 12, CSEL, vol. 17, p. 276).
Macedonius, Patriarch of Constantinople (466-516)
Macedonius declared, when desired by the Emperor Anastasius to condemn the Council of Chalcedon, that 'such a step without an Ecumenical Synod presided over by the Pope of Rome is impossible.' (Macedonius, Patr. Graec. 108: 360a (Theophan. Chronogr. pp. 234-346 seq.)
Emperor Justinian (520-533)
Writing to the Pope:
Yielding honor to the Apostolic See and to Your Holiness, and honoring your Holiness, as one ought to honor a father, we have hastened to subject all the priests of the whole Eastern district, and to unite them to the See of your Holiness, for we do not allow of any point, however manifest and indisputable it be, which relates to the state of the Churches, not being brought to the cognizance of your Holiness, since you are the Head of all the holy Churches. (Justinian Epist. ad. Pap. Joan. ii. Cod. Justin. lib. I. tit. 1).
Let your Apostleship show that you have worthily succeeded to the Apostle Peter, since the Lord will work through you, as Surpreme Pastor, the salvation of all. (Coll. Avell. Ep. 196, July 9th, 520, Justinian to Pope Hormisdas).
St. Maximus the Confessor (c. 650)
A celebrated theologian and a native of Constantinople
How much more in the case of the clergy and Church of the Romans, which from old until now presides over all the churches which are under the sun? Having surely received this canonically, as well as from councils and the apostles, as from the princes of the latter (Peter and Paul), and being numbered in their company, she is subject to no writings or issues in synodical documents, on account of the eminence of her pontificate .....even as in all these things all are equally subject to her (the Church of Rome) according to sacerodotal law. And so when, without fear, but with all holy and becoming confidence, those ministers (the popes) are of the truly firm and immovable rock, that is of the most great and Apostolic Church of Rome. (Maximus, in J.B. Mansi, ed. Amplissima Collectio Conciliorum, vol. 10)
If the Roman See recognizes Pyrrhus to be not only a reprobate but a heretic, it is certainly plain that everyone who anathematizes those who have rejected Pyrrhus also anathematizes the See of Rome, that is, he anathematizes the Catholic Church. I need hardly add that he excommunicates himself also, if indeed he is in communion with the Roman See and the Catholic Church of God ...Let him hasten before all things to satisfy the Roman See, for if it is satisfied, all will agree in calling him pious and orthodox. For he only speaks in vain who thinks he ought to pursuade or entrap persons like myself, and does not satisfy and implore the blessed Pope of the most holy Catholic Church of the Romans, that is, the Apostolic See, which is from the incarnate of the Son of God Himself, and also all the holy synods, accodring to the holy canons and definitions has received universal and surpreme dominion, authority, and power of binding and loosing over all the holy churches of God throughout the whole world. (Maximus, Letter to Peter, in Mansi x, 692).
John VI, Patriarch of Constantinople (715)
The Pope of Rome, the head of the Christian priesthood, whom in Peter, the Lord commanded to confirm his brethren. (John VI, Epist. ad Constantin. Pap. ad. Combefis, Auctuar. Bibl. P.P. Graec.tom. ii. p. 211, seq.)
St. Nicephorus, Patriarch of Constantinople (758-82
Without whom (the Romans presiding in the seventh Council) a doctrine brought forward in the Church could not, even though confirmed by canonical decrees and by ecclesiastical usuage, ever obtain full approval or currency. For it is they (the Popes of Rome) who have had assigned to them the rule in sacred things, and who have received into their hands the dignity of headship among the Apostles. (Nicephorus, Niceph. Cpl. pro. s. imag. c 25 [Mai N. Bibl. pp. ii. 30]).
St. Theodore the Studite of Constantinople (759-826)
Writing to Pope Leo III:
Since to great Peter Christ our Lord gave the office of Chief Shepherd after entrusting him with the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, to Peter or his successor must of necessity every novelty in the Catholic Church be referred. [Therefore], save us, oh most divine Head of Heads, Chief Shepherd of the Church of Heaven. (Theodore, Bk. I. Ep. 23)
Writing to Pope Paschal:
Hear, O Apostolic Head, divinely-appointed Shepherd of Christ's sheep, keybearer of the Kingdom of Heaven, Rock of the Faith upon whom the Catholic Church is built. For Peter art thou, who adornest and governest the Chair of Peter. Hither, then, from the West, imitator of Christ, arise and repel not for ever (Ps. xliii. 23). To thee spake Christ our Lord: 'And thou being one day converted, shalt strengthen thy brethren.' Behold the hour and the place. Help us, thou that art set by God for this. Stretch forth thy hand so far as thou canst. Thou hast strength with God, through being the first of all. (Letter of St. Theodore and four other Abbots to Pope Paschal, Bk. ii Ep. 12, Patr. Graec. 99, 1152-3)
Writing to Emperor Michael:
Order that the declaration from old Rome be received, as was the custom by Tradition of our Fathers from of old and from the beginning. For this, O Emperor, is the highests of the Churches of God, in which first Peter held the Chair, to whom the Lord said: Thou art Peter ...and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. (Theodore, Bk. II. Ep. 86)
I witness now before God and men, they have torn themselves away from the Body of Christ, from the Surpreme See (Rome), in which Christ placed the keys of the Faith, against which the gates of hell (I mean the mouth of heretics) have not prevailed, and never will until the Consummation, according to the promise of Him Who cannot lie. Let the blessed and Apostolic Paschal (Pope St. Paschal I) rejoice therefore, for he has fulfilled the work of Peter. (Theodore Bk. II. Ep. 63).
In truth we have seen that a manifest successor of the prince of the Apostles presides over the Roman Church. We truly believe that Christ has not deserted the Church here (Constantinople), for assistance from you has been our one and only aid from of old and from the beginning by the providence of God in the critical times. You are, indeed the untroubled and pure fount of orthodoxy from the beginning, you the calm harbor of the whole Church, far removed from the waves of heresy, you the God-chosen city of refuge. (Letter of St. Theodor and Four Abbots to Pope Paschal).
Let him (Patriarch Nicephorus of Constantinople) assemble a synod of those with whom he has been at variance, if it is impossible that representatives of the other Patriarchs should be present, a thing which might certainly be if the Emperor should wish the Western Patriarch (the Roman Pope) to be present, to whom is given authority over an ecumenical synod; but let him make peace and union by sending his synodical letters to the prelate of the First See. (Theodore the Studite, Patr. Graec. 99, 1420)
Antioch
Theodoret, Bishop of Cyrus in Syria (450)
A native of Antioch, Theodoret ruled under the Antiochean Patriarch.
'For as I,' He says, 'did not despise thee when tossed, so be thou a support to thy brethren in trouble, and the help by which thou was saved do thou thyself impart to others, and exhort them not while they are tottering, but raise them up in their peril. For this reason I suffer thee also to slip, but do not permit thee to fall, thus through thee gaining steadfastness for those who are tossed.' So this great pillar supported the tossing and sinking world, and permitted it not to fall entirely and gave it back stability, having been ordered to feed God's sheep. (Theodoret, Oratio de Caritate in J. P. Minge, ed., Partrologiae Curses Completus: Series Graeca).
I therefore beseech your holiness to persuade the most holy and blessed bishop (Pope Leo) to use his Apostolic power, and to order me to hasten to your Council. For that most holy throne (Rome) has the sovereignty over the churches throughout the universe on many grounds. (Theodoret, Tom. iv. Epist. cxvi. Renato, p. 1197).
If Paul, the herald of the truth, the trumpet of the Holy Spirit, hastened to the great Peter, to convey from him the solution to those in Antioch, who were at issue about living under the law, how much more do we, poor and humble, run to the Apostolic Throne (Rome) to receive from you (Pope Leo) healing for wounds of the the Churches. For it pertains to you to have primacy in all things; for your throne is adorned with many prerogatives. (Theodoret Ibid, Epistle Leoni) -
The post above proves the Early Patriach acknowledged his authority.
-
Your post is long and confusing.Originally posted by Pope Nicholas:The post above proves the Early Patriach acknowledged his authority.
Do you distinguish between patriarchs and church fathers?
As usual, the quotes are not very differentiating. It is one thing to say the Apostle Peter lords over other apostles; it is another thing to say they all should be respected. You see the difference? The former is the Catholic position. The latter is the Protestant position.
No one doubts that the Roman See is special. No one is saying the Roman See does not have any authority. But primacy in the sense of lordship over other Sees? Hmm .. -
The Roman See has authority.
A good example is Pope Leo's letter to one of the councils (forgot whether it is Nicea or Chalcedon or some other).
The bishops were disputing some theological issues. The Pope did not attend the council but when his letter arrived, it sort of settled the issue.
Power right?
-
The provenance of the Source clearly said who was Patriach and who was a Eastern Church Father.Originally posted by Icemoon:Your post is long and confusing.
Do you distinguish between patriarchs and church fathers?
As usual, the quotes are not very differentiating. It is one thing to say the Apostle Peter lords over other apostles; it is another thing to say they all should be respected. You see the difference? The former is the Catholic position. The latter is the Protestant position.
No one doubts that the Roman See is special. No one is saying the Roman See does not have any authority. But primacy in the sense of lordship over other Sees? Hmm ..
I dont think the EO shares the prot position. I think its between the 2 sides. Peter has POWER but not Rome.
Ok i shall give 3 quotes to show clear primacy haha by the Patriachs themseleves.
Macedonius, Patriarch of Constantinople (466-516)
Macedonius declared, when desired by the Emperor Anastasius to condemn the Council of Chalcedon, that 'such a step without an Ecumenical Synod presided over by the Pope of Rome is impossible.' (Macedonius, Patr. Graec. 108: 360a (Theophan. Chronogr. pp. 234-346 seq.)
The Roman Pontiff is needed to convene a Council.
John VI, Patriarch of Constantinople (715)
The Pope of Rome, the head of the Christian priesthood, whom in Peter, the Lord commanded to confirm his brethren. (John VI, Epist. ad Constantin. Pap. ad. Combefis, Auctuar. Bibl. P.P. Graec.tom. ii. p. 211, seq.)
The Roman Pontiff is head of the clergy.
St. Nicephorus, Patriarch of Constantinople (758-82
Without whom (the Romans presiding in the seventh Council) a doctrine brought forward in the Church could not, even though confirmed by canonical decrees and by ecclesiastical usuage, ever obtain full approval or currency. For it is they (the Popes of Rome) who have had assigned to them the rule in sacred things, and who have received into their hands the dignity of headship among the Apostles. (Nicephorus, Niceph. Cpl. pro. s. imag. c 25 [Mai N. Bibl. pp. ii. 30]).
Pope is needed to preside a council and he is the ruler of the church
Emperor Justinian (520-533)
Writing to the Pope:
Yielding honor to the Apostolic See and to Your Holiness, and honoring your Holiness, as one ought to honor a father, we have hastened to subject all the priests of the whole Eastern district, and to unite them to the See of your Holiness, for we do not allow of any point, however manifest and indisputable it be, which relates to the state of the Churches, not being brought to the cognizance of your Holiness, since you are the Head of all the holy Churches. (Justinian Epist. ad. Pap. Joan. ii. Cod. Justin. lib. I. tit. 1).
Let your Apostleship show that you have worthily succeeded to the Apostle Peter, since the Lord will work through you, as Surpreme Pastor, the salvation of all. (Coll. Avell. Ep. 196, July 9th, 520, Justinian to Pope Hormisdas).
It clearly shows that the Patriachs acknowledged the Pope as Successor to Peter and head of the Church. -
Yupz, the Tome of Leo.Originally posted by Icemoon:The Roman See has authority.
A good example is Pope Leo's letter to one of the councils (forgot whether it is Nicea or Chalcedon or some other).
The bishops were disputing some theological issues. The Pope did not attend the council but when his letter arrived, it sort of settled the issue.
Power right?
And according to tradition, after Leo had finished his decree, the 630 bishops and 4 papal legates present exclaimed unanimously, "What Leo believes we all believe, anathema to him who believes anything else. Peter has spoken through the mouth of Leo."
This is taken to mean that Popes are the rightful sucessors to St. Peter. -
yay .. three cheers to Rome .. hip hip .. hurray!
-
Originally posted by Pope Nicholas:
So Nicea and Chalcedon were not officially convened by the Pope .. how?
The provenance of the Source clearly said who was Patriach and who was a Eastern Church Father.
I dont think the EO shares the prot position. I think its between the 2 sides. Peter has POWER but not Rome.
Ok i shall give 3 quotes to show clear primacy haha by the Patriachs themseleves.
Macedonius, Patriarch of Constantinople (466-516)
Macedonius declared, when desired by the Emperor Anastasius to condemn the Council of Chalcedon, that [b]'such a step without an Ecumenical Synod presided over by the Pope of Rome is impossible.' (Macedonius, Patr. Graec. 108: 360a (Theophan. Chronogr. pp. 234-346 seq.)
The Roman Pontiff is needed to convene a Council.[/b]
Actually the quote is still not differentiating enough. Because I'm sure Prots will also complain *if* the Council in Acts 15(?) was not convened by the pillars of the Jerusalem Church. -
HAHA...naturally.
Why did a portion of the EO split in the Great Schism? -
Because a schismatic church is better than a heretical church.Originally posted by Pope Nicholas:HAHA...naturally.
Why did a portion of the EO split in the Great Schism?
we rather have many lifeboats than one sinking ship. -
you say liao .. according to tradition.Originally posted by Pope Nicholas:Yupz, the Tome of Leo.
And according to tradition, after Leo had finished his decree, the 630 bishops and 4 papal legates present exclaimed unanimously, "What Leo believes we all believe, anathema to him who believes anything else. Peter has spoken through the mouth of Leo."
This is taken to mean that Popes are the rightful sucessors to St. Peter.
which means it is likely not to be true. -
I mean wads the theological difference? I do understand the East split numerous times but tend to return after a while...and even the Council of Florence gave us abrief unity in the 1400s.Originally posted by Icemoon:Because a schismatic church is better than a heretical church.
we rather have many lifeboats than one sinking ship.
But what was the doctrinal reasons? Was it the Filloque? -
I am out of my depth.
A lot of things to study you know .. 2000 years of Catholic history and theology, 400 years of Protestant history and theology.
-
hmmm.. i'm amazed by u guys' knowledge.. but does spending so much time studying the church history and stuff bring any1 closer to God? hey pope, check out my post in the previous page.. thanx..
-
don't be fooled by our "knowledge". can't you see it is all cut and paste? I'm talking about Mr Pope.Originally posted by VivId CrItiQuE:hmmm.. i'm amazed by u guys' knowledge.. but does spending so much time studying the church history and stuff bring any1 closer to God? hey pope, check out my post in the previous page.. thanx.. -
Naturally finding the quotes of ECF takes time and knoweledge.Originally posted by Icemoon:don't be fooled by our "knowledge". can't you see it is all cut and paste? I'm talking about Mr Pope. -
Objection 1: Since the Apostles didnt need Saintly help, neither do we.Originally posted by VivId CrItiQuE:how bout after Christ has ascended to heaven? so ur saying the apostles do not haf to seek moses or elijah (i chose them as examples) because they walked with Christ? or ur implying we are inferior christians, thus we haf to seek the saints to intercede for us?
another point, as pope mentioned, the saints in heaven are not superhumans, thus we need to tell them wad prayers we need. but if all the catholics on earth submit their prayer requests to the saints, can the saints pray wif superhuman speed for all the prayer requests?
i believe when christ told christians to pray for one another, the purpose is to unite christians.. to show christ's love by praying for one another.. its not as though when some1 else pray for u, its more effective, unless u admit u haf lesser faith..
Matthew 18:19-20 "Again, I tell you that if two of you on earth agree about anything you ask for, it will be done for you by my Father in heaven. 20For where two or three come together in my name, there am I with them."
I believe this verse shows that Jesus wanted Christians to be united, it doesn't mean that ur prayers won't be answered if u pray alone, and we all know that Christ is with us even when we are alone..
thus, the main purpose of intercessory prayers are to unite christians and showing Christ's love, effectiveness is secondary.
I answer to that is that there was no Saints in that period. There was no Christians in heaven. Furthermore do we not see the Son of God himself interacting with jewish 'saints'. This shows there is no barrier between Mortals and Glorified Mortals.
Objection 2: Saints are not superhumans and hence cannot hear every catholic prayer.
My answer to that is simply if being in heaven were like being in the next room, then of course itwould be valid. A mortal, unglorified person in the next room would indeed suffer the restrictioons imposed by the way space and time work in our universe. But the saints are not in the next room, and they are not subject to the time/space limitations of this life. This objection protrays a rather childish view of heaven.
Objection 3: Intercessory prayer has one sole benefit and that is uniting christians.
I agree that it unites Christians and hence we should ask the Saints to pray for us. The Saints are Christians and belong to the Church triuphmant. We are not separated from them in any sense. Instead we are united in Christ. Can u truly say the Saints are dead and hence cannot pray for us in heaven?
Also, God answers in particular the prayers of the righteous. James declares:
"The prayer of a righteous man has great power in its effects. Elijah was a man of like nature with ourselves and he prayed fervently that it might not rain, and for three years and six months it did not rain on the earth. Then he prayed again and the heaven gave rain, and the earth brought forth its fruit" (Jam. 5:16–1.
Yet those Christians in heaven are more righteous, since they have been made perfect to stand in GodÂ’s presence (Heb. 12:22-23), than anyone on earth, meaning their prayers would be even more efficacious. -
Originally posted by Pope Nicholas:
Objection 1: Since the Apostles didnt need Saintly help, neither do we.
I answer to that is that there was no Saints in that period. There was no Christians in heaven. Furthermore do we not see the Son of God himself interacting with jewish 'saints'. This shows there is no barrier between Mortals and Glorified Mortals.
There was no Christian in heaven, but how bout Moses and Elijah? Are u saying only Christians pray? Y can't Moses or Elijah intercede for the apostles?
Objection 2: Saints are not superhumans and hence cannot hear every catholic prayer.
My answer to that is simply if being in heaven were like being in the next room, then of course itwould be valid. A mortal, unglorified person in the next room would indeed suffer the restrictioons imposed by the way space and time work in our universe. But the saints are not in the next room, and they are not subject to the time/space limitations of this life. This objection protrays a rather childish view of heaven.
I concede dis point.
Objection 3: Intercessory prayer has one sole benefit and that is uniting christians.
I agree that it unites Christians and hence we should ask the Saints to pray for us. The Saints are Christians and belong to the Church triuphmant. We are not separated from them in any sense. Instead we are united in Christ. Can u truly say the Saints are dead and hence cannot pray for us in heaven?
The purpose of uniting Christians on earth, is so that we can carry out God's work on earth as ONE, power of synergy. I think dis kinda unity is diff from being ONE in Christ. Thus unity applies differently to the dead and alive. So asking the apostles to intercede for us, to me is pretty much meaningless.
Also, God answers in particular the prayers of the righteous. James declares:
"The prayer of a righteous man has great power in its effects. Elijah was a man of like nature with ourselves and he prayed fervently that it might not rain, and for three years and six months it did not rain on the earth. Then he prayed again and the heaven gave rain, and the earth brought forth its fruit" (Jam. 5:16–1.
Yeah, so y didn't the apostles seeked intercessory from Elijah?
Yet those Christians in heaven are more righteous, since they have been made perfect to stand in GodÂ’s presence (Heb. 12:22-23), than anyone on earth, meaning their prayers would be even more efficacious.
Are u sure those Christians in heaven are more righteous? We are declared righteous through faith in Christ. Does the blood of Christ cleanse partially? Thus I believe prayer effectiveness is based on how much faith u haf, and how aligned are your prayers with God's will. Once again, dere isn't a need to seek intercessory from the apostles. -
I think this thread has gone way off topic and that the answer was already given partially.
*locking*