Posted on 10/10/2005 9:35:22 AM PDT by NYer
Below are the summaries of the interventions:
- H. Em. Card. Lubomyr HUSAR, M.S.U., Archbishop Major of, President of the Synodm of the Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Church (Kyiv-Halych, UKRAINE)
I believe, first of all, I must express my gratitude to the Secretary General and to the Preparatory Commission who took into account the observations made by the Oriental Churches both in the Lineamenta and in the Instrumentum Laboris.
I would like also to intervene on the Eucharistic practice (no. 22. 23. 24) in the Tradition of the Greek Ukrainian catholic Church, but, wanting to focus the present intervention on another problem, I will postpone this aspect to an in scriptis intervention.
The problem that I face as a Hierarch of a sui iuris Oriental Church refers to numbers 85, 86 and 87 of the Instrumentum Laboris. I express myself in interrogative terms. My preface is that there can be no doubt whatsoever that the Eucharist is the source and summit of the life and the mission of the Church. But this is also true for Oriental Churches!
- If the Liturgy is a regula fidei (lex orandi, lex credendi)
- if the Divine Liturgy celebrated by Oriental Churches in communion with the See of Rome and by the Orthodox or Apostolical Churches is identical for both,
-if there is mutual recognition of the Apostolic Succession of Bishops and, consequently, of priests that celebrate it, then my question is: what more is required for unity?
Is there maybe another fons or another culmen superior to the Eucharist? And if not, why isn’t con-celebration permitted?
A final proposal. In order to grow also in Catholic intraecclesial communion I would like to propose that the next Synod be dedicated to the Oriental Churches.
[00087-02.03] [IN081] [Original text: Italian]
- H.E. Most. Rev. Djura DZUDZAR, Titular Bishop of Acrasso, Apostolic Exarch of Serbia e Montenegro for the Catholics of Byzantine Rite (SERBIA AND MONTENEGRO)
I will now refer to the fourth chapter of Instrumentum Laboris: “The Eucharist and Inculturation” (Nos. 80 and 81), “The Eucharist and Ecumenism” (No. 86), “The Eucharist and Intercommunion” (No. 87).
Inculturation
The constant meetings between East and West leads to confrontation between the two Christian liturgical traditions. The Eastern liturgy is “accused’ of incomprehensibility and archaism, which make the celebration moments “heavy”, but there is good reason for it to be very involving and mystical. Latin simplification instead brings about “liturgical impoverishment”.
To allow our celebration to be a sign of recognition and identity for non Catholics, it is necessary to stress this formation in all the categories of the people of God, with priority for the education institutes, priest-liturgists, deacons, animators and ministrants. In a word, regular pastoral care and an adequate ordinary liturgical catechesis must take precedence.
The Eucharist and Ecumenism
The common celebration can become a strong message in daily life. However, what is necessary are clear premises which indicate up to where it is possible to operate at a liturgical level with the churches and Christian communities which make up the ecumenical mosaic. Therefore, we propose a liturgical guide which helps to make sure that communion, not yet reached, is invoked in the prayer and not taken for granted, and even as an “instrument” of dialogue. The Eucharist and Intercommunion
I underline two possible threats: prejudice, as a first danger, or relativism. Here we also call for clarity and truth; opening up but without disregarding our identity. Even in this sector, the Eucharist cannot be the means for communion, not even the means for building a generic human community. The Eucharist is not even a starting point. It is the ministry of Christ who in the gift of the Eucharist gives us his Body. It is the gift given to he who belongs to Christ and must become a saint for this and therefore, thanks to this fundamental preoccupation, also the seed of unity in the Church and in the world.
The most urgent request to this Synod is: to revisit the Eucharistic mystery in relation to the other Sacraments, especially in relation to the sacramentality of marriage in mixed marriages and offer essential guidance, although to lower it into the local context on the part of the bishops concerned. It is a challenge which we consider involves other areas which are always vaster, and strongly pertinent in the European continent.
[00156-02.06] [IN127] [Original text: Italian]
- H.E. Most. Rev. Menghisteab TESFAMARIAM, M.C.C.I., Bishop of Asmara (ERITREA)
I come from an area of Eastern African Christian Tradition where, among non Catholics, daily celebration of the Eucharist, frequent reception of Holy Communion, reservation of the Sacred Speces in the Tabernacle, and adoration of the Eucharist outside Holy Mass are not practiced.
Does this mean there is less celebration of the Sacred Mysteries? Or, does it mean there is less adoration in these Churches? Not at all. There is only a different approach and different theological sensibilities. As a Catholic minority we do have all the above mentioned traditional Latin Catholic practices. But we feel we need to embed them better within an Eastern Christian Spirituality.
The second chapter of Part III of the Instrumentum Laboris has a beautiful title: Adoring the Lord in Mystery. The Eucharist is indeed the Mystery of our Faith. The subtitle of the same chapter is however not clear. What does" From Celebration to Adoration" mean? I hope it does not mean a temporal sequence, or an essential dichotomy between the two actions of the people of God. In the Liturgical action of the Eastern Churches celebration and adoration are two actions intrinsecally united. They are two aspects of the same reality, just as the table of the word and that of the Body and Blood of Christ are two parts of the same Eucharistic Banquet. Celebration and adoration go hand in hand. They do not follow each other. The first stresses the festive aspect, the second highlights the Greatness and Holiness of God. On one hand, we celebrate the great things God has done for us through His only Son our Lord and Redeemer Jesus Christ. We feel so close and familiar to Him and sing Allelujah! In our tradition there should be only the High Mass all sung and everybody involved: Priest, deacon, people. Liturgical dances prepare the people before Mass. God has become one of us and has offered His life for us. He is the Emmanuel! God with us.
On the other hand, we adore the Lord of Glory together with the angels and archangels, Cherubim and Seraphim. During the Holy Eucharistic action Heaven and Earth are in unison to prostrate themselves in adoration before pteMajesty of the Triune God, the wholly O!her. The doxologies sung during the Holy Mass are but an expression of the intense experiences of this awe inspiring presence of the Holy: "Holy, Holy Holy, God of Power and Might. Heaven and Earth are full of your Glory. Hosanna in the Highest".
Celebration and Adoration are thus two inseparable actions of the people of God gathered around the table of the Word and Christ's Body and Blood. These two actions unite Heaven and Earth. For a brief moment heaven descends and is tangible among men. It is like the experience of the disciples of Jesus, Peter John and James on Mount Tabor. The Eucharist is Mystery of Faith. It cannot be worthily celebrated without a deep sense of the Sacred. An act of adoration without a feeling of wonder and amazement may inspire only fear and despair. Hence we need to stress the unity of celebration and adoration. We have to encourage our faithful to become an adoring celebrating community, be it during Mass or outside Mass.
[00215-02.03] [IN179] [Original text: English]
"Is not that the Orthodox lack things needing clarification themselves. The issue of the "Aerial Toll Houses" comes to mind."
Not much need for clarification there, just a good belly laugh! Actually, that's an old Russian idea, or at least it was the Russians who ran with it. I suspect it was a way to deal with Purgatory. I don't know anyone, or at least anyone we should take seriously, who gives them a second thought.
"I think the Catholic intelligentsia are well meaning, but naive."
I've never seen it put that way in this context. I suppose it fits, but perhaps its the sort of naivete we see sometimes in American foreign policy.
"The biggest issue is that both sides claim to be the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, and nothing is going to change that."
I can't see that anything need change that.
I'
Bishops meet at Vatican for synod; Communion to Catholic politicians on agenda
Papal Homily at Opening of Synod - "Lord: Help Us to Be Converted!"
Briefing on Synod of Bishops (to the media)
A primer on the October Synod of Bishops in Rome
Top Cardinal Plays Down Priest Shortage (Divorcees to receive communion?)
The First Synod after the Conclave Gets Underway. The Pope Is Being Tested
Ordination of married men is raised at Vatican synod
Bishop Urges Talk of Polticians at Vatican
Abandon Eucharistic doctrine, dissidents urge Synod
Vatican clamps down on information at synod
Bishops Discussing Communion in the Hand - Also Concerned About How the Mass Is Celebrated
Synod Reflects on a Key Ecumenical Question
SYNODUS EPISCOPORUM BULLETIN (Summary of Synod Working Groups - First Session - Oct.5
Archbishop Jan Lenga of Kazakhstan: Restore Tabernacle, Stop Communion in the Hand
"No to General Absolution," Except Rarely, Says Cardinal Re
SYNOD - Report #5: Environment, social justice emerge as eucharistic themes
No ban on gays expected in Vatican document; will advise 'prudential judgement'
Communion in hand versus on tongue gets attention at synod (strange commentary from bishops)
Synod - 07Oct - Married vs Celibate Priests
Synod - 06Oct - The Trinitarian, Marian, and Ecclesiological dimension of the Eucharist
Pope Addresses Synod Unexpectedly
Some bishops say church must reconsider role for married priests
Deja vu: First week of (Vatican) synod follows patterns from past
7 Key Topics Discussed So Far at (Vatican) Synod - Spokesman Assesses 1st Week of Assembly
Eucharistic adoration is key, but also has drawbacks, bishops say
SYNOD OF BISHOPS - 10OCT05 - Intercommunion (with Orthodox Church among topics)
SYNOD OF BISHOPS - 10OCT05 - Participation of the Laity (with music)
I don't know...Fr. Seraphim Rose thought they were a "big deal." As long as there are Orthodox believers who observe these kinds of traditions, things like this will be an issue, and when I say "these kinds of traditions," I don't mean it derogatorily.
Another issue would be the distinction between God and his "energies" and what the Hesychast claimed they saw as "the uncreated light of Tabor." Again, I find all that fascinating--raised eyebrow--and I make no negative judgment about it; I think that there's remarkable agreement between Eastern and Western contemplatives. Yet, the terminology needs more refinement.
And speaking of Orthodox Traditionalists, there's the case of the Old Calendarist and their ethos; they're more influential in Orthodoxy than the Tridentine Traditionalists in the Roman Catholicism. As far as I can tell, there's a lack or an unwillingness on the part of canonical Orthodoxs to engage them in any meaningful way.
The fracture line is obvious for me to see. Like their Latin counterparts, the Orthodox Traditionalists are awaiting for the rest of the Church to reconcile with them; to agree with their worldview may mean getting ready to pay some tolls here, for clerics to be mandated to wear long hair and beards, to take the pews out of the churches--which I think is kind of cool--and for women to yield their places in line to men.
But this is only external details. What's the inner values, the worldview that would be assumed if the Traditionalists are recognized as the true bearers of Orthodoxy? What attitudes would derive from this?
Push them away, and then, what would be the cost for World Orthodoxy?
My friend, not everything is sweetness and light in Orthodoxy. The questions facing you are as tough as the one facing us: Who are we? What are we? Where's the Royal Path? Who are the extremes? Where and when will Love triumph?
-Theo
Okay .... now THAT just made my day :-)
"I don't know...Fr. Seraphim Rose thought they were a "big deal."
Yeah, I know he said that, and I mean that derogatorily.
"Another issue would be the distinction between God and his "energies" and what the Hesychast claimed they saw as "the uncreated light of Tabor." Again, I find all that fascinating--raised eyebrow--and I make no negative judgment about it; I think that there's remarkable agreement between Eastern and Western contemplatives. Yet, the terminology needs more refinement."
Why?
"And speaking of Orthodox Traditionalists, there's the case of the Old Calendarist and their ethos; they're more influential in Orthodoxy than the Tridentine Traditionalists in the Roman Catholicism."
They are? Where?
"As far as I can tell, there's a lack or an unwillingness on the part of canonical Orthodoxs to engage them in any meaningful way."
You are right. They are not canonical group. Why should we "engage" with them?
" to agree with their worldview may mean getting ready to pay some tolls here"
Again I ask, why? One could say the same thing about Protestant ecclesial assemnlies and I would respond with the same why.
"What's the inner values, the worldview that would be assumed if the Traditionalists are recognized as the true bearers of Orthodoxy?"
If you mean those groups which go by variations of "The One True Holy Honest to God Orthodox Church", you'd end up with a heretical Christian type Taliban. But they are a tiny, tiny group. It won't happen.
"Push them away, and then, what would be the cost for World Orthodoxy?"
Nothing. Its been done.
"My friend, not everything is sweetness and light in Orthodoxy."
True enough.
"The questions facing you are as tough as the one facing us: Who are we? What are we? Where's the Royal Path? Who are the extremes? Where and when will Love triumph?"
You're kidding, right?
I think in the context of reunification, each side's view of mutual exclusivity creates an impenetrable barrier.
There seems to be a certain unwillingness on the Orthodox side to acknowledge the Eastern and Western theological approaches have differed since patristic times.
Like, where do the early papal claims fall within the context of Orthodoxy? I read about the "Orthodox Popes of Rome" on Orthodox Web sites all the time, but using the Byzantine criteria for being Orthodox, they never were.
Not to beat a dead horse here, but the Popes of Rome always claimed a certain extraordinary authority for themselves. Like I said before, I do not cling to the ultramontane view of the papacy. I am just posting these citations for discussion's sake.
Authority Claimed by the Bishop of Rome,The Pope
"The Church of God which sojourns in Rome to the Church of God which sojourns in Corinth....If anyone disobey the things which have been said by Him through us, let them know that they will involve themselves in transgression and in no small danger."
Clement of Rome[regn. c A.D.91-101],1st Epistle to the Corinthians,1,59:1 (c.A.D. 96),in JUR,I:7,12
"Thereupon Victor, who presided over the church at Rome, immediately attempted to cut off from the common unity the parishes of all Asia, with the churches that agreed with them, as heterodox; and he wrote letters and declared all the brethren there wholly excommunicate..."
Victor I [regn A.D. 189-198],in Eusebius EH,24:9,in NPNF2,I:242-243
"Stephen, that he who so boasts of the place of his episcopate, and contends that he holds the succession from Peter, on whom the foundations of the Church were laid...Stephen, who announces that he holds by succession the throne of Peter"
Stephen I [regn A.D. 254-257], Firmilian to Cyprian,Epistle 74/75:17(A.D. 256).in ANF,V:394
"And why was nothing said to us concerning the Church of the Alexandrians in particular? Are you ignorant that the custom has been for word to be written first to us, and then for a just decision to be passed from this place? If then any such suspicion rested upon the Bishop there, notice thereof ought to have been sent to the Church of this place; whereas, after neglecting to inform us, and proceeding on their own authority as they pleased, now they desire to obtain our concurrence in their decisions, though we never condemned him. Not so have the constitutions of Paul, not so have the traditions of the Fathers directed; this is another form of procedure, a novel practice. I beseech you, readily bear with me: what I write is for the common good. For what we have received from the blessed Apostle Peter s, that I signify to you; and I should not have written this, as deeming that these things were manifest unto all men, had not these proceedings so disturbed us."
Julius[regn A.D. 337-352],To the Eusebians,fragment in Athanasius' Against the Arians,2:35,in NPNF2,IV:118
"Most honourable sons: Inasmuch as your love renders to the apostolic see the reverence which is its due, accept the same in no niggard measure for yourselves. For even though in the holy church in which the holy apostle sat, and taught us how it becomes us to manage the rudder which has been committed to us, we nevertheless confess ourselves to be unworthy of the honour, we yet on this very account strive by every means within our power if haply we may be able to achieve the glory of that blessedness....Why then do you again ask me for the condemnation of Timotheus? Here, by the judgment of the apostolic see, in the presence of Peter, bishop of Alexandria, he was condemned, together with his teacher, Apollinarius, who will also in the day of judgment undergo due punishment and torment. But if he succeeds in persuading some less stable men, as though having some hope, after by his confession changing the true hope which is in Christ, with him shall likewise perish whoever of set purpose withstands the order of the Church. May God keep you sound, most honoured sons."
Damasus[regn A.D. 366-384],To the Eastern Bishops,fragment in Theodoret's EH,5:10,in NPNF2,III:139
"We bear the burdens of all who are heavy laden; nay, rather, the blessed apostle Peter bears them in us and protects and watches over us, his heirs,as we trust,in all the care of his ministry....Now let all your priests observe the rule here given, unless they wish to be plucked from the solid, apostolic rock upon which Christ built the universal Church....I think, dearest brother, disposed of all the questions which were contained in your letter of inquiry and have, I believe, returned adequate answers to each of the cases you reported by our son, the priest Basianus, to the Roman Church as to the head of your body....And whereas no priest of the Lord is free to be ignorant of the statutes of the Apostolic See and the venerable provisions of the canons"
Sircius[regn c A.D. 384-399],To Himerius,bishop of Tarragona(Spain),1,3,20,in SL,699,701,707
"Care shall not be lacking on my part to guard the faith of the Gospel as regards my peoples, and to visit by letter, as far as I am able, the parts of my body throughout the divers regions of the earth."
Anastasius[regn A.D. 399-401],Epistle 1,in DOP,182
"In making inquiry with respect to those things that should be treated ... by bishops ... as you have done, the example of ancient tradition ... For you decided that it was proper to refer to our judgement, knowing what is due to the Apostolic See, since all we who are set in this place, desire to follow that Apostle from whom the very episcopate and whole authority of this named derived ... that whatsoever is done, even though it be in distant provinces, should not be ended without being brought to the knowledge of this See, that by its authority the whole just pronouncement should be strengthened, and that from it all other Churches (like waters flowing from their natal source and flowing through the different regions of the world, the pure streams of one incorrupt head)...you also show your solicitude for the well being of all, and that you ask for a decree that shall profit all the Churches of the world at once."
Innocent I[regn A.D. 401-417],To the Council of Carthage,1,2 (A.D. 417), in SEP,146-147
"It is therefore with due care and propriety that you consult the secrets of the Apostolic office that office, I mean, to which belongs, besides the things which are wihtout, the care of all the Churches...Especially as often as a question of faith is discussed, I think that all our brothers and fellow bishops should refer to none other than to Peter, the author of their name and office."
Innocent I[regn A.D. 401-417],To the Council of Mileve,2 (A.D. 417), in SEP,147-148
"Although the tradition of the fathers has attributed to the Apostolic See so great authority that none would dare to contest its judgement, and has preserved this ever in its canons and rules, and current ecclesiastical discipline in its laws still pays the reverence which it ought to the name of Peter...For he himself has care over all the churches, and above all of that which he sat...Since, then Peter is the head of so great authority, and has confirmed the suffrages of our forefathers since his time...and as bishops you are bound to know it; yet; though such was our authority that none could reconsider our decision."
Zosimus[regn A.D. 417-418],To the Council of Carthage,in SPP,175
"For it has never been lawful to reconsider what has once been settled by the apostolic see."
Boniface[regn A.D. 418-422],To Rufus bishop of Thessalonica,in GILES,230
"The universal oredering of the Church at ist birth took its origin from the office of blessed Peter, in which is found both directings power and its supreme authority. From him as from a source, at the time when our religion was in the stage of growth, all churches received their common order. This much is shown by the injunctions of the council of Nicaea, since it did not venture to make a decree in his regard, recognizing that nothing could be added to his dignity: in fact it knew that all had been assigned to him by the word of the Lord. So it is clear that this church is to all churches throughout the world as the head is to the members, and that whoever seperates himself from it becomes an exile from the Christian religion, since he ceases to belong to its fellowship."
Boniface[regn A.D. 418-422],To the bishops of Thessaly,in GILES,230
"None has ever been so rash as to oppose the apostolic primacy, the judgement of which may not be revised; none rebels against it, unless he would judge in his turn."
Boniface[regn A.D. 418-422],To Rufus and bishops of Macedonia,in GILES,231
"Wherefore, assuming to yourself the authority of our see and using our stead and place with power, you will deliver this sentence with utmost severity."
Celestine[regn A.D. 422-427],To Cyril of Alexandria,Epistle 11(A.D. 430),in SPP,208
"The blessed apostle Peter, in his successors, has handed down what he received. Who would be willing to seperate himself from the doctrine of whom the Master himself instructed first among the apostles?"
Sixtus III,[regn A.D. 432-440],To John of Antioch(A.D. 433),in GILES,261
"And so he too rejoices over your good feeling and welcomes your respect for the LORD'S own institution as shown towards the partners of His honour, commending the well ordered love of the whole Church, which ever finds Peter in Peter's See, and from affection for so great a shepherd grows not lukewarm even over so inferior a successor as myself."
Pope Leo the Great[regn. A.D.440-461],Sermon 2(A.D ante 461),in NPNF2,XII:116
" 'Thou an the Christ, the Son of the living God,' and every tongue which confesses the Lord, accepts the instruction his voice conveys. This Faith conquers the devil, and breaks the bonds of his prisoners. It uproots us from this earth and plants us in heaven, and the gates of Hades cannot prevail against it. For with such solidity is it endued by God that the depravity of heretics cannot mar it nor the unbelief of the heathen overcome it."
Pope Leo the Great[regn. A.D.440-461],Sermon 3:2-3(A.D ante 461),in NPNF2,XII:117
"Who does not cease to preside in his see,who will doubt that he rules in every part of the world."
Pope Leo the Great[regn. A.D.440-461],Sermon 5(A.D ante 461),in GCC,95
"But this mysterious function the LORD wished to be indeed the concern of all the apostles, but in such a way that He has placed the principal charge on the blessed Peter, chief of all the Apostles: and from him as from the Head wishes His gifts to flow to all the body: so that any one who dares to secede from Peter's solid rock may understand that he has no part or lot in the divine mystery."
Pope Leo the Great[regn. A.D.440-461],Epistle 10(A.D 445),in NPNF2,XII:8
The Orthodox theologians also seem to dodge how the Roman Popes were addressed during the ecumenical councils, and I think they are important within the context of a reunified apostolic Christendom.
THE EPISTLE OF CYRIL TO NESTORIUS WITH THE XII ANATHEMATISMS.
And if your holiness have not a mind to this according to the limits defined in the writings of our brother of blessed memory and most reverend fellow-minister Celestine, Bishop of the Church of Rome, be well assured then that you have no lot with us, nor place or standing (logon) among the priests and bishops of God.
DECREE OF THE COUNCIL AGAINST NESTORIUS.
As, in addition to other things, the impious Nestorius has not obeyed our citation, and did not receive the holy bishops who were sent by us to him, we were compelled to examine his ungodly doctrines. We discovered that he had held and published impious doctrines in his letters and treatises, as well as in discourses which he delivered in this city, and which have been testified to. Compelled thereto by the canons and by the letter (anagkaiwV katepeixqenteV apo te twn kanonwn, kai ek thV epistolhV, k. t. h.) of our most holy father and fellow-servant Coelestine, the Roman bishop, we have come, with many tears, to this sorrowful sentence against him, namely, that our Lord Jesus Christ, whom he has blasphemed, decrees by the holy Synod that Nestorius be excluded from the episcopal dignity, and from all priestly communion.
EXTRACTS FROM THE ACTS. SESSION II.
Philip the presbyter and legate of the Apostolic See said: We bless the holy and adorable Trinity that our lowliness has been deemed worthy to attend your holy Synod. For a long time ago (palai) our most holy and blessed pope Coelestine, bishop of the Apostolic See, through his letters to that holy and most pious man Cyril, bishop of Alexandria, gave judgment concerning the present cause and affair (wrisen) which letters have been shown to your holy assembly. And now again for the corroboration of the Catholic (kaqolikhV) faith, he has sent through us letters to all your holinesses, which you will bid (pelousate) to be read with becoming reverence (prepontwV) and to be entered on the ecclesiastical minutes.
Arcadius, a bishop and legate of the Roman Church said: May it please your blessedness to give order that the letters of the holy and ever-to-be-mentioned-with-veneration Pope Coelestine, bishop of the Apostolic See, which have been brought by us, be read, from which your reverence will be able to see what care he has for all the Churches.
Cyril, the bishop of Alexandria said: Let the letter received from the most holy and altogether most blessed Coelestine, bishop of the Apostolic See of Rome be read to the holy Synod with fitting honour.
THE LETTER OF POPE COELESTINE TO THE SYNOD OF EPHESUS.
... Out of our solicitude, we have sent our holy brethren and fellow priests, who are at one with us and are most approved men, Arcadius, and Projectus, the bishops, and our presbyter, Philip, that they may be present at what is done and may carry out what things have been already decreed by us (quae a nobis antea statuta sunt, exequatur).
To the performing of which we have no doubt that your holiness will assent when it is seen that what has been decreed is for the security of the whole church.
EXTRACTS FROM THE ACTS. SESSION II.
[immediately following the above-cited letter of the Pope to the Synod of Ephesus]
And all the most reverend bishops at the same time cried out: This is a just judgment. To Coelestine, a new Paul! To Cyril a new Paul! To Coelestine the guardian of the faith! To Coelestine of one mind with the synod! To Coelestine the whole Synod offers its thanks! One Coelestine! One Cyril! One faith of the Synod! One faith of the world!
Projectus, the most reverend bishop and legate, said: Let your holiness consider the form (tupon) of the writings of the holy and venerable pope Coelestine, the bishop, who has exhorted your holiness (not as if teaching the ignorant, but as reminding them that know) that those things which he had long ago defined, and now thought it right to remind you of, ye might give command to be carried out to the uttermost, according to the canon of the common faith, and according to the use of the Catholic Church.
Philip, presbyter and legate of the Apostolic See said: We offer our thanks to the holy and venerable Synod, that when the writings of our holy and blessed pope had been read to you, the holy members by our [or your] holy voices, ye joined yourselves to the holy head also by your holy acclamations. For your blessedness is not ignorant that the head of the whole faith, the head of the Apostles, is blessed Peter the Apostle. And since now our mediocrity, after having been tempest-tossed and much vexed, has arrived, we ask that ye give order that there be laid before us what things were done in this holy Synod before our arrival; in order that according to the opinion of our blessed pope and of this present holy assembly, we likewise may ratify their determination.
Philip the presbyter and legate of the Apostolic See said: There is no doubt, and in fact it has been known in all ages, that the holy and most blessed Peter, prince (exarkoV) and head of the Apostles, pillar of the faith, and foundation (qemelioV) of the Catholic Church, received the keys of the kingdom from our Lord Jesus Christ, the Saviour and Redeemer of the human race, and that to him was given the power of loosing and binding sins: who down even to to-day and forever both lives and judges in his successors. The holy and most blessed pope Coelestine, according to due order, is his successor and holds his place, and us he sent to supply his place in this holy synod, which the most humane and Christian Emperors have commanded to assemble, bearing in mind and continually watching over the Catholic faith.
Projectus, bishop and legate of the Roman Church said: . . . Moreover I also, by my authority as legate of the holy Apostolic See, define, being with my brethren an executor (ekbibasthV) of the aforesaid sentence, that the beforenamed Nestorius is an enemy of the truth, a corrupter of the faith, and as guilty of the things of which he was accused, has been removed from the grade of Episcopal honour, and moreover from the communion of all orthodox priests.
THE LETTER OF THE SYNOD TO POPE CELESTINE.
...The zeal of your holiness for piety, and your care for the right faith, so grateful and highly pleasing to God the Saviour of us all, are worthy of all admiration. For it is your custom in such great matters to make trial of all things, and the confirmation of the Churches you have made your own care. But since it is right that all things which have taken place should be brought to the knowledge of your holiness, we are writing of necessity [to inform you] that, by the will of Christ the Saviour of us all, and in accordance with the orders of the most pious and Christ-loving Emperors, we assembled together in the Metropolis of the Ephesians from many and far scattered regions, being in all over two hundred bishops.
With our brethren and fellow-ministers, both Cyril the bishop and Memnon, who had endured reproval at their hands, we are all in communion, and after the rashness [of their accusers] we both have and do perform the liturgy in common, all together celebrating the Synaxis, having made of none effect their play in writing, and having thus shewn that it lacked all validity and effect. For it was mere reviling and nothing else. For what kind of a synod could thirty men hold, some of whom were marked with the stamp of heresy, and some without sees and ejected [from their dioceses]? Or what strength could it have in opposition to a synod gathered from all the whole world? For there were sitting with us the most reverend bishops Arcadius and Projectus, and with them the most holy presbyter Philip, all of whom were sent by your holiness, who gave to us your presence and filled the place of the Apostolic See (thV apostolikhV kaqedraV).and Christ-loving Emperors, we assembled together in the Metropolis of the Ephesians from many and far scattered regions, being in all over two hundred bishops.
Council of Chalcedon, 451
EXTRACTS FROM THE ACTS. SESSION I.
Paschasinus, the most reverend bishop and legate of the Apostolic See, stood up in the midst with his most reverend colleagues and said: We received directions at the hands of the most blessed and apostolic bishop of the Roman city, which is the head of all the churches, which directions say that Dioscorus is not to be allowed a seat in this assembly, but that if he should attempt to take his seat he is to be cast out. This instruction we must carry out; if now your holiness so commands let him be expelled or else we leave.
Lucentius, the most reverend bishop having the place of the Apostolic See, said: ... And he [Dioscorus] dared to hold a synod without the authority of the Apostolic See, a thing which had never taken place nor can take place.
Paschasinus the most reverend bishop, holding the place of the Apostolic See said: We cannot go counter to the decrees of the most blessed and apostolic bishop ["Pope" for "bishop" in the Latin], who governs the Apostolic See, nor against the ecclesiastical canons nor the patristic traditions.
Lucentius, the most reverend bishop, and legate of the Apostolic See, said: Since the faith of Flavian of blessed memory agrees with the Apostolic See and the tradition of the fathers it is just that the sentence by which he was condemned by the heretics should be turned back upon them by this most holy synod.
THE LETTER OF CYRIL TO JOHN OF ANTIOCH.
To the same purpose the all-wise Peter also said when he wrote of Christ as having "suffered in the flesh," and not in the nature of his ineffable godhead.
THE TOME OF ST. LEO.
Whereupon the blessed Peter, as inspired by God, and about to benefit all nations by his confession, said, "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God." Not undeservedly, therefore, was he pronounced blessed by the Lord, and derived from the original Rock that solidity which belonged both to his virtue and to his name, who through revelation from the Father confessed the selfsame to be both the Son of God and the Christ
EXTRACTS FROM THE ACTS. SESSION II. (continued).
After the reading of the foregoing epistle [the Tome of Leo], the most reverend bishops cried out: This is the faith of the fathers, this is the faith of the Apostles. So we all believe, thus the orthodox believe. Anathema to him who does not thus believe. Peter has spoken thus through Leo. So taught the Apostles. Piously and truly did Leo teach, so taught Cyril. Everlasting be the memory of Cyril. Leo and Cyril taught the same thing, anathema to him who does not so believe. This is the true faith. Those of us who are orthodox thus believe. This is the faith of the fathers. Why were not these things read at Ephesus [i.e. at the heretical synod held there] ? These are the things Dioscorus hid away.
EXTRACTS FROM THE ACTS. SESSION II. (continued).
Paschasinus the bishop of Lilybaeum, in the province of Silicia, and holding the place of the most holy Leo, archbishop of the Apostolic see of old Rome, said in Latin what being interpreted is as follows: It is well known to this beloved of God synod, that divine letters were sent to the blessed and apostolic pope Leo, inviting him to deign to be present at the holy synod. But since ancient custom did not sanction this, nor the general necessity of the time seemed to permit it, he commanded our littleness to preside in his place over this holy council, and therefore it is necessary that whatever things are brought into discussion should be examined by our interference (dialaliaV). Therefore let the book presented by our most beloved-of-God brother, and fellow-bishop Eusebius be received, and read by the beloved of God archdeacon and primicerius of the notaries, Aetius.
EXTRACTS FROM THE ACTS. SESSION III.
[Next follows the petition of Eusebius et post nonnulla four petitions each addressed to "The most holy and beloved-of-God ecumenical archbishop and patriarch of great Rome Leo, and to the holy and ecumenical Synod assembled at Chalcedon, etc., etc. ;" ...the Roman Legates spoke together, and in their speech occurs the following:]
Wherefore the most holy and blessed Leo, archbishop of the great and elder Rome, through us, and through this present most holy synod together with the thrice blessed and all-glorious Peter the Apostle, who is the rock and foundation of the Catholic Church, and the foundation of the orthodox faith, hath stripped him of the episcopate, and hath alienated from him all hieratic worthiness. Therefore let this most holy and great synod sentence the before mentioned Dioscorus to the canonical penalties.
EXTRACTS FROM THE ACTS. SESSION IV.
Paschasinus and Lucentius, the most reverend bishops, and Boniface the most reverend presbyter, legates of the Apostolic See through that most reverend man, bishop Paschasinus said: ... And in the third place the writings of that blessed man, [Pope] Leo, Archbishop of all the churches, who condemned the heresy of Nestorius and Eutyches, shew what the true faith is.
EXTRACTS FROM THE ACTS. SESSION IV.
Paschasinus and Lucentius the most reverend bishops and Boniface a presbyter, vicars of the Apostolic See of Rome, said: If they do not agree to the letter of that apostolic and blessed man, Pope Leo, give directions that we be given our letters of dismission, and let a synod be held there [i. e. in the West].
...
The most blessed bishops of Illyria said: Let those who contradict be made manifest. Those who contradict are Nestorians. Those who contradict, let them go to Rome.
The most magnificent and glorious judges said: Add then to the definition, according to the judgment of our most holy father Leo, that there are two natures in Christ united unchangeably, inseparably, unconfusedly.
THE DEFINITION OF FAITH OF THE COUNCIL OF CHALCEDON.
And, for the confirmation of the orthodox doctrines, it has rightly added to these the letter of the President of the great and old Rome, the most blessed and holy Archbishop Leo, which was addressed to Archbishop Flavian of blessed memory, for the removal of the false doctrines of Eutyches, judging them to be agreeable to the confession of the great Peter, and as it were a common pillar against misbelievers.
EXTRACTS FROM THE ACTS. SESSION VI.
Lucentius, the bishop, said: The Apostolic See gave orders that all things should be done in our presence [This sentence reads in the Latin: The Apostolic See ought not to be humiliated in our presence. ]; and therefore whatever yesterday was done to the prejudice of the canons during our absence, we beseech your highness to command to be rescinded. But if not, let our opposition be placed in the minutes, and pray let us know clearly [Lat. that we may know] what we are to report to that most apostolic bishop who is the ruler of the whole church [i.e. the Pope], so that he may be able to take action with regard to the indignity done to his See and to the setting at naught of the canons.
Fifth Ecumenical Council: Constantinople II, 553
EXTRACTS FROM THE ACTS. SESSION VII.
But we, bishops, answered him [Pope Vigilius]: "If your blessedness is willing to meet together with us and the most holy Patriarchs, and the most religious bishops, and to treat of the Three Chapters and to give, in unison with us all, a suitable form of the orthodox faith, as the Holy Apostles and the holy Fathers and the four Councils have done, we will hold thee as our head, as a [father] and primate...."
Sixth Ecumenical Council: Constantinople III, 680-681
THE LETTER OF POPE AGATHO TO THE EMPEROR.
And that no one may be ignorant of this pious intention of yours, or suspect that we have been compelled by force, and have not freely consented to the carrying into effect of the imperial decrees touching the preaching of our evangelical faith which was addressed to our predecessor Donus, a pontiff of Apostolic memory, they have through our ministry been sent to and entirely approved by all nations and peoples...
Therefore, most Christian lords and sons, in accordance with the most pious jussio of your God-protected clemency, we have had a care to send, with the devotion of a prayerful heart (from the obedience we owe you, not because we relied on the [superabundant] knowledge of those whom we send to you), our fellow-servants here present, Abundantius, John, and John, our most reverend brother bishops, Theodore and George our most beloved sons and presbyters, with our most beloved son John, a deacon, and with Constantine, a subdeacon of this holy spiritual mother, the Apostolic See, as well as Theodore, the presbyter legate of the holy Church of Ravenna and the religious servants of God the monks. For, among men placed amid the Gentiles, and earning their daily bread by bodily labour with considerable distraction, how could a knowledge of the Scriptures, in its fulness, be found unless what has been canonically defined by our holy and apostolic predecessors, and by the venerable five councils, we preserve in simplicity of heart, and without any distorting keep the faith come to us from the Fathers, always desirous and endeavouring to possess that one and chiefest good, viz.: that nothing be diminished from the things canonically defined, and that nothing be changed nor added thereto, but that those same things, both in words and sense, be guarded untouched? To these same commissioners we also have given the witness of some of the holy Fathers, whom this Apostolic Church of Christ [i.e. Rome] receives, together with their books, so that, having obtained from the power of your most benign Christianity the privilege of suggesting, they might out of these endeavour to give satisfaction, (when your imperial Meekness shall have so commanded) as to what this Apostolic Church of Christ [Rome], their spiritual mother and the mother of your God-sprung empire, believes and preaches, not in words of worldly eloquence, which are not at the command of ordinary men, but in the integrity of the apostolic faith, in which having been taught from the cradle, we pray that we may serve and obey the Lord of heaven, the Propagator of your Christian empire, even unto the end. Consequently, we have granted them faculty or authority with your most tranquil mightiness, to afford satisfaction with simplicity whenever your clemency shall command, it being enjoined on them as a limitation that they presume not to add to, take away, or to change anything; but that they set forth this tradition of the Apostolic See in all sincerity as it has been taught by the apostolic pontiffs, who were our predecessors.
And briefly we shall intimate to your divinely instructed Piety, what the strength of our Apostolic faith contains, which we have received through Apostolic tradition and through the tradition of the Apostolical pontiffs, and that of the five holy general synods, through which the foundations of Christ's Catholic Church have been strengthened and established;
This is the apostolic and evangelic tradition, which the spiritual mother of your most felicitous empire, the Apostolic Church of Christ, holds. This is the pure expression of piety. This is the true and immaculate profession of the Christian religion, not invented by human cunning, but which was taught by the Holy Ghost through the princes of the Apostles.
[Does "princes of the Apostles" refer to the Popes, since they are the successors of Peter, and Peter is often called the "Prince of the Apostles"? Or perhaps Peter and Paul?]
And therefore I beseech you with a contrite heart and rivers of tears, with prostrated mind, deign to stretch forth your most clement right hand to the Apostolic doctrine which the co-worker of your pious labours, the blessed apostle Peter [is Pope Agatho referring to himself here?], has delivered, that it be not hidden under a bushel, but that it be preached in the whole earth more shrilly than a bugle: because the true confession thereof for which Peter was pronounced blessed by the Lord of all things, was revealed by the Father of heaven, for he received from the Redeemer of all himself, by three commendations, the duty of feeding the spiritual sheep of the Church; under whose protecting shield, this Apostolic Church of his [i.e. Rome] has never turned away from the path of truth in any direction of error, whose authority, as that of the Prince of all the Apostles, the whole Catholic Church, and the Ecumenical Synods have faithfully embraced, and followed in all things; and all the venerable Fathers have embraced its Apostolic doctrine, through which they as the most approved luminaries of the Church of Christ have shone; and the holy orthodox doctors have venerated and followed it, while the heretics have pursued it with false criminations and with derogatory hatred.
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 hath desired to have you, that he might sift you as wheat; but I have prayed for thee, that (thy) faith fail not. And when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren." Let your tranquil Clemency therefore consider, since it is the Lord and Saviour of all, whose faith it is, that promised that Peter's faith should not fail and exhorted him to strengthen his brethren, how it is known to all that the Apostolic pontiffs, the predecessors of my littleness, have always confidently done this very thing: of whom also our littleness, since I have received this ministry by divine designation, wishes to be the follower, although unequal to them and the least of all. [What follows describes what Honorius was condemned for (a dereliction of the duty to "preach the truth"), which is not something that is prevented by Papal infallibility.] For woe is me, if I neglect to preach the truth of my Lord, which they have sincerely preached. Woe is me, if I cover over with silence the truth which I am bidden to give to the exchangers, i.e., to teach to the Christian people and imbue it therewith. What shall I say in the future examination by Christ himself, if I blush (which God forbid!) to preach here the truth of his words? What satisfaction shall I be able to give for myself, what for the souls committed to me, when he demands a strict account of the office I have received?... Wherefore the predecessors of Apostolic memory of my littleness, learned in the doctrine of the Lord, ever since the prelates of the Church of Constantinople have been trying to introduce into the immaculate Church of Christ an heretical innovation, have never ceased to exhort and warn them with many prayers, that they should, at least by silence, desist from the heretical error of the depraved dogma, lest from this they make the beginning of a split in the unity of the Church...
Therefore the Holy Church of God, the mother of your most Christian power, should be delivered and liberated with all your might (through the help of God) from the errors of such teachers, and the evangelical and apostolic uprightness of the orthodox faith, which has been established upon the firm rock of this Church of blessed Peter, the Prince of the Apostles, which by his grace and guardianship remains free from all error, [that faith I say] the whole number of rulers and priests, of the clergy and of the people, unanimously should confess and preach with us as the true declaration of the Apostolic tradition, in order to please God and to save their own souls.
And indeed the apostolic predecessors of my humility admonished, begged, upbraided, besought, reproved, and exercised every kind of exhortation that the recent wound bright receive a remedy, moved thereto not by a mind filled with hatred (God is my witness) nor through the elation of boasting, nor through the opposition of contention, nor through an inane desire to find some fault with their teachings, nor through anything akin to the love of arrogance, but out of zeal for the uprightness of the truth, and for the rule of the confession of the pure Gospel, and for the salvation of souls, and for the stability of the Christian state, and for the safety of those who rule the Roman Empire. Nor did they cease from their admonitions after the long duration of this domesticated error, but always exhorted and bore record, and that with fraternal charity, not through malice or pertinacious hatred (far be it from the Christian heart to rejoice at another's fall, when the Lord of all teaches, "I desire not the death of a sinner, but that he be converted and live;" and who rejoiceth over one sinner that repenteth more than over ninety-and-nine just persons: who came down from heaven to earth to deliver the lost sheep, inclining the power of his majesty), but desiring them with outstretched spiritual arms, and exhorting to embrace them returning to the unity of the orthodox faith, and awaiting their conversion to the full rectitude of the orthodox faith: that they might not make themselves aliens from our communion, that is from the communion of blessed Peter the Apostle, whose ministry, we (though unworthy) exercise, and preach the faith he has handed down, but that they should together with us pray Christ the Lord, the spotless sacrifice, for the stability of your most strong and serene Empire.
THE LETTER OF AGATHO AND OF THE ROMAN SYNOD OF 125 BISHOPS WHICH WAS TO SERVE AS AN INSTRUCTION TO THE LEGATES SENT TO ATTEND THE SIXTH SYNOD.
[Latin version:]
But we, although most humble, yet strive with all our might that the commonwealth of your Christian empire may be shown to be more sublime than all the nations, for in it has been rounded the See of Blessed Peter, the prince of the Apostles, by the authority of which, all Christian nations venerate and worship with us, through the reverence of the blessed Apostle Peter himself.
[ending of the Greek version:]
... The authority of which for the truth, all the Christian nations together with us worship and revere, according to the honour of the blessed Peter the Apostle himself.
THE DEFINITION OF FAITH. SESSION XVIII.
....the Tome of the most holy and blessed Leo, Pope of the same old Rome, which was directed to St. Flavian, which also this Council called the Pillar of the right faith....
THE PROSPHONETICUS TO THE EMPEROR.
But the highest prince of the Apostles fought with us: for we had on our side his imitator and the successor in his see, who also had set forth in his letter the mystery of the divine word (qeolo giaV). For the ancient city of Rome handed thee a confession of divine character, and a chart from the sunsetting raised up the day of dogmas, and made the darkness manifest, and Peter spoke through Agatho....
LETTER OF THE COUNCIL TO ST. AGATHO.
Serious illnesses call for greater helps, as you know, most blessed [father]; and therefore Christ our true God, who is the creator and governing power of all things, gave a wise physician, namely your God-honoured sanctity, to drive away by force the contagion of heretical pestilence by the remedies of orthodoxy, and to give the strength of health to the members of the church. Therefore to thee, as to the bishop of the first see of the Universal Church, we leave what must be done, since you willingly take for your standing ground the firm rock of the faith, as we know from having read your true confession in the letter sent by your fatherly beatitude to the most pious emperor: and we acknowledge that this letter was divinely written (perscriptas) as by the Chief of the Apostles, and through it we have cast out the heretical sect of many errors which had recently sprung up...
For we cannot laugh at the fall of our neighbours, nor exult with joy at their unbridled madness, nor have we been elated that we might fall all the more grievously because of this thing; not thus, O venerable and sacred head, have we been taught...
Seventh Ecumenical Council: The Second Council of Nicea, 787
THE DIVINE SACRA SENT BY THE EMPERORS CONSTANTINE AND IRENE TO THE MOST HOLY AND MOST BLESSED HADRIAN, POPE OF OLD ROME.
They who receive the dignity of the empire, or the honour of the principal priesthood from our Lord Jesus Christ, ought to provide and to care for those things which please him, and rule and govern the people committed to their care according to his will and good pleasure.
Therefore, O most holy Head (Caput), it is incumbent upon us and you, that irreprehensibly we know the things which be his, and that in these we exercise ourselves, since from him we have received the imperatorial dignity, and you the dignity of the chief priesthood....
As then you are the veritable chief priest (primus sacerdos)who presides in the place and in the see of the holy and superlaudable Apostle Peter, let your paternal blessedness come to us, as we have said before, and add your presence to all those other priests who shall be assembled together here, that thus the will of the Lord may be accomplished.
THE IMPERIAL SACRA. READ AT THE FIRST SESSION.
We have received letters from Hadrian, most Holy Pope of old Rome, by his Legates -- namely, Peter, the God-beloved Archpresbyter, and Peter, the God-beloved Presbyter and Abbot -- who will be present in council with you; and we command that, according to synodical custom, these be read in the hearing of you all; and that, having heard these with becoming silence, and moreover the Epistles contained in two octavos sent by the Chief Priest and other Priests of the Eastern dioceses by John, most pious Monk and Chancellor of the Patriarchal throne of Antioch, and Thomas, Priest and Abbot, who also are present together with you, ye may by these understand what are the sentiments of the Church Catholic on this point.
SESSION II.
PART OF POPE HADRIAN'S LETTER.
[This version not read at the council. For the version that was, see below.]
If you persevere in that orthodox Faith in which you have begun, and the sacred and venerable images be by your means erected again in those parts, as by the lord, the Emperor Constantine of pious memory, and the blessed Helen, who promulgated the orthodox Faith, and exalted the holy Catholic and Apostolic Roman Church your spiritual mother, and with the other orthodox Emperors venerated it as the head of all Churches, so will your Clemency, that is protected of God, receive the name of another Constantine, and another Helen, through whom at the beginning the holy Catholic and Apostolic Church derived strength, and like whom your own imperial fame is spread abroad by triumphs, so as to be brilliant and deeply fixed in the whole world. But the more, if following the traditions of the orthodox Faith, you embrace the judgment of the Church of blessed Peter, chief of the Apostles, and, as of old your predecessors the holy Emperors acted, so you, too, venerating it with honour, love with all your heart his Vicar, and if your sacred majesty follow by preference their orthodox Faith, according to our holy Roman Church. May the chief of the Apostles himself, to whom the power was given by our Lord God to bind and remit sins in heaven and earth, be often your protector, and trample all barbarous nations under your feet, and everywhere make you conquerors. For let sacred authority lay open the marks of his dignity, and how great veneration ought to be shewn to his, the highest See, by all the faithful in the world. For the Lord set him who bears the keys of the kingdom of heaven as chief over all, and by Him is he honoured with this privilege, by which the keys of the kingdom of heaven are entrusted to him. He, therefore, that was preferred with so exalted an honour was thought worthy to confess that Faith on which the Church of Christ is rounded. A blessed reward followed that blessed confession, by the preaching of which the holy universal Church [this apparently refers to Rome] was illumined, and from it the other Churches of God have derived the proofs of Faith. For the blessed Peter himself, the chief of the Apostles, who first sat in the Apostolic See, left the chiefship of his Apostolate, and pastoral care, to his successors, who are to sit in his most holy seat for ever. And that power of authority, which he received from the Lord God our Saviour, he too bestowed and delivered by divine command to the Pontiffs, his successors, etc.
We greatly wondered that in your imperial commands, directed for the Patriarch of the royal city, Tarasius, we find him there called Universal: but we know not whether this was written through ignorance or schism, or the heresy of the wicked. But henceforth we advise your most merciful and imperial majesty, that he be by no means called Universal in your writings, because it appears to be contrary to the institutions of the holy Canons and the decrees of the traditions of the holy Fathers. For he never could have ranked second, save for the authority of our holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, as is plain to all. Because if he be named Universal, above the holy Roman Church which has a prior rank, which is the head of all the Churches of God, it is certain that he shews himself as a rebel against the holy Councils, and a heretic. For, if he is Universal, he is recognized to have the Primacy even over the Church of our See, which appears ridiculous to all faithful Christians: because in the whole world the chief rank and power was given to the blessed Apostle Peter by the Redeemer of the world himself; and through the same Apostle, whose place we unworthily hold, the holy Catholic and Apostolic Roman Church holds the first rank, and the authority of power, now and for ever, so that if any one, which we believe not, has called him, or assents to his being called Universal, let him know that he is estranged from the orthodox Faith, and a rebel against our holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.
SESSION II.
PART OF POPE HADRIAN'S LETTER.
[as read at the council in Greek]
If the ancient orthodoxy be perfected and restored by your means in those regions, and the venerable icons be placed in their original state, you will be partakers with the Lord Constantine, Emperor of old, now in the Divine keeping, and the Empress Helena, who made conspicuous and confirmed the orthodox Faith, and exalted still more your holy mother, the Catholic and Roman and spiritual Church, and with the orthodox Emperors who ruled after them, and so your most pious and heaven-protected name likewise will be set forth as that of another Constantine and another Helena, being renowned and praised through the whole world, by whom the holy Catholic and Apostolic Church is restored. And especially if you follow the tradition of the orthodox Faith of the Church of the holy Peter and Paul, the chief Apostles, and embrace their Vicar, as the Emperors who reigned before you of old both honoured their Vicar, and loved him with all their heart: and if your sacred majesty honour the most holy Roman Church of the chief Apostles, to whom was given power by God the Word himself to loose and to bind sins in heaven and earth. For they will extend their shield over your power, and all barbarous nations shall be put under your feet: and wherever you go they will make you conquerors. For the holy and chief Apostles themselves, who set up the Catholic and orthodox Faith, have laid it down as a written law that all who after them are to be successors of their seats, should hold their Faith and remain in it to the end.
[After the above letter had been read:]
Peter and Peter the most beloved-of-God presbyters who held the place of Hadrian, the most holy pope of Rome, said: We ourselves received such letters from our apostolic father and delivered them to the pious lords.
And when the most blessed Pope heard it, he said: Since this has come to pass in the days of their reign, God has magnified their pious rule above all former reigns. And this suggestion (anaforan) which has been read he sent to our most pious kings together with a letter to your holiness and with his vicars who are here present and presiding.
Tarasius the most holy patriarch said: The divine Apostle Paul, who was filled with the light of Christ, and who hath begotten us through the gospel, in writing to the Romans, commending their zeal for the true faith which they had in Christ our true God, thus said: "Your faith is gone forth into all the world." It is necessary to follow out this witness, and he that would contradict it is without good sense. Wherefore Hadrian, the ruler of Old Rome, since he was a sharer of these things, thus borne witness to, wrote expressly and truly to our religious Emperors, and to our humility, confirming admirably and beautifully the ancient tradition of the Catholic Church. ....
Date: 2005-10-10
Cardinal Husar Suggests a Synod for Eastern Churches
VATICAN CITY, OCT. 10, 2005 (Zenit.org).- Cardinal Lubomyr Husar, archbishop major of Lviv of the Ukrainians, proposed that the next Synod of Bishops be dedicated to the Eastern Churches.
The president of the synod of the Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Church said that this initiative would be important "in order to grow also in Catholic intra-ecclesial communion."
The cardinal today addressed the Synod of Bishops on the Eucharist on the theme, "Tradition of the Greek Ukrainian Catholic Church."
"My preface is that there can be no doubt whatsoever that the Eucharist is the source and summit of the life and mission of the Church," he said. "But this is also true for the Eastern Churches."
He asked: "If the liturgy is a 'regula fidei,' if the Divine Liturgy celebrated by Eastern Churches in communion with the See of Rome and by the Orthodox or apostolic Churches is identical for both, if there is mutual recognition of the apostolic succession of bishops … then my question is: What more is required for unity?"
* * * * *
I believe Kolokotronis addressed Husar's rhetorical question above but the question of a Synod for Eastern Churches is intriguing, so long as the western church is integrated into the discussions. Your thoughts?
John, we've been over this here multiple times over the years. There are page after page of these sorts of quotes from the 1st thousand years of the Church's existence. There are also page after age of quotes from hierarchs who excoriated the the bishop of Rome for presumption. The fact is that no pre-schism pope claimed universal jurisdiction over the whole Church to appoint and remove prelates and priests. No pre-schism pope claimed infallibility. Indeed, there were popes who condemned those ideas. What was going on in the West, however, lead to the Great Schism and things like the Dictatus Papae and frankly it was all downhill after that.
The Eastern Rite bishops in communion with Rome, at least some of them, are even today challenging the power of the Pope to tell them what to do and this has been going on for some time. The Melkites, for example, gave only qualified assent to the Infallibility decree of Vatican I.
I think you will find that the greatest hurdle to union between East and West are the claims of the Papacy to extraordinary authority over the whole Church. The theological disagreements are mostly about words and focus, the result of two different ways of doing theology, and have been and are being dealt with. The interview with Met. John Zizoulis, the representative of the EP to the Synod lays out the Orthodox position clearly. If you haven't read it, I urge you to do so. The Orthodox hierarchs and the Latin ones understand that the role of the Petrine Ministry is the problem. That's why the reinstituted dialogue between the Churches will be dealing with that very issue.
Just as with the Council before that one, eventually some Pope recognized it. The fact that the Popes had to remind everyone of their great power they claimed they were given is indicative that the rest of the Church did not share their opinion. I mean, where does the Queen of England constantly remind her subjects that she is the Queen and the head of the church there and that she must be obeyed? No need for that. Everyone knows it and accepts it.
I am so sick of reading about the Papal Supremacy as a historical "fact" this that I am seriously considering becoming Protestant!
The bottom line is this: our faiths are not the same. This is not an Old Believer or some Traditionalist Orthodox invention -- it's a fact. The Latin Church started with he Filioque and once it got off the train it went off in the other direction. Period. Until and if ever our faiths are restored (by the Latin side returning to the theology of the Undivided Church) the rest of the issues -- such as intercommunion, the Creed, and papacy will disappear as obstacles. We cannot be in communion with those whose faith involves inventions and innovations unknown to the Church of the first millennium.
Kolo, you can continue this exercise in futility. I think enough has been said.
I doubt the RCC will call a Synbod for its 2% Oriental rite churches. I think they are not a link but rather an obstacle to a constructive Latin-Orthodox dialogue.
I know. I am sure my Melkite pastor excommunicated himself when he gave a sermon saying "We don't believe in the pope's universal jurisdiction."
I posted those quotes to try to get a discussion going on where they properly fit within the pheroma of Orthodoxy, not to get a polemic going.
"I know. I am sure my Melkite pastor excommunicated himself when he gave a sermon saying "We don't believe in the pope's universal jurisdiction.""
Dangerous thing to say! :)
"I posted those quotes to try to get a discussion going on where they properly fit within the pheroma of Orthodoxy, not to get a polemic going."
I hardly think my response to your post was polemical! At any rate, JR, phronema is not the problem. The East and the West will have different worldviews for generations and generations after any reunion. The issues are at base theological, not how we do theology. Personally, I believe that the greatest part of the theological issues can be resolved. The ecclesiological issue of the papacy, which is at base a theological issue, or at least arises out of theological issues, will be harder, or even impossible for us to resolve. Beyond that, as Kosta pointed out, we've pretty much exhausted the issue for the here (FR) and now until some other hierarch has a comment about this.
"Ecclesia Triumphans Catholic Apologetics"
Why does this not surprise me, especially the Ecclesia Triumphans part? Thanks for the link!
Selective reading, indeed. A short glance at this document shows where all the FR apologetics get their out-of-context quotes. Predictably, such words that don't fit into their preconceived formula are left unbolded so as to remain invisible at a glance. One such quote left out is where the Bishop of Rome is called Paul, not Peter.
"To Coelestine, a new Paul! To Cyril a new Paul!" (Council of Ephesus)
Of course, the author of this amateur piece of apologia, had to leave that unbolded, because +Cyril was the Bishop of Alexandria, and +Celestine the Bishop of Rome -- so in this case, both are mentioned as equals, successors of +Paul.
Another line left out (conveniently) "To Coelestine of one mind with the synod!" In other words, the Pope is of one mind with the Synod, not the other way around.
Kolo seems to think that the theological issue is secondary, and suggests that the issue of Papal Supremacy is the cruicial one. Without resolving that first, there can be no Ecumenical Council that will hammer out theological issues. +Benedict XVI seems to have made it a priority by the same reasoning.
But, at the same time, the Orthodox Church never denied that the Bishop of Rome is first in honor, or that he is the presiding bishop of an Ecumenical Council. The issue of Papacy is its suggested infallibility. As long as they claim an infallible Pope (and they must!), there can be no reunion.
The real problem, as I see it, is that this Patriarch is outside the Church from the Orthodox point of view -- because of theology of the Latin Church under his jurisdiction.
So, while his place in the Church is undisputed (set in stone by an Ecumenical Council, to which we are bound to adhere), and his Apostolicity is undisputed, he is nevertheless out of (Eucharistic) communion with the Orthodox, and therefore outside of the Orthodox Faith that his predecessors once belonged to.
So, whether we agree on his (in)fallibility or not is not the impediment to his recognition. The infallibility is a theological matter, and therefore subject to and not for an Ecumenical Council.
The disastrous effects of the Vatican I really come to surface here. We cannot hammer out the unity of Faith except through an EC, and we cannot have an EC until the Bishop of Rome calls one, but he can't call one because he is not in communion with the Orthodox. It's that chicken/egg thing.
The only way this may be possible, as many of us have repeated here and elsewhere, is for the Church to simply turn back the hands of time and return to the Church of seven Councils and start afresh, with all innovations given to the EC to resolve. That will never happen. The RCC will simply not renounce one thousand years of its history, and +Benedict XVI made it clear that this is not it either.
Rather, it is an exercise in futility and pride. I think it would be more honest if we simply proclaimed each other outside the Church, separate for good, recognize each other as irreconcilably divorced, and let the gates of hell show us which Church was true. But, judging from the fact that the Church is in violation of the commandant to be united could be disastrous for both sides. It's a failure no matter how we look at it. All of Christianity, that is.
"The disastrous effects of the Vatican I really come to surface here. We cannot hammer out the unity of Faith except through an EC, and we cannot have an EC until the Bishop of Rome calls one, but he can't call one because he is not in communion with the Orthodox. It's that chicken/egg thing."
As you have posited the situation, of course its a chicken and egg thing. But tell me, why does the Pope have to call an Ecumenical Council? And don't tell me he's the default summoner of a council because the Emperor is gone. Why couldn't the five patriarchs of the the Church of the 7 Councils call it together and summon all the Churches to send representatives, get down to business and see if they can work out matters. The fact that we are in schism, historicly isn't an impediment so far as I know. If a Great Council can resolve the theological differences, including the the appropriate role of the pope and the Churches can reach consensus, then we'll see if the people proclaim their AXIOS or ANAXIOS by living that union or not as the case may be. The purpose of the ongoing discussions would be to see where the apparent points of both agreement and disagreement might be so as to properly prepare for such a Great Council.
I think that's what is going on right now. If I'm off the mark here, I'm certainly willing to be corrected! :)
Do Church canons discuss how and by whom and EC can be called?
Oh geeze, I'm just following along and reading here....but do keep pinging me to this one. Nothing but crickets chirping where we were before..
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.