Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: Truth Defender

Miles: “Further, you are mistaken in saying that the Council of Sardica - which recognized appeals to Rome - was not received by the East.”

Truth Defender: ‘Negative. At the time it was held the Eastern Church didn’t accept it. That is history, without being rewritten by Rome at a later date and with new leadership in the Eastern and Western churches.’

You said Sardica was not accepted. Sardica was a local council held in the West; which later was explicitly accepted by the Eastern Church. What you have, here, is a positive proof that the undivided Church accepted the right of appeals to Rome. There are no ifs, ands or buts about it.


405 posted on 08/01/2008 9:37:41 PM PDT by Miles the Slasher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 398 | View Replies ]


To: Miles the Slasher
You said Sardica was not accepted. Sardica was a local council held in the West; which later was explicitly accepted by the Eastern Church. What you have, here, is a positive proof that the undivided Church accepted the right of appeals to Rome. There are no ifs, ands or buts about it.

I've already explained why the author said that. But, here it is again: When the Council was finished, the Eastern church rejected its statements. It was only much later, under new leadership of both the Western and Eastern churches that it was debated and agreed to. Originally it was not accepted by the Eastern church - which is what was said. No if, buts, or ands about it!

428 posted on 08/02/2008 7:24:43 AM PDT by Truth Defender (History teaches, if we but listen to it; but no one really listens!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 405 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson