Green Umbrella vs. Cyrillic (Was: I am Godless)

Cyrillic

Toumarches
Joined
Jun 9, 2012
Messages
13,710
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
25
Location
Netherlands
Green Umbrella, aren't you the papist I'm debating over at another forum?
 

Green_Umbrella

Sr. Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2012
Messages
188
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Cyrillic said:
Green Umbrella, aren't you the papist I'm debating over at another forum?
I am at another forum. But you do credit things to me I have not stated. Why would you do this?
 

Cyrillic

Toumarches
Joined
Jun 9, 2012
Messages
13,710
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
25
Location
Netherlands
Green_Umbrella said:
Cyrillic said:
Green Umbrella, aren't you the papist I'm debating over at another forum?
I am at another forum. But you do credit things to me I have not stated. Why would you do this?
Where did I do that?
 

Green_Umbrella

Sr. Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2012
Messages
188
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Cyrillic said:
Green_Umbrella said:
Cyrillic said:
Green Umbrella, aren't you the papist I'm debating over at another forum?
I am at another forum. But you do credit things to me I have not stated. Why would you do this?
Where did I do that?
Papist

Papist is a (usually disparaging) term or an anti-Catholic slur, referring to the Roman Catholic Church, its teachings, practices, or adherents. The term was coined during the English Reformation to denote a person whose loyalties were to the Pope, rather than to the Church of England. Over time, however, the term came to mean one who supported Papal authority over all Christians.
This does not describe me at present. It may in the future, or it might not. I am an enquirer. I am researching and asking questions. I have formed no conclusions. But I do say the Council of Florence from what I know right now looks ecumenical.

But that leaves many questions. Can ¨the people¨ reject an ecumenical council? Did the Greeks demand the council not to be considered ecumenical unless ratified by local synods. Is that even necessary? Does that matter? What makes a council legit exactly and what does not?

I do not know. I have no conclusions yet. The entire thing is quite complex it seems. It will take some time to for my conclusion. So I am not a Papist.
 

Aristocles

Merarches
Joined
Apr 23, 2003
Messages
10,031
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Pittsburgh
But I do say the Council of Florence from what I know right now looks ecumenical.
A council, coerced to its conclusion and rejected by the Church (the faithful) is not ecumenical.
 

Green_Umbrella

Sr. Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2012
Messages
188
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Αριστοκλής said:
But I do say the Council of Florence from what I know right now looks ecumenical.
A council, coerced to its conclusion and rejected by the Church (the faithful) is not ecumenical.
Watching Cryillic debate the people on the other forum is like watching architects arguing the building codes to a skyscraper with me being the cement mixer. I have no idea what they are talking about. 

;D

I do not know...yet.  ;)
 

dzheremi

Protokentarchos
Joined
Jan 18, 2010
Messages
4,417
Reaction score
0
Points
0
What is difficult to understand about a council being rejected by the people? It's happened plenty of times. Why else do you think we're still not in union with one another? If it were as simple as declaring this or that an ecumenical council that MUST be held to, then we wouldn't see multiple attempts at reunion councils fall flat. The people know their faith, and they wouldn't accept betrayal at Florence from bishops who had been pressured to sign on to something that does not reflect their faith. There is no such thing as "such and such a bishop signed off on it, therefore it's X, Y, Z", the way the Romans have decided applies to their Pope (yet another thing we don't listen to from them). Bishops can be wrong, just like councils that one particular church declares to be preserving the true faith can be doing something else instead.
 

Green_Umbrella

Sr. Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2012
Messages
188
Reaction score
0
Points
0
dzheremi said:
What is difficult to understand about a council being rejected by the people? It's happened plenty of times. Why else do you think we're still not in union with one another? If it were as simple as declaring this or that an ecumenical council that MUST be held to, then we wouldn't see multiple attempts at reunion councils fall flat. The people know their faith, and they wouldn't accept betrayal at Florence from bishops who had been pressured to sign on to something that does not reflect their faith. There is no such thing as "such and such a bishop signed off on it, therefore it's X, Y, Z", the way the Romans have decided applies to their Pope (yet another thing we don't listen to from them). Bishops can be wrong, just like councils that one particular church declares to be preserving the true faith can be doing something else instead.
But you are assuming knowledge I do not have.

e.g. ¨What is difficult to understand about a council being rejected by the people? It's happened plenty of times.¨

It has? I do not know that.

e.g. ¨Bishops can be wrong...¨

They can? I do not know that.

I need to research this and it seems quite complex so it will take some time. Allow me to have it please.
 

Green_Umbrella

Sr. Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2012
Messages
188
Reaction score
0
Points
0
neon_knights said:
Green_Umbrella said:
They can? I do not know that.
I seriously hope that you are being sarcastic here.
I need to research this and it seems quite complex so it will take some time. Allow me to have it please.
 

Aristocles

Merarches
Joined
Apr 23, 2003
Messages
10,031
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Pittsburgh
Green_Umbrella said:
dzheremi said:
What is difficult to understand about a council being rejected by the people? It's happened plenty of times. Why else do you think we're still not in union with one another? If it were as simple as declaring this or that an ecumenical council that MUST be held to, then we wouldn't see multiple attempts at reunion councils fall flat. The people know their faith, and they wouldn't accept betrayal at Florence from bishops who had been pressured to sign on to something that does not reflect their faith. There is no such thing as "such and such a bishop signed off on it, therefore it's X, Y, Z", the way the Romans have decided applies to their Pope (yet another thing we don't listen to from them). Bishops can be wrong, just like councils that one particular church declares to be preserving the true faith can be doing something else instead.
But you are assuming knowledge I do not have.

e.g. ¨What is difficult to understand about a council being rejected by the people? It's happened plenty of times.¨

It has? I do not know that.

e.g. ¨Bishops can be wrong...¨

They can? I do not know that.

I need to research this and it seems quite complex so it will take some time. Allow me to have it please.
The council in 1270 was similarly rejected before Florence. Repeating the same error does not validate it.
 

dzheremi

Protokentarchos
Joined
Jan 18, 2010
Messages
4,417
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Yes, Green Umbrella, the people have rejected councils which did not reflect the Orthodox faith, and bishops and priests who have been guilty of the same tampering have been deposed. The despised Arius was formerly a presbyter at Alexandria. Nestorius was at one time Patriarch of Constantinople, and similarly the monothelite heretic Honorius was once Pope of Rome. They were all heretical and wrong and as wrong can be.
 

Green_Umbrella

Sr. Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2012
Messages
188
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Αριστοκλής said:
Green_Umbrella said:
dzheremi said:
What is difficult to understand about a council being rejected by the people? It's happened plenty of times. Why else do you think we're still not in union with one another? If it were as simple as declaring this or that an ecumenical council that MUST be held to, then we wouldn't see multiple attempts at reunion councils fall flat. The people know their faith, and they wouldn't accept betrayal at Florence from bishops who had been pressured to sign on to something that does not reflect their faith. There is no such thing as "such and such a bishop signed off on it, therefore it's X, Y, Z", the way the Romans have decided applies to their Pope (yet another thing we don't listen to from them). Bishops can be wrong, just like councils that one particular church declares to be preserving the true faith can be doing something else instead.
But you are assuming knowledge I do not have.

e.g. ¨What is difficult to understand about a council being rejected by the people? It's happened plenty of times.¨

It has? I do not know that.

e.g. ¨Bishops can be wrong...¨

They can? I do not know that.

I need to research this and it seems quite complex so it will take some time. Allow me to have it please.
The council in 1270 was similarly rejected before Florence. Repeating the same error does not validate it.
Do you have a link with this information? The only thing I can find about a council in 1270 says...

¨In the Council of 1270, presided over by Bertrand de Malferrat, Archbishop of Arles, the usurpers of ecclesiastical property were severely threatened; unclaimed legacies were allotted to pious uses; the bishops were urged to mutual support; the individual churches were taxed for the support of the papal legate; and ecclesiastics were forbidden to convoke the civil courts against their bishops. Christmas carols were banned.¨
 

Green_Umbrella

Sr. Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2012
Messages
188
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Αριστοκλής said:
Do a better search of the Second Council of Lyons.
Ah ok,

Second Council of Lyon (1274) attempted reunion with the Eastern churches, approved Franciscan and Dominican orders, a tithe to support crusades, and conclave procedures.
 
Top