• Please remember: Pray for Ukraine in the Prayer forum; Share news in the Christian News section; Discuss religious implications in FFA: Religious Topics; Discuss political implications in Politics (and if you don't have access, PM me) Thank you! + Fr. George, Forum Administrator

Isn't Florence an Ecumenical Council? The Pentarchy thought so.

Xavier

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Apr 5, 2015
Messages
1,276
Reaction score
22
Points
38
Age
33
Website
marianapostolate.com
Faith
Ecumenical Catholic Christian
Jurisdiction
The Pope - but my heart is for Re-Union!
Why isn't the Council of Florence considered by Orthodox Christians to be an Ecumenical Council? Even if the claim is (1) the Pentarchy must approve, and (2) the Byzantine Emperor must be present, both conditions were clearly fulfilled, beside the Papal approval. Therefore, Florence is an Ecumenical Council. Thoughts?

" In early April 1438, the Byzantine contingent, over 700 strong, arrived at Ferrara. On 9 April 1438, the first solemn session at Ferrara began, with the Eastern Roman Emperor, the Patriarch of Constantinople and representatives of the Patriarchal Sees of Antioch, Alexandria and Jerusalem in attendance and Pope Eugene IV presiding."

From: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_Florence
 

Samn!

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Sep 14, 2010
Messages
1,216
Reaction score
349
Points
83
Jurisdiction
Patriarchaat van Erps-Kwerps
The issues of representation of the Melkite Patriarchates at Florence is complicated, because they were appointed by the emperor and appear to have been incommunicado from (and had no prior history with) the sees they were purportedly representing. But, even if we grant your premise, the fact that Mark of Ephesus was named as Antioch's representative means that the Pentarchy as a whole did not approve of the council.
 

TheTrisagion

Hoplitarches
Joined
Nov 9, 2012
Messages
17,920
Reaction score
140
Points
63
Age
42
Location
PA, USA
Faith
Orthodox
Jurisdiction
Antiochian
I think you left out the most important determining factor. For an Ecumenical Council to be valid from the perspective of the Orthodox Church, the Church must accept, as a whole, the decision. The Orthodox Church clearly did not accept the decision even if a few representatives did. How "whole church" is defined can sometimes be a bit vague, (ie Fourth Ecumenical Council), but the Council of Florence was definitely not accepted by the "whole church" regardless of how you define it.
 

Asteriktos

Strategos
Joined
Oct 4, 2002
Messages
40,135
Reaction score
612
Points
113
Faith
-
Jurisdiction
-
Whether it's Papal supremacy/infallibility, apostolic succession, or Church Councils, Catholic apologists always seem to forget the special ingredient necessary for something to be considered orthodox: orthodoxy.
 
Last edited:

PorphyriosK

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Aug 26, 2012
Messages
1,976
Reaction score
398
Points
83
Faith
Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction
ROCOR
Why isn't the Council of Florence considered by Orthodox Christians to be an Ecumenical Council? Even if the claim is (1) the Pentarchy must approve, and (2) the Byzantine Emperor must be present, both conditions were clearly fulfilled, beside the Papal approval. Therefore, Florence is an Ecumenical Council. Thoughts?

" In early April 1438, the Byzantine contingent, over 700 strong, arrived at Ferrara. On 9 April 1438, the first solemn session at Ferrara began, with the Eastern Roman Emperor, the Patriarch of Constantinople and representatives of the Patriarchal Sees of Antioch, Alexandria and Jerusalem in attendance and Pope Eugene IV presiding."

From: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_Florence
We could easily pose a similar question:

Why isn't the Council of *Constantinople 879-880* considered by *Roman Catholics* to be an Ecumenical Council? Even if the claim is (1) the Pentarchy must approve, and (2) the Byzantine Emperor must be present, both conditions were clearly fulfilled, beside the Papal approval. Therefore, *Constantinople 879-880* is an Ecumenical Council. Thoughts?
 

Vanhyo

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Mar 26, 2015
Messages
1,200
Reaction score
29
Points
48
Location
Bulgaria
Faith
Orthodox
Jurisdiction
BOC
Actually you will find out that all robber councils have the following in common: political goal and abuse.
 

Xavier

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Apr 5, 2015
Messages
1,276
Reaction score
22
Points
38
Age
33
Website
marianapostolate.com
Faith
Ecumenical Catholic Christian
Jurisdiction
The Pope - but my heart is for Re-Union!
Apotheoun said:
The Council of Florence is not ecumenical because it promoted error on various issues. The end.
That's pure private judgment, though. Not the Pentarchy's judgment. Someone who rejected Chalcedon's Ecumenicity could as well say "The Council of Chalcedon is not Ecumenical because it promoted error on various issues. The end". Chalcedon is Ecumenical because the Pope approved. Or, if you wish, because the Pentarchy approved. You have to be consistent in the external requirements needed for an Ecumenical Council.

I will post excerpts from the Byzantine Emperor at the Council of Florence later on. I believe he said something like "I view this current Ecumenical Council to be no less holy than the previous ones". The participants at the Council of Florence believed it to be an Ecumenical Council.

I have quotes from Joseph Gill's "The Council of Florence".

Vanhyo, the Pentarchy did not approve of Ephesus II, therefore it was a Robber Council. Notably, for e.g. Pope St. Leo the Great did not approve.

Give another example of a Robber Council which was approved by Patriarchs and Representatives of all Five Sees?
 

PorphyriosK

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Aug 26, 2012
Messages
1,976
Reaction score
398
Points
83
Faith
Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction
ROCOR
That's pure private judgment, though. Not the Pentarchy's judgment. Someone who rejected Chalcedon's Ecumenicity could as well say "The Council of Chalcedon is not Ecumenical because it promoted error on various issues. The end". Chalcedon is Ecumenical because the Pope approved. Or, if you wish, because the Pentarchy approved. You have to be consistent in the external requirements needed for an Ecumenical Council.

I will post excerpts from the Byzantine Emperor at the Council of Florence later on. I believe he said something like "I view this current Ecumenical Council to be no less holy than the previous ones". The participants at the Council of Florence believed it to be an Ecumenical Council.

I have quotes from Joseph Gill's "The Council of Florence".

Vanhyo, the Pentarchy did not approve of Ephesus II, therefore it was a Robber Council. Notably, for e.g. Pope St. Leo the Great did not approve.

Give another example of a Robber Council which was approved by Patriarchs and Representatives of all Five Sees?
I believe you might be getting these arguments from the Dimond Brothers heretical video. Which by the way, has been thoroughly refuted.

Again, everything you're asserting about Florence can be applied to the Photian Council of 879-880, with the exception being that Rome held that one as Ecumenical for hundreds of years before striking it from the record.
 
Last edited:

Cavaradossi

Archon
Joined
Jun 23, 2011
Messages
2,159
Reaction score
157
Points
63
Faith
Orthodox
Jurisdiction
AANA
As mentioned in Samn!'s response, the council was not approved by the pentarchy as a whole. Not only were the representatives not in communication with the patriarchates they were representing, and not only did St. Mark of Ephesus reject the council, but the other three Eastern Patriarchates, when they received news of what had transpired at the council, only provisionally accepted the decision of their "representatives" until such a time when they could review the council's decisions. When such a review was carried out early in the 1440's, the other three Eastern Patriarchates decided not to accept Florence.
 

MalpanaGiwargis

High Elder
Joined
Aug 7, 2014
Messages
699
Reaction score
51
Points
28
Location
Atlanta, GA
Faith
Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction
ACROD
Xavier, the modern Catholic list of which councils (up to that time) are ecumenical was assembled for the first time in 1586 by Bellarmine in his De controversiis (On Controversies); before him the number varied considerably, but his list came to be authoritative among Roman Catholics. He is the first author to flatly declare that the Pentarchy is not even necessary for ecumenical status, only papal approval. The Catholic position on what makes an ecumenical council is thus younger than the Council of Trent—it can hardly be surprising that the Orthodox don't share it.

You are trying to force Orthodoxy into Roman Catholic categories—it doesn't work like that. Is the Orthodox approach messy? Yes. Does the Orthodox approach make it difficult to account for all the data at times (e.g., Chalcedon)? Yes, sometimes. But the Catholic papal doctrine only gives the appearance of a solution to the problem. Besides papal approval, you have to be willing to effectively accept a papal "line-item veto," so that popes can accept parts of councils and not others—and always to the advantage of papal power. Funny how that works, huh?
 

scamandrius

Merarches
Joined
Jan 22, 2006
Messages
9,407
Reaction score
13
Points
38
Location
Omaha
Faith
Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction
Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Denver
Why isn't the Council of Florence considered by Orthodox Christians to be an Ecumenical Council? Even if the claim is (1) the Pentarchy must approve, and (2) the Byzantine Emperor must be present, both conditions were clearly fulfilled, beside the Papal approval. Therefore, Florence is an Ecumenical Council. Thoughts?

" In early April 1438, the Byzantine contingent, over 700 strong, arrived at Ferrara. On 9 April 1438, the first solemn session at Ferrara began, with the Eastern Roman Emperor, the Patriarch of Constantinople and representatives of the Patriarchal Sees of Antioch, Alexandria and Jerusalem in attendance and Pope Eugene IV presiding."

From: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_Florence
When referring to the head of the Eastern Roman Empire, he is called the Eastern Roman Emperor. There never was a Byzantine Empire, a Byzantine Emperor, a Byzantine people.
 

Katechon

High Elder
Warned
Post Moderated
Joined
Nov 16, 2018
Messages
522
Reaction score
256
Points
63
Location
Germany
Faith
Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction
ROC-MP
When referring to the head of the Eastern Roman Empire, he is called the Eastern Roman Emperor.
Or simply Roman Emperor, since during the time of the Seven Ecumenical Councils there wasn't even a pretender in the West.
 

Pravoslavbob

Protokentarchos
Staff member
Moderator
Site Supporter
Joined
Nov 16, 2004
Messages
3,797
Reaction score
68
Points
48
Location
Canada
Faith
Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction
OCA
Why isn't the Council of Florence considered by Orthodox Christians to be an Ecumenical Council? Even if the claim is (1) the Pentarchy must approve, and (2) the Byzantine Emperor must be present, both conditions were clearly fulfilled, beside the Papal approval. Therefore, Florence is an Ecumenical Council. Thoughts?

" In early April 1438, the Byzantine contingent, over 700 strong, arrived at Ferrara. On 9 April 1438, the first solemn session at Ferrara began, with the Eastern Roman Emperor, the Patriarch of Constantinople and representatives of the Patriarchal Sees of Antioch, Alexandria and Jerusalem in attendance and Pope Eugene IV presiding."

From: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_Florence
If you genuinely believe that communion with Rome is of paramount concern, why are you yourself not in full communion with Rome?
 

biro

Protostrator
Site Supporter
Joined
Aug 31, 2010
Messages
24,064
Reaction score
473
Points
83
Age
49
Website
archiveofourown.org
The Eastern Empire was only called that because they lost a war against the Western one. Because no one in the East has ever sinned…

The name byzant comes from bezant, a coin.
 

Katechon

High Elder
Warned
Post Moderated
Joined
Nov 16, 2018
Messages
522
Reaction score
256
Points
63
Location
Germany
Faith
Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction
ROC-MP
If you genuinely believe that communion with Rome is of paramount concern, why are you yourself not in full communion with Rome?
If he really is a parishioner of the SSPX or some other such group, his cult-like invocation of "papal authority" is as much ridiculous as it is historiographically tone deaf.
 

Alpo2

High Elder
Joined
Jul 22, 2019
Messages
606
Reaction score
255
Points
43
Faith
Fenno-Ugric Orthodox
Jurisdiction
Finnish Orthodox Inside of Finland
I kind of like SSPX and the like. It's nice to see that at least some in the RCC have a concept of Tradition which can overrule even everything that Pope says.
 

Katechon

High Elder
Warned
Post Moderated
Joined
Nov 16, 2018
Messages
522
Reaction score
256
Points
63
Location
Germany
Faith
Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction
ROC-MP
I kind of like SSPX and the like. It's nice to see that at least some in the RCC have a concept of Tradition which can overrule even everything that Pope says.
Yeah, if they'd be consistent they'd reject Vatican I along with Vatican II. But they aren't. They invoke "papal authority" while undermining it on every level: magisterially, jurisdictionally, personally. I think "papal authority" is as a concept a source of immense pride among Westerners, so it is difficult to let go.
 

Alpo2

High Elder
Joined
Jul 22, 2019
Messages
606
Reaction score
255
Points
43
Faith
Fenno-Ugric Orthodox
Jurisdiction
Finnish Orthodox Inside of Finland
Yeah, if they'd be consistent they'd reject Vatican I along with Vatican II. But they aren't.
Yeah it's a bit illogical but at least they try to be consistently traditional. Many won't bother even trying.
 
Top