Cyprian Was Wrong on Rebaptism

[Jean-Serge]

The primacy of the pope is simply a primacy of honour... Not of ruling... If it is primacy of ruling you should suppport Pope Nicolas in his conflict with Saint Photius. If it was the case, Saint Peter would not have been afraid of Saint Paul, hising himself... Presiding does not always mean governing : for instance in a constitutionnal monarchy, the sovereign governs but does not govern and rule.

Moreover the single fact that Honorius was condemned (wrongly or not), this being accepted by the see ofRome clearly shows that the Pope were not regarded as supreme authority... But maybe you're catholic.

The problem with this thread is that you base your opinion on an wrong assumption : the true things are those recognised by the Pope of Rome (which is tipically catholic). I think you are entirely mistaken... With a wrong beginning you cannot arrive at good destination...

Finally, Guettée had no interest in lyingsince he was himself catholic and discovered that the catholic interpretation was wrong. The primacy of Rome exists and is of honour but ceased whan Rome fell into heresy...

[Evfimy]

The primacy of the pope is simply a primacy of honour...

Then why do you not honor him? If the honor us by divine right, then it is perpetual.

of ruling...

Did you even notice the references I gave? The popes had a primacy of jurisdiction. We see multiple cases of bishops all over the Christian world appealing to Rome over disputes. Even Arius, and Saint John Chrysostom, etc appealed to the pope.

Saint Gregory Nazianzen stated "...Rome presides over all, reverencing the universal divine harmony." [PG 37:1068].

Have you ever heard of the Decree of Pope Damasus? It is from a Roman Council that was held in 382. It gave this explanation for the Roman primacy:

"Likewise it is decreed:...we have considered that it ought to be announced that although all Catholic churches throughout the world comprise but one bridal chamber of Christ, nevertheless the holy Roman Church has been set before the other churches not by any synodal decrees but by the evangelical voice of our Lord and Savior, saying: "Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it....." [PL 13:374-6].

Moreover the single fact that Honorius was condemned (wrongly or not), this being accepted by the see of Rome clearly shows that the Pope were not regarded as supreme authority... But maybe you're catholic.

Honorius' error was not stated from "the chair" or his official teaching capacity. His error does not affect the doctrine of infallibility. The phrase "the chair" is used a lot in reference to the papacy.

Finally, Guettée had no interest in lyingsince he was himself catholic and discovered that the catholic interpretation was wrong. The primacy of Rome exists and is of honour but ceased whan Rome fell into heresy...

Lying or not, he supressed information. I don't think he even mentioned the Catholic profession of faith that was signed by over 2500 eastern clergy recognizing the primacy of Rome in the 6th century. One source says it was around 2500 eastern clergy. This is known as the formula of Pope Hormisdas.

Second, according to what I have found, Rome is not capable of falling into error. Who has the authority even to say Rome is in error? The Roman primacy is by divine right (from the Gospels) and is preserved intact by Peter and Christ ,to the consummation of time. Here are some examples:

Pope St. Siricius [384-399]:

"...Peter, who we trust, in all things protects and has regard to us who are heirs of his government..." [PL 13:1182-3].

There are so many statements like that, that it would take me a long time to show them. Let me know if you really are interested in this.

P.S. I am not a Catholic (in the Roman sense). I am just doing a study on this and found some interesting things.

P.S.S. I've been having problems with the underlining feature. It is not underlining my selections.

[Jean-Serge]

I will have to make a little research for you in my books... this is only a partial answer. When you say "Honorius' error was not stated from "the chair" or his official teaching capacity. His error does not affect the doctrine of infallibility. The phrase "the chair" is used a lot in reference to the papacy. "

When was the first time used the word "on the chair" (ex cathedra)? It seems to me to be a very modern expression unknown by the Fathers and quite hypocritical. If someone says something dogmatical, wether it is ex cathedra or not, if he is wrong, he is wrong... Then he is a heretic.

The question of Honorius is not wether he was really monothelist or not. It is simply that his condemnation through anathema proves that nobody then believed Rome would always be preserved from error. If this was an accepted thing, they would have never condemned the Pope. For me, it is enough to refute your opinion.

[Jean-Serge]

I will have to make a little research for you in my books... this is only a partial answer. When you say "Honorius' error was not stated from "the chair" or his official teaching capacity. His error does not affect the doctrine of infallibility. The phrase "the chair" is used a lot in reference to the papacy. "

When was the first time used the word "on the chair" (ex cathedra)? It seems to me to be a very modern expression entirely unknown by the Fathers that comes from the Council of Vatican I and very hypocritical. If someone says something dogmatical, wether it is ex cathedra or not, if he is wrong, he is wrong... Then he is a heretic. The expression "ex cathedra" applied to the papal infallibility was forged to solve the question of Honorius and many other popes who did not believe Inmaculate conceptions and others latin lies. This being a contradiction with the modern papal lies, they forges the definition of infallibility ex cathedra but only afterwards whether the question of declaration "ex cathedra" was entirely unknown in the ancient church.

The question of Honorius is not wether he was really monothelist or not. It is simply that his condemnation through anathema proves that nobody then believed Rome would always be preserved from error. If this was an accepted thing, they would have never condemned the Pope. For me, it is enough to refute your opinion.

[Evfimy]

Are you asking me when the first time the term "ex cathedra" was used or the phrase "the chair" (in reference to the papacy)? I don't know the answer the former, but I can most certainly answer the latter. What exactly are you asking me.

[Jean-Serge]

I was asking the question about "ex cathedra" because I have many quotations of popes that did not believe for example in Inmaculate conception and so on. That is whay the Vatican forged this hypocritical distinction between en declaration ex cathedra or not... I will find cases of popes who had opposite theological views... Which means at leat one had to be wrong.

[Evfimy]

Catholics do not deny popes can be wrong. The teaching is that they cannot be wrong when they speak to the universal Church on matters of faith or morals in an ex cathedra context from the chair.

I said previously that the formula of Hormisdas was signed by around 20,000 eastern clergy according to one account. I was wrong. The account says about 2500.

St. Theodore the Studite wrote to Pope Leo III[795-816]:

...O arch-shepherd of the church... save us now... For if they, usurping an authority which does not belong to them, have dared to convene a heretical council, whereas those who follow ancient custom do not even have the right of convening an orthodox one without your knowledge, it seems absolutely necessary, we dare to say to you, that your divine primacy should call together a lawful council, so that the Catholic dogma may drive out heresy and that your primacy may neither be anathematized by these new voices lacking authority...

It is in order to obey your divine authority as chief pastor that we have set forth these things as it befitted our nothingness... [PG 99: 1017-21]

St. Theodore wrote to Pope Paschal[817-824]:

... O apostolic head, divinely established shepherd of Christ’s sheep, doorkeeper of the heavenly kingdom, rock of the faith on which the Catholic Church has been built. For you are Peter-- you are the successor of Peter, whose throne you grace and direct... To you did Christ our God say, "When you have been converted, strengthen your brethren." Now is the time and the place: help us, you who have been established by God for that purpose... [PG 99: 1152-3]

Do you agree that St. Theodore believed the authority of the Pope was a Divine Rite? If not, why?