View Single Post
  #173  
Old Jul 31, '08, 11:56 am
Isa Almisry Isa Almisry is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: July 29, 2007
Posts: 7,605
Religion: Arab Orthodox
Default Re: Eastern Catholic and Orthodoxy

Quote:
Originally Posted by JJR1453 View Post
(1) Exactly, just like Vigilius. Just another instance where the Emperors from the East would go to such great lengths to obtain the confirmation of a council from the Bishop of Rome.
Sooo all that strong arming the Emperors from the East did for the bishops to sign unity agreements (at least at early as the Formula of Pope Hormisdas) shows how much the agreement of the other patriarchs was needed? (in particular, Pope Hormisdas' command for the emperor to use force to get signatures show how much the "head" needed to act WITH "the college of bishops," to use Vatican speak?).

Quote:
(2) Negative. Study the history of the day, the council was not the "death blow" which you make it out to be. The East still suffered from Arianism. If you would like to get iinto particulars, we may.
Please do, with particulars, as I have heard a lot of nonsense. Like Arians deposed St. John Crysostom, when it was done by Popes Theophilos and St. Cyril. I'll repeat. After the Second Council it evaported in the East.

Quote:
(3) First off, you have done more than beat a dead horse here. And, how does this help your arguement again? Nobody is denying that the Emperors viewed themselves, rightly, to be in succession of those Emperors that came before them in Rome. They were truly Emperors of the Roman Empire, or what would dwindle into what was left of it. However, this helps out your arguement none. Also, you have provided ZERO scholarship to back your claims. I will not ask you again in this thread, for which, I fear we have both derailed. I will start a new thread regarding only specifically: Codex Theodosianus XVI.i.2.

God bless,

JJR
[/quote]

Posted in the thread you started, as above. And both Meyendorff and Treadgold are far ahead of your ultramonist scholar.