Councils of 869 and 879 - confusion
#1
I'm getting really confused about the two Councils of 869 and 879 in Constantinople.

Has anyone here studied them?

For example, some sources say that Photius faked the Pope's letter in the 879 Council that abrogated the 869 Council, and that the Pope never did this. However, this other Catholic source, Papal Encyclicals.net, says that Photius didn't fake the letter! http://www.papalencyclicals.net/councils/ecum08.htm

So if that's true, then why do we reject the 879 Council today and accept the 869 one? the Orthodox however accept only the 879 Council. Is there something I'm missing?

I find this really complicated because every source seems to say something else. How do we figure out what the truth is about this? This is a really major issue in the Catholic/Orthodox Schism.

Thank you!
totus tuus
Reply
#2
These Councils along with Constance are VERY interesting.  There was a great piece awhile back on these councils at Pravoslavie.ru. You can go there and search for it.  Of course it's from an Orthodox perspective so you ought to read the Roman take on things also.

The more you study this stuff the more you might come to see as I did that there is no silver bullet answer to who was right and who was wrong; you either accept the narrative of Rome or Byzantium after you read,pray and ponder the dramas and confusion of history and ecclesiastical politics.
Walk before God in simplicity, and not in subtleties of the mind. Simplicity brings faith; but subtle and intricate speculations bring conceit; and conceit brings withdrawal from God. -Saint Isaac of Syria, Directions on Spiritual Training


"It is impossible in human terms to exaggerate the importance of being in a church or chapel before the Blessed Sacrament as often and for as long as our duties and state of life allow. I very seldom repeat what I say. Let me repeat this sentence. It is impossible in human language to exaggerate the importance of being in a chapel or church before the Blessed Sacrament as often and for as long as our duties and state of life allow. That sentence is the talisman of the highest sanctity. "Father John Hardon
Reply
#3
The more I read the more I get confused...

I read in one source that the Pope once again excommunicated Photius in 881.. is this true? so why do the Orthodox say that Rome accepted the 879 Council till the 12th century? it's really complicated to just find out the history of all this.

"There is a good deal that neither Robinson nor Fr. Dragas tells us here--not least, the fact that as soon as Photius sent the Acts of his council to Rome for the Pope's ratification, Pope John VIII (872-82) (pictured left) instead responded by excommunicating him, solemnly condemning him in 881, and permanently reinstating the ban on him in 882. Dragas has extensive notes on the decrees by which John VIII struck down the earlier censures of Photius by the synod of 869. He includes the detailed texts of John VIII rescinding the earlier decrees of the earlier synod." http://catholictradition.blogspot.ca/200...chive.html

and yet other sources disagree

"As to Pope John excommunicating St Photios, there are conflicting reports. Metropolitan Kallistos says that it has been proven by Dr Francis Dvornik in his book The Photian Schism that it never happened.

Until recently it was thought that there was a second 'Photian schism', but Dr Dvornik has proved with devastating conclusiveness that this second schism is a myth: in Photius' later period of office (877-86) communion between Constantinople and the Papacy remained unbroken.

Timothy Ware, The Orthodox Church, pg 56"

https://forums.catholic.com/t/eighth-ecu...s/216609/2
totus tuus
Reply
#4
http://www.pravoslavie.ru/english/97929.htm

Here is the article I mentioned... it's well worth a slow careful read.
Walk before God in simplicity, and not in subtleties of the mind. Simplicity brings faith; but subtle and intricate speculations bring conceit; and conceit brings withdrawal from God. -Saint Isaac of Syria, Directions on Spiritual Training


"It is impossible in human terms to exaggerate the importance of being in a church or chapel before the Blessed Sacrament as often and for as long as our duties and state of life allow. I very seldom repeat what I say. Let me repeat this sentence. It is impossible in human language to exaggerate the importance of being in a chapel or church before the Blessed Sacrament as often and for as long as our duties and state of life allow. That sentence is the talisman of the highest sanctity. "Father John Hardon
Reply
#5
What would this all mean though? I mean the Orthodox use these claims to say that the Catholic Church is not the true Church..

I found a thread that sort of presents both views https://forums.catholic.com/t/eighth-ecu.../216609/13
totus tuus
Reply
#6
(09-09-2017, 02:46 PM)little_flower10 Wrote: What would this all mean though? I mean the Orthodox use these claims to say that the Catholic Church is not the true Church..

I found a thread that sort of presents both views https://forums.catholic.com/t/eighth-ecu.../216609/13

It would mean that both sides spin the evidence in favor of their own Church. Rome historically has gone to absurd lengths to deny ANY limit to papal power and authority, and the Orthodox have done the same to deny these claims.  

Francis Oakleys book on Conciliarism and the Council of Constance is another place to look when studying this sort of thing, although it's expensive.
Walk before God in simplicity, and not in subtleties of the mind. Simplicity brings faith; but subtle and intricate speculations bring conceit; and conceit brings withdrawal from God. -Saint Isaac of Syria, Directions on Spiritual Training


"It is impossible in human terms to exaggerate the importance of being in a church or chapel before the Blessed Sacrament as often and for as long as our duties and state of life allow. I very seldom repeat what I say. Let me repeat this sentence. It is impossible in human language to exaggerate the importance of being in a chapel or church before the Blessed Sacrament as often and for as long as our duties and state of life allow. That sentence is the talisman of the highest sanctity. "Father John Hardon
Reply
#7
The debate boils down to whether John VIII annulled the 869 Council or not. What's ironic is that it is the EO who have staked their position on a Pope having the authority to annul a Council.  If he didn't annul it, then the Catholic position is correct.  If he did annul it, then the Catholic position on the authority of the Pope is correct.  Either way, the Catholic position is correct and the opposing EO one is not. :shrug:
[Image: catherinesiena-1.jpg]
Reply
#8
(10-10-2017, 10:08 AM)SaintSebastian Wrote: The debate boils down to whether John VIII annulled the 869 Council or not. What's ironic is that it is the EO who have staked their position on a Pope having the authority to annul a Council.  If he didn't annul it, then the Catholic position is correct.  If he did annul it, then the Catholic position on the authority of the Pope is correct.  Either way, the Catholic position is correct and the opposing EO one is not. :shrug:

Solid.
Reply
#9
This is an interesting link concerning no less than the founder of Christendom College!

http://www.ewtn.com/v/experts/showmessag...ber=310158
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)