Photios

I have no problem citing the Fathers. What I have a problem is with trolls who just copy paste stuff from websites without any analysis or argument. So I don’t owe the Fathers an apology. Besides, you’re a Catholic troll as I have seen you do the same thing on other websites.

As for the Formula of Hormisdas, this is what happens when people don’t read the literature on both sides of an issue.

1st the Patriarch of Constantinople modified the text in the presence of the papal legates as he saw fit, to indicate that it was the JOINT authority of both sees.

2nd In the signed version much of the high language of the papacy just doesn’t appear.

3rd. About half of the Eastern clergy NEVER signed it and the Pope was forced to accept them into communion without it.

So yes I have read it. Have you actually read ANY historical treatments of these issues other than the cut and paste method?

Have you ever read this formula? It affirms the Roman primacy. The original formula was signed by around 2500 eastern clergy.

There was one Apostolic Council. (The Apostolic Age ended)
There were several Imperial Councils. (The Imperial Age ended in 1453)
If, by the grace of God we get together a council of all the Orthodox, I would suggest calling it something else. (Suggestions: Pan-Orthodox, International, Global)

Thomas

“It seems to me that the Byzantines never really made a functional distinction between oikoumene as ‘the empire’ and oikoumene as ‘inhabited creation,’ which is kind of problematic, given that the empire even at its zenith never contained all Christians or all bishops, and well, that the empire hasn’t existed for quite some time….”

Well, maybe the EMPIRE hasn’t existed for some time, but the People [Race] and the Geography ['bounds of their habitation'] still do! And, DID the Empire contain ‘all -right-believing- bishops’, if not the -wrong-believing- which, as the Church teacheth, are no ‘bishops’ at all….

What I mean is, the post-schism Roman/Western attempts at World evangelization going on to this day, (which, I think everyone will agree, are intimately tied to their filioquist mindset; [of mixing the 'persons' of the Trinity with Man (pope) as active replacement for the H.S., who was reduced only to the 'love between the Father and the Son" ("All you need is Love, yup da dum da dee")]…

In adopting filioquism, Rome (and Geneva/Augsburg/Canterbury) went OUTSIDE of the ‘Ecumene’ to do so. So, the first question to ask is, Was this correct/right? It would seem that, if they were THEOLOGICAL heretics in doing so, the INCARANATIONAL heresy of ‘ingrafting’ was wrong also….

Conversely, once one goes outside of the “Ecumene’ -i.e., the Empire, i.e., Europe,(C-incidentally?) all sorts of theological heresies begin to erupt, following on Rome’s defection, and Protestantism’s defection of that defection…. thus, the 25,000 protestant groups alone, ignoring Eddyists, Smithites, Russelites, etc.

IF the ‘World’ that Christ spoke of, when He gave the “Great Commission” was ONLY to the “Ecumene” (as I have argued before in other places) then are ALL missionary endeavors OUTSIDE of the “Ecumene” (i.e., Caucasoid Europe) misguided at best, or HERETICAL at worst?

Could it be that the ‘lost sheep of the house of Israel’ ARE only to be found within the “Ecumene’ as the Greeks, (and thereby, the hellenized Hebrews of the first century) thought of the “World.”

What then of “World Orthodoxy”? Are they in error in this point?
Are the SCOBA-dox also erring, by seeking to ‘multiculturalize’ American [sic] Orthodoxy?
Does pre-schism Orthodox missionary activity hold up this mode, or refute itl?
What about post-schsim Orthodox missionary activity, until the ‘Lutheran influence’ occurs in Peter & Catherine [the Great's] reigns?

Just asking….for all of said activity would have resulted from an improper ’scope and sequence’ of just how pervasive the mission of the H.S. indwelling His Church should have gone… and would of a necessity lead us to find that all such attempts are incarnationally no more than ‘temple prostitution’ by seeking to enfold ‘the nations round about us’ when we should be a ‘holy seed, a chosen people, etc.’.