![]() |
![]() |
|
#1031
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
And yet the other side of his character is no less evident. His insatiable ambition, his determination to obtain and keep the patriarchal see, led him to the extreme of dishonesty. His claim was worthless. That Ignatius was the rightful patriarch as long as he lived, and Photius an intruder, cannot be denied by any one who does not conceive the Church as merely the slave of a civil government. And to keep this place Photius descended to the lowest depth of deceit. At the very time he was protesting his obedience to the pope he was dictating to the emperor insolent letters that denied all papal jurisdiction. He misrepresented the story of Ignatius's deposition with unblushing lies, and he at least connived at Ignatius's ill-treatment in banishment. He proclaimed openly his entire subservience to the State in the whole question of his intrusion. He stops at nothing in his war against the Latins. He heaps up accusations against them that he must have known were lies. His effrontery on occasions is almost incredible. For instance, as one more grievance against Rome, he never tires of inveighing against the fact that Pope Marinus I (882-84), John VIII's successor, was translated from another see, instead of being ordained from the Roman clergy. He describes this as an atrocious breach of canon law, quoting against it the first and second canons of Sardica; and at the same time he himself continually transferred bishops in his patriarchate. The Orthodox, who look upon him, rightly, as the great champion of their cause against Rome, have forgiven all his offences for the sake of this championship. They have canonized him, and on 6 Feb., when they keep his feast, their office overflows with his praise. He is the "far-shining radiant star of the church", the "most inspired guide of the Orthodox", "thrice blessed speaker for God", "wise and divine glory of the hierarchy, who broke the horns of Roman pride" ("Menologion" for 6 Feb., ed. Maltzew, I, 916 sq.). The Catholic remembers this extraordinary man with mixed feelings. We do not deny his eminent qualities and yet we certainly do not remember him as a thrice blessed speaker for God. One may perhaps sum up Photius by saying that he was a great man with one blot on his character---his insatiable and unscrupulous ambition. But that blot so covers his life that it eclipses everything else and makes him deserve our final judgment as one of the worst enemies the Church of Christ ever had, and the cause of the greatest calamity that ever befell her.
|
#1032
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Citat:
PS Si voi spuneti ca Biserica Catolica a facut tot felul de excese pentru putere... |
#1033
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Citat:
Pe de alta parte, exista si in Biserica Catolica papi care au fost laici inainte de inscaunare. Un exemplu este Sfantul Fabian (drag mie, in mod special, pentru ca fiul meu ii poarta numele), care a venit la Roma ca simplu laic, si s-a nimerit tocmai la adunarea in care trebuia ales un nou papă. Sfantul Duh s-a coborat asupra lui, in forma unui porumbel, din cate îmi aduc aminte, și a fost ridicat la demnitatea de papă prin aclamațiile populare. S-a dovedit apoi a fi un papă vrednic și a fost și ridicat la cinstea altarelor: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Fabian Last edited by Erethorn; 08.06.2011 at 08:21:23. |
#1034
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Si mai gresit...
|
#1035
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Stati linistit. Au fost si papi care au fost pusi in functie de autoritatile civile, asa ca nu e o problema. Au fost si papi care si-au cumparat titlul cu bani. Doar cateva exemple: papa Vigiliu, papa Bonifaciu 8 - pa care Dante il aseaza in iad printre simoniaci, si papa Alexandru Borgia. Astea sunt doar 3 exemple, fiindca sunt foarte multi.
|
#1036
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Citat:
Last edited by nutucutu; 08.06.2011 at 09:01:40. |
#1037
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Pai si intre Fotie si acesti papi exista foarte multe diferente.
|
#1038
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Citat:
Acum revenind, vad ca in acest mesaj ai dat in sfarsit un raspuns la intrebare: dupa cele spuse de tine, insemnele patriarhale nu au fost primite de la papa. Dar de la cine? Si apropos de sinodul de la Ierusalim: tu ce ai inteles din sinod? De ce a fost nevoie de el? Asa o sa intelegi mai bine nevoia oamenilor de-a lungul istoriei de autoritate. O zi minunata! |
#1039
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Dar exista si nevoia oamenilor de libertate.
Vezi legenda marelui inchizitor din romanul Fratii Karamazov de Dostoievski |
#1040
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Citat:
Nu stiu care au fost greselile catoliclor de atunci, dar imi pare rau ca nici ei nu au reusit sa pastreze unitatea bisericii. |
|