www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West The Pope of Rome and Relations with Constantinople

CIX

Dear all!

I am looking for some historical assistance. I'm approaching my senior year of university (major in Ancient History). I have to write a dissertation of 10,000 on a topic of my choosing.

I was hoping to write something on Church history. I would like to examine in particular the relations between the Papacy in Rome, and the Emperor and Patriarch in Constantinople. My aim is to see how Papal authority was exercised/viewed by both sides, to what extent the Pope in Rome exercised jurisdictional authority over the Church in the East. However, I don't want it to be too explicit in an apologetical sense; but simply to examine how and if such authority was viewed and exercised.

I have to pick maybe one important event demonstrating this, and my original thought was to look at one of the seven Ecumenical Councils between 325 and 787.
Someone told me that the iconoclasm debate is a good one to look at, since the Roman Church defended icons (as well as monks in the East).

Does anyone have any thoughts or opinions? Are there any other significant events in Church history that merit consideration?

The development of the papacy during the first millenium and its relationship to Constantinople during that same time is certainly an interesting topic and one with implications for current relations between Catholicism and Orthodoxy. You might also consider either the Trinitarian controversy or the Christological controversy. You should have no difficulty with access to both the primary documents that are relevant as well as an enormous body of secondary literature. Also, I believe that the Trinitarian and Christological debates of the first millenium are the most important of all the theological debates of that time.
Ryan

Dear BL,

Athanasius' suggestions are excellent!

If I was going to go back to school to get a REAL education (not that social science mumbo-jumbo again! ), I would do a paper on the Sixth Ecumenical Council to discuss the way the Pope of Rome and his role was extolled so highly by that Council.

The backdrop could be the whole struggle between Byzantine Patriarch and Emperor and how this was brought to bear on the acknowledgement (by both) of role of the Pope of Rome as a kind of referree and the like.

Alex

CIX

Dear Alex and Athanasius,

Many thanks for your suggestions!

Alex, about the Sixth Ecumenical Council and the Monothelite controversy...I've found some good stuff on that one!

Do you know if the Seventh Ecumenical Council and the Iconoclasm issue touches on or involves the authority of the Pope of Rome and relations with Constantinople? Someone told me it was a good one to look at also.

Also, a priest recommended to me the Council of Chalcedon yesterday...especially about how the Easterners remarked on Peter speaking through Leo!

In Christ!

Dear BL,

Yes, indeed!

The events leading up to the 7th Ec. Council and the iconoclast controversy also involved correspondence between the popes of the day and the Byzantine Emperor where the pope chastised the emperor for his "rude-barbaric" mannerisms with respect to his treatment of the entire issue theologically - and also physically through the martyrdom of iconophiles etc.

The Pope basically told him off in a way that ONLY the Pope of Rome could have under those circumstances (telling him to leave theology and the Church to those who are competent to deal with them - obviously not including the emperor!).

Chalcedon is another good example here. In addition to the arguments over Christology there is also the struggle between Alexandria and Constantinople over who would be "second after Rome."

I think I'm rather jealous of you . . . going after a real education and all that . . .

Alex (known on this Forum as "The Druid")

Times, language, and feelings were a little rough back then (to say the least) !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Dear Kansas,

I guess the Robber Synod was where the original "knuckle sandwich" was served up . . . with no salt or ketchup either!

To be fair, it also shows how seriously people take religion - this is the one thing that always upsets atheists and agnostics . . .

Poor babies . . .

Alex

Alex, the Druid:

I thought all along you were a "Reformed Druid?" :p

Amado,
An Aztec

Dear Amigo Amado,

Yes, my Druidic group introduced reforms to ensure that Byzantine Catholic Ruthenians would feel unwelcome among us!

Gosh, we're good as a team, don't you think?

Alex

Well, if Amado is an Aztec and Dr. Alex is a Druid, then I must be a pantheist Hellene! :p

Now which 'rite' should I adhere myself to? :rolleyes:

Hmmm...there are the gods of drink, (Dionysus) of war, (Athena) of love (Aphrodite/Venus)....just too many vices to chose from!


Hehehehe...JUST kidding, for anyone who might be wondering.

Actually, a group of Greeks have started following this 'ancient Greek gods' stupidity and nonsense, and have actually been granted legal recognition by the government ( ) --MUCH to the annoyance, anger and dismay of the outspoken and charismatic Archbishop Christodoulos of Athens and all Greece.

Just another sign of these neo-pagan times...

Alice

Put the tendencies of the Byzantine empire into Greek perspective. They structured their church along the lines of Greek social conventions. Independent city-states. These city-states were also very militaristic (Troy, Athens, etc...). Their primacy of � a fierce independence only bound together by voluntary collegiality � and no central authority. But notice that when there was a top dog - he made himself such by force and by alliances of force. Total obedience or (when the wind shifted) he was thrown out and someone else found to give total obedience to. Black and white with no gray between.

You will not have time but there are lectures by The Teaching Company, Ancient Greek Civilization by Dr. Jeremy Macenerny (spelling?). Fantastic audio series.

Especially interesting is his lectures of Greek religion and you can see how that also influenced the structure of the Christian Byzantine empire.

The Byzantine empire expects a Pope to be militaristic. A king who leads by telling his people 'the way it is' through his power. This was how Greek kings were made and ruled. They had to overcome the collegiality� by brute force.

While the Roman structure (that which influenced the structure and growth of the Latin church) followed the Roman model where Cesar had been regulated to being elected � and so Cesar was essentially a glue that held the different political parties of the republic � together. Essentially a mediator.

The Pope that the Eastern church fears and does not want (and rightly so) is a militaristic Pope (what they expect a Pope to be). Interestingly enough - the Pope of Rome is not that Pope he is more of a mediator. This is not to say that there were not times when a Pope of Rome HAD to be militaristic as when the Western Christian empire had been under military threats � or when the church felt threatened by the Protestant Reformation (hence the Inquisition to root out malcontents).

But for how differently the church of the East and the Latin church believe a Pope should function - investigate the structure of authority of ancient Greece - and then the role of Senate and such of Cesar in Rome.

Good luck to you.

-ray

Dear Alice,

Well, I carry a medallion of Alexander the Great (with his Star on the reverse) with me all the time!

And when I visit Greektown here, I always place some carnations at the statue of Alexander the Great in the little parkette that is there . . .

I refer to him affectionately as the "Royal General."

I also have lapel pins with his Star and his image . . .

There are Muslims who invoke him as a saint, I understand, and also some Ethiopian Orthodox, who have also taken up this practice.

Ecumenism has some good qualities about it, don't you think?

My favourite icon is that of St Sisoes standing over the remains of Alexander the Great.

It's my way of getting the Royal General into my icon corner . . .

O.K., you don't have to say it - I'll work on getting a life . . .

When I once told Fr. Serge Keleher about this cult of Alexander, he quipped that, in that case, they should declare him to be the patron saint of ecumenism!

When I asked him why, he said, "Because he cut the Gordian Knot!"

Yassous!

Megas Alexandros

I think that you should find some good unbiased sources first. Refer to Chadwick or Pelikan to start with.

It is not necessary to only examine east-west relationships to see how the Papacy worked. It is equally possible to study the relationship between Roma and Gaul, for instance; or Roma and Milan at the time of St Ambrose. A study of the relationship with the east should be balanced against a study of the relationships in the west.

The history of the progress of the filioque across western Europe would be an excellent topic, for example.

If you really want to study an Eastern Ecumenical Council, I agree the Sixth would be a good one. particularly as it relates to the Monothelite issue.

+T+
Michael

Dear Alice you said:

I say:

Athena was the god of wisdom and arts, as well as war. Actually, peace in Athens was just an interlude between wars. :rolleyes:

Now for me, I prefer the 'rites of Dionysus'. Lots of fun there...isn't that what being Greek's all about?

So here's a little tidbit. When a certain dictator was disposed and exiled, he came upon an exceptionally tall women in Corinth. Dressed her up as the goddess Athena and had her take him back into Athens with a chariot. It worked! So much for the Greeks.

Zenovia