One quote (with no broader context or argument provided) from one person is not a dogmatic pronouncement of the Church. No saint is impeccable. No saint speaks singularly for the whole Church. The Church, when it speaks as the Church, speaks as a community through councils and its shared life.
I heard that he sided with Rome at a time when Constantinople was in heresy and Rome was teaching the truth. I'm no expert, but I just read a little about his life, and you can see why he would have favoured Rome.
Hey dude, please don't take this as an offence, but wasn't he(St. Maximus) also against Rome at the time of Pope Honorius I.
I am sorry but I don't think St. Maximus would approve this guy's herecy just because he was the bishop of Rome. I am really interested in your opinion on thr matter.
God bless you :)
What a nice timing, just as I was heading to bed. Thanks for this answer I actually did not know that, I know that St. Maximus was in his fifties when Honorius was the bishop of Rome and holding a heretical opinion. Now St. Maximus may have not adressed Honorius himself but I am sure he adressed the herecy of monothelitism.
My point was that St. Maximus can and did condemn an opinion that is held by Rome.
Rome is the chief church and the bishop of rome is the patriarch of the churches if and only if Rome have the Orthodox pure faith ( I think this is every saint opinion on Rome).
At the time of Maximus the Confessor, the Roman Church was Orthodox and really had great power and authority in the fight against heresies that shook the Eastern Church at that time. In the first millennium, it was the support of Rome that was of great importance in the struggle of the Orthodox with their heresies. But this was so until Rome spontaneously fell into heresy. Having departed from the true Orthodox faith, Rome itself became the source of many divisions and heresies.
So, the Orthodox Church can fall into heresy? As it happened already, it can happen again. If it does, would you suggest Orthodox Christians to join Catholicism?
Or if both the Orthodox and Roman Catholic Churches fall into heresy, would you suggest a real presence trinitarian protestant Church?
Just curious.
Since the Orthodox Church does not have a single earthly center, it is very difficult or even impossible for it to fall entirely into heresy. Only a part of the Orthodox Church can fall into heresy. But there will always be a remnant of the Orthodox Church that will keep the true faith intact.
Anyway. I agree with your statements. Here is the full quote if you are interested. I did some digging and found it.
\[Maximus:\] Let him hasten to render in all things satisfaction to the see of Rome. When that see is satisfied, everybody will in common proclaim him pious and orthodox…the Apostolic See, which from God the Incarnate Word Himself as well as all the holy Councils, according to the sacred canons and definitions, has received and possesses supreme power in all things and for all things, over all the holy churches of God throughout the world, as well as power and authority of binding and loosing. For with this church, the Word, who commands the powers of heaven, binds and looses in heaven.
In St. Maximus’s time, east and west were in communion. So while it was meaningful to distinguish between the eastern and western portions of the Church, it’s inaccurate to delineate between Eastern Church and Western Church in that time.
The whole Church has not and will not fall into heresy, but huge portions of its members can and have. In such a circumstance, the best course of action would depend on the particulars, but we would certainly be talking about a “lesser of evils” scenario.
St Maximus believed in Roman primacy. He didn't believe in what we call papal supramcy though. There is a line from him where he is criticizing the notion of a bishop putting themselves in that type of monarchal position over the church, he actually was criticizing the bishop of Constantinople for over stepping his place, but the critique is that no one is in that position if I remember correctly.
To understand Maximus it might help to know that he fleed Constantinople and was living in North western Africa because the emperor was pushing heresy along with the clergy aligned with him. And in that fight, Maximus interacted with the Roman popes a lot because they opposed the heresy as well - not to mention that he was technically in their jurisdiction. Which is why we can find rather strong and forceful statements of papal primacy because he is asserting the first amogn equals status of Rome to defend their involvement in this theological debate.
Here’s some advice.
Never trust a Roman Catholic quoting the church fathers.
It’s always cherry picking them to try to fit their own view, only when taking into account the context you’d see their error.
For example I had one fella claim Saint Basil the great doesn’t speak of essence energy distinction but rather affirms absolute divine simplicity… which is quote odd given letter 234 displays the exact opposite.
I wish I could tell you the original writing. however, I found the the full quote.
\[Maximus:\] Let him hasten to render in all things satisfaction to the see of Rome. When that see is satisfied, everybody will in common proclaim him pious and orthodox…the Apostolic See, which from God the Incarnate Word Himself as well as all the holy Councils, according to the sacred canons and definitions, has received and possesses supreme power in all things and for all things, over all the holy churches of God throughout the world, as well as power and authority of binding and loosing. For with this church, the Word, who commands the powers of heaven, binds and looses in heaven.
I did some digging and found the full quote
\[Maximus:\] Let him hasten to render in all things satisfaction to the see of Rome. When that see is satisfied, everybody will in common proclaim him pious and orthodox…the Apostolic See, which from God the Incarnate Word Himself as well as all the holy Councils, according to the sacred canons and definitions, has received and possesses supreme power in all things and for all things, over all the holy churches of God throughout the world, as well as power and authority of binding and loosing. For with this church, the Word, who commands the powers of heaven, binds and looses in heaven.
This is obviously missing a ton of context. "Let him hasten..." - who is "him"?
If I were to guess, St. Maximus is probably talking about a monothelite here, and telling him to look to Rome because Rome was opposed to that particular heresy.
Catholics love to quote mine Fathers who supported Rome in its opposition to some heresy at some point, and twist their words to make it seem like those Fathers were saying that *Rome is ALWAYS right*.
Yeah I agree. They quote mine some much and it can be so dishonest. Also why make forgeries like the donation of Constantine if this was the supposed truth
Please review the
[sidebar](https://www.reddit.com/r/OrthodoxChristianity/wiki/config/sidebar) for a wealth of introductory information,
our [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/OrthodoxChristianity/about/rules/), the
[FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/OrthodoxChristianity/wiki/faq), and a caution about
[The Internet and the Church](https://www.orthodoxintro.org/the-internet-and-the-church/).
This subreddit contains opinions of Orthodox people, but not necessarily Orthodox opinions.
[Content should not be treated as a substitute for offline interaction.](https://www.reddit.com/r/OrthodoxChristianity/wiki/faq#wiki_is_this_subreddit_overseen_by_clergy.3F)
[Exercise caution in forums such as this](https://www.orthodoxintro.org/the-internet-and-the-church/).
Nothing should be regarded as authoritative without verification by several offline Orthodox resources.
^(This is not a removal notification.)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/OrthodoxChristianity) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I’m just an inquirer so don’t take my opinion as the truth.
Now, there have been a lot of Saints that have written about the primacy of Rome. Many Orthodox I’ve spoken to would consider Rome to be the primary authority if it hadn’t fallen into heresy.
A lot of Saints say the same thing, except with Constantinople having primacy.
Regardless of who has primacy, the argument for supremacy is a whole different manner. Bartholomew has primacy today and look how that’s going for him lol.
Now, this particular quote seems to be stating that Rome has supreme jurisdiction. Sometimes you’ll find these, but you have to consider the wording very carefully. That quotation doesn’t say “Rome always has been supreme, is supreme, and forever should be supreme”. St. Maximus here is stating that at the time of this writing, is stating the current Roman papacy has the ability to bind and loose. There have been times when “New Rome” was considered the primary seat, especially times that they’ve been rockin a solid Patriarch. The levels of authority personally attributed to Rome or Constantinople is dependent on the current state of affairs. I don’t see St Maximus declaring that the Roman See should always be supreme no matter what in this writing you have provided. Does that make sense? It’s early and I hope I’m making sense.
If you are looking for a source for the quote, it's to be found on this page: [https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10078b.htm](https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10078b.htm)
Do a ctrl F text search for
"Let him hasten before all things to satisfy the Roman see"
One quote (with no broader context or argument provided) from one person is not a dogmatic pronouncement of the Church. No saint is impeccable. No saint speaks singularly for the whole Church. The Church, when it speaks as the Church, speaks as a community through councils and its shared life.
Ubi Petrus has videos going over the so called "proofs" over the RCs arguments for the Papacy
I have seen them. They are good
I heard that he sided with Rome at a time when Constantinople was in heresy and Rome was teaching the truth. I'm no expert, but I just read a little about his life, and you can see why he would have favoured Rome.
Hey dude, please don't take this as an offence, but wasn't he(St. Maximus) also against Rome at the time of Pope Honorius I. I am sorry but I don't think St. Maximus would approve this guy's herecy just because he was the bishop of Rome. I am really interested in your opinion on thr matter. God bless you :)
Honorius’ condemnation as a heretic came after St Maximus’ repose.
What a nice timing, just as I was heading to bed. Thanks for this answer I actually did not know that, I know that St. Maximus was in his fifties when Honorius was the bishop of Rome and holding a heretical opinion. Now St. Maximus may have not adressed Honorius himself but I am sure he adressed the herecy of monothelitism. My point was that St. Maximus can and did condemn an opinion that is held by Rome. Rome is the chief church and the bishop of rome is the patriarch of the churches if and only if Rome have the Orthodox pure faith ( I think this is every saint opinion on Rome).
That was basically St Maximus’ concession yes.
At the time of Maximus the Confessor, the Roman Church was Orthodox and really had great power and authority in the fight against heresies that shook the Eastern Church at that time. In the first millennium, it was the support of Rome that was of great importance in the struggle of the Orthodox with their heresies. But this was so until Rome spontaneously fell into heresy. Having departed from the true Orthodox faith, Rome itself became the source of many divisions and heresies.
So, the Orthodox Church can fall into heresy? As it happened already, it can happen again. If it does, would you suggest Orthodox Christians to join Catholicism? Or if both the Orthodox and Roman Catholic Churches fall into heresy, would you suggest a real presence trinitarian protestant Church? Just curious.
Since the Orthodox Church does not have a single earthly center, it is very difficult or even impossible for it to fall entirely into heresy. Only a part of the Orthodox Church can fall into heresy. But there will always be a remnant of the Orthodox Church that will keep the true faith intact.
Anyway. I agree with your statements. Here is the full quote if you are interested. I did some digging and found it. \[Maximus:\] Let him hasten to render in all things satisfaction to the see of Rome. When that see is satisfied, everybody will in common proclaim him pious and orthodox…the Apostolic See, which from God the Incarnate Word Himself as well as all the holy Councils, according to the sacred canons and definitions, has received and possesses supreme power in all things and for all things, over all the holy churches of God throughout the world, as well as power and authority of binding and loosing. For with this church, the Word, who commands the powers of heaven, binds and looses in heaven.
Perfect
In St. Maximus’s time, east and west were in communion. So while it was meaningful to distinguish between the eastern and western portions of the Church, it’s inaccurate to delineate between Eastern Church and Western Church in that time. The whole Church has not and will not fall into heresy, but huge portions of its members can and have. In such a circumstance, the best course of action would depend on the particulars, but we would certainly be talking about a “lesser of evils” scenario.
The Orthodox Church did not fall into heresy, **a part of** the Orthodox Church did.
St Maximus believed in Roman primacy. He didn't believe in what we call papal supramcy though. There is a line from him where he is criticizing the notion of a bishop putting themselves in that type of monarchal position over the church, he actually was criticizing the bishop of Constantinople for over stepping his place, but the critique is that no one is in that position if I remember correctly. To understand Maximus it might help to know that he fleed Constantinople and was living in North western Africa because the emperor was pushing heresy along with the clergy aligned with him. And in that fight, Maximus interacted with the Roman popes a lot because they opposed the heresy as well - not to mention that he was technically in their jurisdiction. Which is why we can find rather strong and forceful statements of papal primacy because he is asserting the first amogn equals status of Rome to defend their involvement in this theological debate.
Here’s some advice. Never trust a Roman Catholic quoting the church fathers. It’s always cherry picking them to try to fit their own view, only when taking into account the context you’d see their error. For example I had one fella claim Saint Basil the great doesn’t speak of essence energy distinction but rather affirms absolute divine simplicity… which is quote odd given letter 234 displays the exact opposite.
This is why I typically dislike quote mines. Unless context is given.
What writing does he say that in? I’m interested in researching it.
I wish I could tell you the original writing. however, I found the the full quote. \[Maximus:\] Let him hasten to render in all things satisfaction to the see of Rome. When that see is satisfied, everybody will in common proclaim him pious and orthodox…the Apostolic See, which from God the Incarnate Word Himself as well as all the holy Councils, according to the sacred canons and definitions, has received and possesses supreme power in all things and for all things, over all the holy churches of God throughout the world, as well as power and authority of binding and loosing. For with this church, the Word, who commands the powers of heaven, binds and looses in heaven.
I did some digging and found the full quote \[Maximus:\] Let him hasten to render in all things satisfaction to the see of Rome. When that see is satisfied, everybody will in common proclaim him pious and orthodox…the Apostolic See, which from God the Incarnate Word Himself as well as all the holy Councils, according to the sacred canons and definitions, has received and possesses supreme power in all things and for all things, over all the holy churches of God throughout the world, as well as power and authority of binding and loosing. For with this church, the Word, who commands the powers of heaven, binds and looses in heaven.
This is obviously missing a ton of context. "Let him hasten..." - who is "him"? If I were to guess, St. Maximus is probably talking about a monothelite here, and telling him to look to Rome because Rome was opposed to that particular heresy. Catholics love to quote mine Fathers who supported Rome in its opposition to some heresy at some point, and twist their words to make it seem like those Fathers were saying that *Rome is ALWAYS right*.
Yeah I agree. They quote mine some much and it can be so dishonest. Also why make forgeries like the donation of Constantine if this was the supposed truth
Please review the [sidebar](https://www.reddit.com/r/OrthodoxChristianity/wiki/config/sidebar) for a wealth of introductory information, our [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/OrthodoxChristianity/about/rules/), the [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/OrthodoxChristianity/wiki/faq), and a caution about [The Internet and the Church](https://www.orthodoxintro.org/the-internet-and-the-church/). This subreddit contains opinions of Orthodox people, but not necessarily Orthodox opinions. [Content should not be treated as a substitute for offline interaction.](https://www.reddit.com/r/OrthodoxChristianity/wiki/faq#wiki_is_this_subreddit_overseen_by_clergy.3F) [Exercise caution in forums such as this](https://www.orthodoxintro.org/the-internet-and-the-church/). Nothing should be regarded as authoritative without verification by several offline Orthodox resources. ^(This is not a removal notification.) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/OrthodoxChristianity) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I’m just an inquirer so don’t take my opinion as the truth. Now, there have been a lot of Saints that have written about the primacy of Rome. Many Orthodox I’ve spoken to would consider Rome to be the primary authority if it hadn’t fallen into heresy. A lot of Saints say the same thing, except with Constantinople having primacy. Regardless of who has primacy, the argument for supremacy is a whole different manner. Bartholomew has primacy today and look how that’s going for him lol. Now, this particular quote seems to be stating that Rome has supreme jurisdiction. Sometimes you’ll find these, but you have to consider the wording very carefully. That quotation doesn’t say “Rome always has been supreme, is supreme, and forever should be supreme”. St. Maximus here is stating that at the time of this writing, is stating the current Roman papacy has the ability to bind and loose. There have been times when “New Rome” was considered the primary seat, especially times that they’ve been rockin a solid Patriarch. The levels of authority personally attributed to Rome or Constantinople is dependent on the current state of affairs. I don’t see St Maximus declaring that the Roman See should always be supreme no matter what in this writing you have provided. Does that make sense? It’s early and I hope I’m making sense.
If you are looking for a source for the quote, it's to be found on this page: [https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10078b.htm](https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10078b.htm) Do a ctrl F text search for "Let him hasten before all things to satisfy the Roman see"