www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West Constantinople

What is the origin of the Church in Constantinople? Can anyone show the "pedigree" (to use St. Irenaeus' terminology) of this Church? What is the line of succession back to the Apostles? The list since Constantinople I will do.

Thank you.

I mean since the first ecumenical Council of Constantinople.

May I inquire about the literary sources for this information, and the dates for these sources?

Thank you in advance.

Dear Francisg,

I don't understand your question to the Reverend Father.

Are you suggesting that you doubt that what is on that official site of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople is valid or true?

And what "literary" sources does Rome have to affirm all of the popes?

Alex

If you want literary sources for the Popes, you can take a look at Eusebius' Ecclesiastical history. From there, you can also trace the literary histories of the Councils and other "landmarks" in history to ascertain who was the Pope at that time. Even before Eusebius, there are many literary sources by which you can ascertain the identity of the Roman bishop at the time, in the same manner as you would after Eusebius, and also to verify Eusebius' list. St. Clement and St. Cyprian are two that come to mind off hand.

In any case, what possible insult could it give to want to read primary sources? If one views it that way, I wonder why we don't burn all our primary sources since we have enough secondary sources in the modern age to piece together the past. No one who claims to tell the truth can possibly have any fear or discomfort when one asks for that truth to be backed up; rather, that person should look forward to the opportunity in the exact same spirit with which we are exhorted in Scripture to always be prepared to give an account of and defense for the faith to all who ask. When I was a Protestant, I recall one of the favorite arguments was to insist that the Catholic Church kept the Bible from the people because Catholics were afraid that the Bible would expose Catholicism as false. Little did I know THEN!!! Hahaha!

IN any case, I hope the ancient literary sources I asked for will be provided.

God bless.

Dear Francis,

O.K. - so do I!

But you might want to ask for these directly at some of the English language Greek Orthodox sites.

Fr. Thomas is a busy man, you know!

All I was suggesting is that even with the literary sources, there were some issues in the papal lineage (no, I'm not talking about "Pope Joan" )

There was, I believe, one "Pope" acclaimed as such who was, in reality, merely the secretary of another Pope (was it St Felix?) I'll have to look it up, but there are, in the papal listing, two numbers given for two or three of these.

I wonder why Rome hasn't ruled on this matter and put it to rest?

In addition, some sources see the papal Roman line beginning AFTER Peter and Paul, while other, later ones see it beginning WITH Peter as the first pope. Which is it, I wonder?

Alex

It is beyond my ability to grant such a request. First, you would have to piece this together from various sources, and for all I know, much of it would be in Greek (if you truly want "primary" sources). I have no idea what those sources would be. Obviously, from the time of the Councils on, it would be the the Councils themselves, and other Patristic writings.

Second, it's simply not worth my time. If you doubt what is posted on the GOA website, I won't lose sleep over it. The list posted there is entirely trustworthy and I'm sure is found in other sources. There is no conspiracy to create an apostolic lineage, which is what your question, and answer to Alex, implies. Unless of course, you're doing a resarch paper, then I would suggest that you write to His All-Holiness' office for more information. You can also study this in depth at the Ecumenical Institute in Chambessy, Switzerland and Dumbarton Oaks Research Library in Washington D.C. which specializes in Byzantine studies.

Priest Thomas

Bless me a sinner, Father Thomas!

You are a priest forever according to the Order of Melchisedek!

But I'm really preaching to the converted here . . .

Kissing your right hand, I again implore your blessing,

Alex

Thanks for the suggestion. I have gone on GO sites before, and, from my ignorant perspective, the ones I have communicated with (uuhh.. not the Eucharist ) get easily defensive.

If your first response to my question is any indication, I think there would be even more apprehension about my question at a GO site. But I will try. Thank you again for the suggestion.

Also, I wonder if the issue of the correct list has not been settled because it is more of an historical issue than a theological one. I assume the Vatican only becomes interested in an issue if it has a theological import. I think the only way for the list of popes to obtain such consideration is if there was a position similar to the modern sedevacantism in the patristic era. I think one can securely state that such an issue never existed in the past with regards to Rome. No patristic writer ever seems to have even been concerned with the issue - most likely because there WAS ALWAYS a bishop of Rome. The IDENTITY of each Roman bishop at any particular time seems to be a matter to be discussed among historians, not theologians.

God bless.

Dear Francis,

Well, it doesn't bother me if a Pope has two Roman numerals after his name!

I understand that Bl. Pope John XXIII chose that name and numeral because of an anti-pope with the same.

And I think at least one anti-pope is a saint as well!

God bless you too, Big Guy!

Alex

Alex,

May the Lord God bless you! I know that you have been diligently defending true Eastern Christianity for the past few months in various places on this forum from those who do not understand, or want to look at everything through Western eyes. I want you to know that I've noticed, and so have others. Keep up the good work.

Priest Thomas

Father Thomas,
Thank you for directing me to some resources. I was quick to point out Eusebius in my earlier response to Alex because reading his tome was actually the impetus for my question. I noticed that he did not include a list of bishops of Constantinople, while doing so for all the other Patriarchates, even of Laodicia. I am simply interested to read an ancient primary source for the list of Constantinopolitan bishops since the ommission seemed strange to me, especially if the Patriarchate was established by an Apostle!

In Christ always.

Bless me a sinner, Father Thomas!

While I do not compare myself to other true Defenders of Orthodoxy - thank you!

You remind me of something that an ancestor of my now deceased Bishop, Vladyka Isidore Borecky, once said.

He said that when the Latins got upset with Greek Catholics, they called them "schismatics" too!

Sincerely reverencing your right hand as that of Christ Himself, I remain your humble, sinful servant,

Alex