Saturday, September 26, 2015

Jourdan Hurtaud, O.P.: "Lettres de Savonarole aux princes chrétiens pour la réunion d'un concile" (Translation)

Full translation expected by Monday 10/12, God willing -- stay tuned. Critical commentary to follow.

Jourdan Hurtaud, O.P.: "Lettres de Savonarole aux princes chrétiens pour la réunion d'un concile," Revue Thomiste 7, no. 44 (1900), 631-674

The Letters of Savonarola to the Christian Princes for the Assembly of a Council

The pages devoted by Louis Pastor (1) to the Florentine reformer and the fair or harsh responses it has attracted poses again, not only in the heart of Piagnoni who faithfully guard the fervent cult of his memory, but to the opinion of the Catholic world, the Savonarola question. For four centuries, the trial is debated and the cause is still pending. Our intention is not, here at least, to throw us in full scrimmage and enter the intense debates; we only want to draw attention to one of the parts of the trial, which, we believe, has not been interpreted so far as it should be, neither by the most resolute opponents of the Frate, nor even by his most convinced apologists. We refer to the Letters to Christian princes for the meeting of a council. These letters, in the plan, were to be five in number, addressed to the Emperor, the King of France, the King and Queen of Spain, the King of England, and King of Hungary. Only the first three have been preserved. We give here in its entirety the letter to the Emperor; from the other two we adduce the passages relating to the council. From comparing different the literal interpretation and theological doctrine they express or to which they refer become more obvious. (1) History of the Popes From the Close of the Middle Ages, vol. V and VI. 632

Wednesday, September 09, 2015

Tsarevich Dimitry of Uglich Died Accidentally

Tsarevich Dimitry Ivanovich of Uglich (10/19/1582-5/15/1591), the Youngest son of Ivan IV the Terrible, accidentally killed himself by stabbing himself with a knife during an epileptic fit.

Fr. Francis Dvornik says, "The reports on the death of the real Dmitrij were re-examined by G. Vernadsky (see Bibl.). He has rightly shown that the tsarevich's death was accidental and that Boris Godunov was unjustly accused of his murder. A complete bibliography on this problem is given in his study published in the Oxford Slav. Papers. On the spread of this legend see also A. A. Rudakov’s study in Ist oriceskie Zapiski, 12 (1941), pp. 154-283" (The Slavs in European History and Civilization, Rutgers University Press, 1962, 486 n. 1).

George Vernadsky points out that the testimony of the people who were in the courtyard at the time of the tsarevich's death ("Vasilisa Volokhova, Irina Tuchkova, Maria Samoylova, and the four boys, Dimitry's playmates") is to be preferred to the testimony of "witnesses" who were not (Tsaritsa Maria Feodorovna Nagaya and Mikhail Nagoy) -- see (The Death of the Tsarevich Dimitry: A Reconsideration of the Case, Oxford Slavonic Papers, Vol. V, 1954, 15-17). The Stledstevennoe Delo, the official investigative proceedings, is a more reliable source than the 17th century Russian chronicles (op. cit., 19).

The Catholic tsar False Dmitriy I was not the real Dmitry, nor was he the renegade monk Grigoriy Otrepyev, but he was not strictly an impostor (Thurston, Herbert. "Impostors." The Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. 7. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1910. 9 Sept. 2015 <>); due to his upbringing by the boyars he genuinely believed he was the son of Ivan the Terrible (George Vernadsky, A History of Russia, New Haven: Yale University Press, 1969, 116-117).

Symeon the New Theologian on Filioque

Glory to God in the highest.

The pneumatological teaching of Symeon the New Theologian (949-1012) is not antithetical to Filioque.

See Jacques-Paul Migne, Patrologia Graeca 160:331-332, where Symeon says that the Holy Spirit "proceeds from the Father": "Deitas namque cum sit superessentialis, etiam et sola est immutabilis et invariabilis; estque tanquam mens, rationem et spiritum habens dicitrque Pater, Filii Pater (qui est quasi ratio) et productor Spiritus (2), quemadmodum item genitor rationis. Et cum Pater Deus nominator, simul cum Filio, ac Spiritu intelligitur. Quando demum Spiritus sanctus appellatur Deus, intelligitur eum ex Patre procedentem, etiam Filii spiritum esse, unione et discretion inexplicabili." The scholarly note (2) says that just as our Lord does not, in John 15:26, exclude the Filioque (cf. St. Augustine the Great, Homilies on John 99:6,8 and Against Maximus 2:14 [PL 42:770]), neither do Symeon's words exclude Filioque. Like some of the Church Fathers, Symeon simply makes the positive affirmation that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father, without making the Photian denial that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son. Many Greek Fathers who made this simple affirmation also explicitly affirmed Filioque.

Jaroslav Pelikan is indefinite as to whether Symeon took the Catholic or Orthodox position on Filioque: "Although Simeon’s treatment of such dogmatic questions as the Filioque did not have a polemical tone and sometimes seemed rather confused, he demanded that the norm of teaching be 'the orthodox dogma of the apostolic and catholic church'" (The Christian Tradition: A History of the Development of Doctrine, Volume 2: The Spirit of Eastern Christendom (600-1700), Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1977, 256-257).

Symeon's feast is March 12 in the Orthodox churches (Hussey, J. M. "Symeon the New Theologian, Monk of the Studion." New Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. 13, 2nd ed. Detroit: Gale, 2003. 671-672). Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI rightly referred to him as "holy," though I have yet to confirm some Catholic brothers' references (here, here, and here) of his presence on some Eastern Catholic calendars.

I will do further research before October to see if any data contradicts my thesis, and to determine if there is any data establishing that Symeon was in explicit communion with Rome. I will dig through Pelikan's work, the introductory notes in Migne, and the bibliography in Hussey's encyclopedia article, among other sources.

Thursday, August 29, 2013

Seraphim of Sarov (1754-1833)

Bl. Pope John Paul II the Great, Crossing the Threshold of Hope (New York: Random House, 1994), 17-18: "Much has been written about prayer, and further, prayer has been widely experienced in the history of mankind, especially in the history of Israel and Christianity. Man achieves the fullness of prayer not when he expresses himself, but when he lets God be most fully present in prayer. The history of mystical prayer in the East and West attests to this: Saint Francis, Saint Teresa of Avila, Saint John of the Cross, Saint Ignatius of Loyola, and, in the East, for example, Saint Seraphim of Sarov and many others."

Louis Monden, S.J., Signs and Wonders: A Study of the Miraculous Element in Religion (New York: Desclée, 1966), 306-307: "Let us study, for instance, the life of St. Seraphim of Sarov (died in 1833), the greatest miracle-worker of the 19th century. His biography, no doubt, presents an impressive number of facts which any Catholic would readily recognize as proofs of a supernatural intervention of God. He would, however, recognize just as readily that none of them qualifies as a major miracle, that is, one with an intrinsic apologetic value and of the kind we have so far found absent everywhere except in the Catholic Church. There are two particularly striking instances among the cures attributed to him: the cases of Michael Manturov and Judge Nikolai Motovilov. Both are cases of functional paralysis, which, judging by the way the illness and the manner of the cure are described, could have been cured, medically speaking, through spontaneous psychotherapy with religious motivation. At the Lourdes Bureau cases like these would not even be considered."

Martin Jugie, A.A., Le schisme byzantin, aperçu historique et doctrinal (Paris, P. Lethielleux, 1941), 447-460, esp. 457:
En 1903, la canonisation de l’ascète Séraphin de Sarov († 1833) fut due déjà a la violenté expresse de l’empereur Nicolas II et de sa femme l’impératrice Alexandra Féodorovna, malgré un obstacle qui paraissant insurmontable. Le corps de Séraphin, en effet, n’avait pas été trouvé conservé. Or, le grande miracle qui est à l’origine de la plupart des canonisations historiques est l’incorruption du cadavre. Lorsque l’historien Golubinskii, dans l’ouvrage signalé plus haut, prétendit que cette marquée de sainteté n’était pas obligatoire, la censure ecclésiastique le mit à l’index.1 Mais sous la pression du tsar, et surtout de la tsarine, l’opposition des milieux ecclésiastiques cessa. La condamnation portée contre l’ouvrage de Goloubinskii fut levée et l’on procéda solennellement, en 1903, à la canonisation du saint anachorète, célèbre par ses exploits ascétiques, son oraison, ses visions extatiques et ses enseignements spirituels.2 Cette canonisation, qui ressemblait à un coup de force de l’autorité impériale, fit scandale en Russie. En tout cas, il faut la considérer comme une exception dans l’histoire des canonisations russes officielles.

... 1. La famille impériale attribuait des grâces de guérison déjà l’attouchement du manteau du saint anachorète. L’impératrice insista pour le faire canoniser, espérant obtenir par son intercession la naissance d’un fils. Elle put bientôt se croire exaucée. Exactement un an après la canonisation de Séraphin, elle émit au monde le tsarévitch Alexis.
Albert Michel, "Sainteté," Dictionnaire de théologie catholique (Paris, Letouzey et Ané, 1939), 14.1:####:

Aidan Nichols, O.P., Rome and the Eastern Churches (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2010), 134: "Again, Catholics of the Byzantine rite do, I believe, commemorate saints canonized by the Orthodox during the period of schism, and even dedicate parish churches to them, like the one recently erected under the patronage of Seraphim of Sarov (a nineteenth century Russian hermit) in Toronto, Canada, but I have not heard of Uniate veneration of an Orthodox saint instrumental in the making or continuance of schism, such as the fifteenth century Greek bishop Mark of Ephesus." Fr. Nichols's book was first published in 1992.

-Seraphim's conversation with Nicholas Motovilov (

-2007 Ruthenian Typicon for Tuesday, January 2: "In the Russian Church, the Venerable and God-bearing Father Seraphim, Wonderworker of Sarov." For more info on this Typicon, see

Archimandrite Lazarus Moore, An Extraordinary Peace: St. Seraphim Flame of Sarov [a.k.a. Saint Seraphim of Sarov: A Spiritual Biography] (Anaphora Press, 2009), 238-239: "But if Father Seraphim spoke of the superiority of Orthodoxy to Old Ritualism, still more did he consider it superior to Roman Catholicism. 'He urged us,' we read in the Diveyev Chronicle, 'to stand firmly for the truth of the dogmas of the Orthodox Church, giving as an example St. Mark of Ephesus who showed unshakable zeal in defense of the Eastern Catholic [Orthodox] faith at the Council of Florence. He himself gave various instructions on Orthodoxy, explaining its essence and stressing that it alone contained the truth of Christ's faith in its integrity and purity. He also gave instructions as to how to defend it.'" Ibid. 242-243, on the vision allegedly experienced "in the early 1920’s, [by someone from] a noble family of Protestants in Alsace": "'Suddenly I saw [St.] Francis [of Assisi] himself coming towards me, and with him a little old man like a patriarch, bent but radiant,' she said indicating thereby his old age and venerable appearance. He was all in white. She felt frightened, but they came quite near her and Francis said; 'My daughter, you seek the true Church. It is there, where he is. It supports everyone, and does not require support from anyone.' The white Elder remained silent and only smiled approvingly at the words of Francis. … When she visited his room to see whether he was comfortably settled, she saw there a small Icon and recognized in it the Elder whom she had seen, in her light sleep, with Francis. Astonished and alarmed she asked: 'Who is he, that little old man?' 'St. Seraphim, our Orthodox saint,' answered the workman. Then she understood the meaning of the words of St. Francis about the truth being in the Orthodox Church."

Wednesday, August 28, 2013

Metropolitan Gregory Tsamblak of Kiev (1414-1420)

-Григорий Цамблак.html

-Francis J. Thomson, Gregory Tsamblak - the Man and the Myths (Ghent: Ghent University, Dept. of Slavonic and East European Studies, 1998):

-Muriel Heppell, The Ecclesiastic Career of Gregory Camblak (Verlag, 1979), 134 pp.:

-rival of the schismatic Metropolitan Photius of Kiev (1408-1431)

-Mgr. Julian Pelesz, Geschichte der Union der ruthenischen Kirche Mit Rome (Würzburg-Wien, 1881), vol. 1, 361-365 (PDF pages 373-377):
-In 1418 Gregory I Tsamblak submitted to Pope Martin V of Rome (1417-1431) at the 16th Ecumenical Council (Constance 1414-1418) [Joseph Gill, S.J., The Council of Florence (Cambridge University Press, 2011), 25-27].
-According to Fr. Martin Jugie, Theologia dogmatica christianorum orientalium ab ecclesia catholica dissidentium (Paris: Letouzey et Ané, 19##), vol. 4, 333, Gregory Tsamblak wrote a Catholic exposition of Our Lord's words "Thou art Peter..." (Mt 16:18):
Gregorius Tsamblacus, ex Serbia oriundus, qui metropolitan Kioviensis fuit, eodem fere sensu ac Catholici evangelicum textum Tu es Petrus interpretatur, Petrumque nuncupat fidei petram, regni clavigerum, orbis præfectum4. ...
4. Macarius Bulgakov, op. cit., t. V, p. 457-458.
-Francis Dvornik, The Slavs in European History and Civilization (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1962) 172: Gregory "composed, among other works, twenty-four homilies and a panegyric on Euthymius [Orthodox Patriarch of Trnovo and Bulgaria] and Cyprian [Orthodox Metropolitan of Kiev and all Rus']. His biography of the Serbian king, Stephen Uroš II, deserves to be mentioned. The biography of St. Romil attributed to him was actually written by a hermit named Gregory."
Note: Stephen II professed papal primacy in his Profession of Faith for Pope John XXII (1316-1334), during the reign of Nicodemus I (1316-1324), according to Fr. Martin Jugie, A.A. Theologia dogmatica Christianorum orientalium ab Ecclesia Catholica dissidentium IV:373.
-Dvornik 174: "Another life of [Stephen] Uroš III was written, as mentioned above, by Gregory Camblak of Bulgaria."
-Dvornik 226-227: Vitold "induced his Orthodox bishops to elect, in 1415, the Bulgarian Gregory Camblak as metropolitan of Kiev. The Metropolitan Photius of Moscow protested, and the Patriarch of Constantinople, who had refused all Vitold's requests for an independent metropolitan, excommunicated Gregory. This plan may have originated in Jagiello's and Vitold's western policy. They hoped that the presence of the new metropolitan of Kiev and of all Russia at the Council of Constance (1415) would provide incontrovertible evidence that there was no reason why the Teutonic Order should be allowed to continue its activity in Prussia: not only had all pagans in those parts been converted, but the Poles and Lithuanians were also bringing back to Rome the Russian schismatics. The whole plan misfired. The learned Bulgarian refused to back their polical plans and turned down the proposals of the council for reunion. After his death (1419), the Muscovite metropolitan continued to exercise his jurisdiction over the Lithuanian Orthodox."
WRH: Dvornik implies that Gregory was Orthodox; this contradicts Jugie and Gill, whose work testifies that Gregory was Catholic after the Council of Constance. In the footnotes to this section of the chapter, Dvornik refers to Albert Maria Ammann, S.J. Abriss der Ostlawischen Kirchengeschichte, Vienna 1950, 73-129; I have to comb this section to find any relevant info that may answer the question of Gregory's ecclesiastical allegiance.
-Oscar Halecki, From Florence to Brest (1439-1596), 2nd. ed., (Archon Books, 1968), 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 34, 37, 44:
28: Patriarch Joseph II of Constantinople excommunicated Gregory Tsamblak, as did his predecessor the Orthodox Patriarch Euthymius II of Constantinople.
31: "... the spectacular audience of the Metropolitan of Kiev seems not to have been followed by any further negotiations with him, and ... soon after his return from Constance Tsamblak disappeared, maybe retiring to a Moldavian monastery.70 ... 70 This is the hypothesis of [A.I.] Yatsimirsky (see above, note 54 [Grigoriy Tsamblak, Petersburg 1904]); see also Chodyrnicki, 47 note 4."
-Dmytro Blazejowskyj, Hierarchy of the Kyivan Church (861-1990) (Ed. Univ. Cath. Ucr. Clementis Papae, Opera N. 72, Sacrum Ucrainae Millenium, No. 3.), 90-91:
-Roger Aubert, Dictionnaire d'histoire et de géographie ecclésiastiques. Paris: Letouzey et Ané, 2000-2003, vol. 28, cols. 1494-1501: "Shortly before his death (September 1406), Metropolitan Cyprian called his nephew Gregory (cf. 52. CAMBLAC Gregory, supra, XXI, 1486-88) to travel to Kiev with the intent to ensure his succession. But Cyprian died before the arrival of Gregory and the Patriarch of Constantinople appointed a Greek Photius (1408-1431) to replace it. The new Grand Prince of Lithuania, Vitovt, refused to recognize this and he tried to detach the bishoprics of his dominions within the jurisdiction of the Metropolitan of Moscow by electing Gregory as Metropolitan of Kiev with residence in Vilna. The Patriarch of Constantinople excommunicated him, and Gregory, at the request of Vitovt, led a delegation to the Lithuanian-Russian Orthodox Council of Constance (his position in favor of union with Rome is not clear)."

-English Wikipedia (
-Polish Wikipedia (
-Ukrainian Wikipedia (
-Russian Wikipedia (
-Romanian Wikipedia (

-Popes were Gregory XII (1406-1415; †1417) and Martin V of Rome (1417-1431)
-Greek patriarchs of Constantinople were Euthymius II (1410-1416) and Joseph II (1416-1439), who died a sincere Catholic [AASS 8:I:184F-186E (210-212)]
-Titular Latin Patriarch of Constantinople was Jean de La Rochetaillée (1412-1423; †1437)

Greek Neo-Martyrs (Hippolyte Delehaye, S.J.)

I found Fr. Delehaye's article from a citation in Yves Congar, "A propos des saints canonisés dans les Eglises orthodoxes," Revue des sciences religieuses, 22 (1948), 240 n. 2, who says, "On a déjà posé plusieurs fois la question de savoir comment pourrait être réglée, dans le cas d’une réunion des Eglises orthodoxes à Rome, la question du culte rendu, dans ces Eglises, aux saints morts ou canonisés depuis le schisme. L’existence de saints comparables aux nôtres dans les Eglises orthodoxes est en effet une réalité de fait et qui n’entre en conflit avec aucun principe dogmatique. Nombre de moines et d’évêques orientaux ont mené, depuis la séparation comme avant elle, une vie héroïquement sainte, et Dieu a manifesté cette sainteté par des signes. D’autres, et aussi bien des laïcs, d’humbles et candides chrétiens, sont tombés victimes de l’Islam, des Tatars ou des Turcs et sont de vrais martyrs, témoins des vérités qui sont l’essence même de la foi chrétienne."

These are the words of Hippolyte Delehaye, "Greek Neo-Martyrs," The Constructive Quarterly, IX (1921), 712:
In reading an author who has elsewhere spoken well of these neo-martyrs, I admit having been painfully impressed by the words: "It is evident that for us, Catholics, they are neither saints nor martyrs." If this simply means that the Roman Church does not celebrate them, there is nothing further to be said. But what is lacking to constitute them true martyrs? Did they die for the differences which divide us? For the errors and subtleties of their theologians? Did they even suspect that they existed? Did they not shed their blood for the truths which are the essence of our faith and for which the most illustrious martyrs of the early centuries fought? The neo-martyrs are the purest glory of the Greek Church, and before these generous witnesses to the faith which we hold in common every Christian should bow.
Cf. my post, "Heretical and schismatic false martyrs (Fr. René Hedde, O.P.)," a very rough translation of a section of the article "Martyre" by Fr. René Hedde, O.P. in the 1928 Dictionnaire de théologie catholique, 10.1:233. Above: Ahmed the Calligrapher (†5/3/1682), layman convert from Islam and new martyr under the Turkish yoke, "a favorite saint of" the Society of St. John Chrysostom of Ayatriada Rum Katoliki Kilise in Istanbul, Turkey. Ahmed the Calligrapher is not on any Catholic calendar of saints (cf. Delehaye's comment above: "the Roman Church does not celebrate them").

Tuesday, August 27, 2013

Metropolitan Macarius of Kiev (1495-1497)

Macarius certainly was Catholic prior to becoming Metropolitan, but historians contradict each other on whether he died Catholic or Orthodox.

-Bollandists 9:II:xxvi:A, §108 (50): The section header in the margin says, "Metropolita Macarius Catholicus; item Josephus," then Fr. John Stilting, S.J., says, "De hisce Koialovicius pag. 47 ita habet: Ad annum MCDXCII (apud Kulczynskium 1490) urgente Alexandro, qui, mortuo parente Casimiro rege, magnus Lithuaniæ dux renuntiatus fuerat, metropolitanus creatus est Macarius abbas Vilnesis ad sanctissimam Trinitatem, unus ex illis, quorum nomina legationi sub Misaële institutæ adscripta legimus. Macario successit Josephus Sultan è nobili inter Lisuanos familia ortus. Unitum cum fuisse evincunt litteræ illius de unione & concilio Florentino ad Niphonem Constantinopolitanum anno MCDXCVII scriptæ."
-Bollandists 10:XI:118-119 (154-155):
-Mgr. Pelesz I:476 (488):
-Mgr. Pelesz I:478-479 (490-491): "weleher als Archimandrit von Wilno das im Jahre 1476 von Misaël an Papst Sixtus IV gerichtete Schreiben unterfertigt hat. Im Jahre 1495 versammelten sich (nach der Kiewer Chronik bei Karamsin VI. N. 403) die Bischöfe: Wassian von Wladimir, Lucas von Polozk, Wassian von Turow, Jonas von Luzk, und ordinirten den Archimandriten Macarius mit dem Beinamen Cort zum Metropoliten, und schickten dann einen gewissen Dionysius und einen Mönch, German, zum Patriarchen um den Segen. Der Patriarch Niphon schickte darauf seinen Gesandten Isaph mit der Confirmationsurkunde, so wie mit Briefen an den litauischen Grossfürsten und an die Bischöfe und die Gläubigen der Kiewer Metropolie. Der Gesandte des Patriarchen verlangte aber von den ruthenischen Bischöfen, dass sie künftig zuerst um den Segen bitten, bevor sie zur Ordination des Metropoliten schreiten, was diese auch zusagten; das jetzige Verfahren aber damit entschuldigten, dass auf dieselbe Weise, d. i. ohne vorherigen Segen des Patriarchen, auch der Metropolit Gregor I Semivlac ordinirt worden war. Daraus sieht man, dass die Kiewer Metropoliten immer um die Bestätigung des Patriarchen ersuchten (Kiew. Chron. Macarius wurde auf einer Reise nach Kiew im Dorfe Skryholovy von den Tataren gefangen und enthauptet."
-Mgr. Pelesz I:572 (584): "Es werden wohl einige Beweise dafür angeführt, allein der Umstand, dass sie das Abhängigkeitsverhältniss von Konstantinopel auch damals nicht aufgegeben haben, wo sie nicht mehr zweifeln konnten, dass die griechischen in Konstantinopel residirenden Patriarchen von der Union abfielen, und die unirten Patriarchen, wie aus dem obangeführten Breve des Papstes Alexander VI an den Wilnaer Bischof Albert hervorgeht, in Rom residirten, dieser Umstand macht die Orthodoxie der Metropoliten Simeon, Jonas I und Macarius I verdächtig. Ja sogar der Metropolit Joseph Soltan, der sich dann entschieden der Union angeschlossen hat, scheint anfangs dem Schisma gehuldigt zu haben, wie aus dem eben erwähnten Breve zu ersehen ist. Joseph Soltan arbeitete eifrig an der Ausbreitung der Union, allein er wurde in seinem Wirken durch die zahlreichen am Hofe der Königin Helena lebenden schismatischen Emissäre gehindert, und als dann sein Nachfolger sich offen für das Schisma erklärte, waren allmälig auch die letzen Spuren der Union verschwunden."
-Aurelio Palmieri in 1912 Catholic Encyclopedia: Macarius was "friendly to the union." Palmieri says, "Isidor resigned the Metropolitan See of Kieff about 1458, and in the same year Pius II appointed Gregor the Bulgarian, who was a disciple and companion of the former metropolitan, and who, according to the historian Golubinski, remained united to Rome until 1470, after which he became Orthodox, and died in 1472 [note: Gregory died Catholic, according to Oscar Halecki, pages 97-98 of the work cited below, and Jan Krajcar in New Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. 12, 421]. Among his successors who were friendly to the union were Mikhail Drucki (1475-80), Semion (1481-88), Jonah Glezna (1492-94), Makap (1495-97), and Josef Soltan, who in 1500 wrote a letter to Alexander VI asking for papal confirmation of his metropolitan dignity." Palmieri, Aurelio. "The Religion of Russia." The Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. 13. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1912. 27 Aug. 2013.
-Blazejowskyj 181:
-Oscar Halecki, From Florence to Brest (1439-1596), 2nd. ed., (Archon Books, 1968), 108: "fifteen years later, in 1497, one of the metropolitans, the same Macarius who as Archimandrite had signed Misael's letter to Sixtus IV, wanted to visit Kiev, he was murdered by Tartar invaders." Halecki 108 n. 34 says, "See on this Metropolitan, elected in 1495, and duly confirmed by Constantinople [Kazimierz] Chodynicki, [Kosciol prawoslawny a Rzeczpospolita Polska: zarys historyczny 1370-1632], 70 f."  
-Halecki, op. cit., 111: "... in May 1947, Metropolitan Mecarius was killed by the Tartars. That former signatory of Misael's appeal to Rome does not seem to have been more favorable to reunion than his predecessor Ionas Hlezna who, in 1489, had taken Simeon's place. All three metropolitans of whose activities very little is known, were obviously satisifed with their recognition by the Patriarch of Constantinople and the Lithuanian administration." Here Halecki cites Chodynicki, op. cit., 69-70, then Halecki continues, "The new candidate, Joseph, took a different attitude, and even before he was formally appointed, in May 1498, tried to receive from the Patriarch of Constantinople himself an approval of his project to restore the Union of Florence in his ecclesiastical province." 
-Cf. Halecki 105:
-Cf. Halecki  110:
-Joseph B. Koncevicius, Russia's Attitude Towards Union with Rome (9th-16th Centuries) (Cleveland, OH: John T. Zubal, Inc. Publishers and Booksellers, 1983), 145: "Nothing is clear regarding the attitude of the next Metropolitan, Macarius, who held office but a short time." Fr. Koncevicius's footnote 109 cites Przegląd Poznański, t. 34 (1862), 161-164 and Leon Krewza, Obrona jedności cerkiewnejabo dowody, którymi się pokazuje, iż grecka cerkiew z ła-cińską ma być zjednoczona (A Defense of Church Union, or Arguments showing why the Greek Church must unite with the Latin Church) (Wilno 1617), s. 91, 92.
-Roger Aubert, Dictionnaire d'histoire et de géographie ecclésiastiques. Paris: Letouzey et Ané, 2000-2003, vol. 28, cols. 1494-1501: "For half a century, the successors of Gregory continued to maintain relations with Rome, but in 1507 Joseph Soltan turned back to the Patriarch of Constantinople to obtain confirmation of his election, and it was the same for his successors."
-Ukrainian Wikipedia ( 
- (in Ukrainian): 
-Russian Wikipedia ( 
-Polish Wikipedia ( in the words of the Polish Wikipedia, Macarius of Kiev "spoke strongly against the Union of Florence," according to Antoni Mironowicz: Kościół prawosławny w Polsce (Białostockie Towarzystwo Historyczne, 2006), 187. ISBN 836045602X 
-Another source on Macarius of Kiev in Russian (concerning his participation at the wedding of Catholic Alexander and Orthodox Helen):

-Pope was Alexander VI of Rome (1492-1503)
-Greek Patriarch of Constantinople was Maximus IV (1491-1497) -Titular Latin Patriarchs of Constantinople were Jerome Lando (1474-1496) and Giovanni Michiel (1497–1503)

Wednesday, March 13, 2013

Pope Francis

May Almighty God bless the ministry of the new Pope Francis, the Supreme Pontiff and successor of St. Peter, the Prince of the Apostles. May our Lord bless the pope emeritus, Benedict XVI. In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.

Saturday, February 23, 2013

Updates 2013

Dear readers, I pray that you have been well and that God infuses you with sanctifying grace. I have been very busy over the past year working. Glory to God, I graduated from Fordham University with a B.A. in Theology in May 2012. I need your prayers so that the Holy Spirit comes to my heart and makes me holy.

Let us pray for our Holy Father Pope Benedict XVI, and let us pray that God grants us a worthy successor to him on the Throne of St. Peter, the Prince of the Apostles. Let us pray for all the members of the Church Militant, the Church Suffering, and the world. Let us pray for a swift end to the clerical sexual abuse scandal, and for prompt healing of the victims in soul and body. Let us pray for widespread conversions to the Catholic faith. Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner.

This blog will hopefully continue to be part of a life that will, God willing, become more balanced and God-pleasing.

Thanks be to God, most of the Dictionnaire de Théologie Catholique is available online (letters T-Z to be available in 2017, God willing). This is one of my favorite Catholic works of all time because it is so useful for apologetics and Church history. Update 9/8/2015: God willing, I will close out some of these items this fall by spending a few hours each week on the blog. Pray for me, a sinner. Before October 1, I will post a page detailing updates to old entries. These are some brief updates that are mostly related to my page called "Stances."

Pope Benedict V vs. Antipope Leo VIII

False Dimitry I 
See "Tsarevich Dimitry of Uglich Died Accidentally."

Pope Gregory VI and Simony
Today I started to transcribe the article by Denise Feytmans, "Grégoire VI était-il simoniaque?," Revue belge de philologie et d'histoire , 11 (1932 ), 130-137. After I transcribe the article, I will do a rough translation of it. Feytmans concludes (page 137), "It therefore seems prudent to admit the simony of Gregory VI without trying to find justifications or excuses." I have not yet read this article, so I don't know if it will change my mind. In any event, may the Lord lead us to the truth in this controversial matter of history. In the meantime, I believe that Gregory VI was true pope, which would not be the case if he obtained the papacy simoniacally. Click the link for citations of reliable sources that justify the following understanding of events: The wicked Pope Benedict IX (1032-1045) had become pope at age 20 and after ruling the Church for some years he wanted to marry. Benedict IX's holy godfather John Gratian wanted to rid the Church of such an unworthy pontiff, so he gave a very large sum of money to the party of Tusculum to compensate them for their interests, but "not profit Benedict IX personally" [Klaus-Jürgen Herrmann, "BENEDICT IX." The Papacy: An Encyclopedia, First Edition. Ed. Philippe Levillian, John W. O'Malley. Routledge, 2002. Religion Online. Taylor & Francis.]. After a canonical election was observed, John Gratian reluctantly accepted the papacy and became Gregory VI (i.e., he did not plan on becoming pope, but only on making sure Benedict would step down). Later, he abdicated under pressure but voluntarily (he was not deposed) at the Council of Sutri [Dr. Warren H. Carroll, The Building of Christendom, 324-1100: A History of Christendom, vol. 2 (Royal, VA: Christendom College Press, 1987), 462-464, 469; buy this book today!]. He abdicated to avoid the scandal of an outward appearance of simony, because people then and today wrongly thought that he "bought the papacy" from his godson Benedict IX.

Pope Julius III and the Innocenzo Ciocchi Del Monte Scandal

Queen Ketevan of Georgia
A look at Catholic veneration of the queen.

Pope Martin IV & Michael Palaeologus
See the harsh evaluation in Carroll III:312, 315, 316-317, 321.

Metropolitan Zosimus of Moscow and Judaizing
I mistakenly reported in "Old Rome, Not New Rome" (Friday 7/16/2010) that "radical 'hatred of Rome' led Russians to install 'a Jew named Zosimas' as Metropolitan of Moscow (1490-1494) [Andrew Shipman]." I apologize for the error, and did not mean to libel Metropolitan Zosimus of Moscow. The learned Shipman was mistaken because, according to Fr. Mauricio Gordillo, S.J. in Dictionnaire de théologie catholique, ed. A. Vacant et al. (1938), vol. 14, part 1, there are several good reasons (given by Nikolaĭ Petrovich Popov) to believe that Zosimus of Moscow was not a Judaizer, notwithstanding the allegations of caesaropapist and extremist Joseph of Volokolamsk.

Dr. Warren H. Carroll's Excellent A History of Christendom Series: Buy It Today!

How Catholic Saints are Different from other "Saints" - Dictionnaire de Théologie Catholique

Albert Michel's take.

Photius of Constantinople

A History of Catholicism in Romania

Symeon the New Theologian and Gregory of Sinai on Filioque

TheDailyBeast's Gallery on 15 Papal Scandals

Pope Urban VI, the True Pope: Dr. Warren Carroll's Evaluation and Definitive Proof that Urban VI and the Roman Line were the True Popes

Catholic Patriarchs and Metropolitans in the Orthodox Sees of Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, Jerusalem, Kiev and Moscow, Ohrid, and Georgia

Job of Pochayiv
I have an Orthodox book on Job of Pochayiv coming in the mail before mid-September 2015. I also plan to consult a Ukrainian book on Job () before October 1, 2015. More to come on the "Coronation of Pochaiv Icon of the Mother of God" in 1773, which is celebrated on May 1 in the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Calendar of the Archeparchy of Winnipeg. I will also give information about other Ukrainian icons Hail Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with thee. Blessed art thou among women and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus. Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners, now and at the hour of our death. Amen.

John Huss
Orthodox veneration of John and takes from Old (Joseph Wilhelm) and New Catholic Encyclopedia (Paul de Vooght), Dr. Warren Carroll on the Four Articles in III:505 and the execution of Huss in III:488-490, the DTC (P. Moncelle), etc.

From the DTC, fresh data on Utraquism and abundant new Patristic citations to be added to Catholic Patristics.

Russia Was Catholic Before It Became Orthodox
Continuing my thread on the Kievan metropolitans, with a closer look at the secular rulers and some saints whom Orthodox Christians consider to have been Orthodox, but were in communion with Rome--sources consulted include Joseph B. Koncius, Oscar Halecki, Aurelio Palmieri, John Stilting, Dmytro Blazejowskyj, Maurcio Gordillo, Yves Congar, and John Meyendorff. Further details on St. Sergius of Radonezh and other post-schism saints.

St. Methodius and Filioque
-Francis Dvornik, Byzantine Missions Among the Slavs: SS. Constantine-Cyril and Methodius (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1970), ##.

St. Andrew the Apostle and the See of Constantinople
-Francis Dvornik, The Idea of Apostolicity in Byzantium and the Legend of the Apostle Andrew (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1958), ##.

St. Sava of Serbia 
Attwater, Meyendorff, and other sources. Some of the professions of Serbian rulers in Joseph Gill, Byzantium and the Papacy.

Saints Loyal to Antipopes During Great Western Schism

The Council of Pisa

Updates from M.-M. Gorce, Donald Weinstein, Herbert Lucas, Jourdan Hurtaud, Warren Carroll, Ludwig Pastor, Roberto Ridolfi, Pasquale Villari, K. Foster, Johann Peter Kirsch, and others.

The Fate of Dmitry of Uglich: Separating Fact from Fiction

The Sanctity of Emperors Constantine the Great & Justinian the Great
A look at Catholic and Orthodox sources. Constantine is a saint of the Catholic Church; Justinian is not.

Where Did the Blessed Virgin Mary Repose?

Post-Schism Byzantine Emperors, Patriarchs, and Orthodox Saints

Pope Sixtus IV and Stephen III the Great of Moldavia
The primary source for the former's commendation of the latter.

Translations of Fr. Martin Jugie & John Baptist Baur

Nuggets of Wisdom on Health (Nutrition, Training, Lifestyle)

Saturday, December 31, 2011



Please report any broken links. Also go to now to donate 10 grains of rice for every vocabulary word you correctly define! See if you can get to level 57 like me! :-)

A partial mirror of this blog can be found here at Wordpress.

See the Anthology of William Huysman for easy navigation and indexing of posts. Click here for a convenient index of posts.

Check out my new blog, Catholic Patristics. Click here for a convenient index of posts on that blog.

Hopefully the Scriptural and Patristic catenae on this site will help you realize the truth of the following distinctively Catholic positions:

The Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father through the Son, that is, from the Father and the Son (the formulas are complementary rather than contradictory) as regards His eternal hypostatic existence, and this is no prejudice to the monarchy of the Father.

Trine immersion is not necessary for baptism to be valid; baptism by a single immersion, sprinkling, or pouring is valid, too.

The use of unleavened bread in the Eucharist is perfectly valid; leavened bread is not the only valid option.

The bond of a consummated sacramental marriage is absolutely indissoluble and second marriages are impermissible so long as the spouse is still alive.

The use of artificial birth control methods is intrinsically mortally sinful.

Papal Infallibility
The seeds of the papal infallibility dogma defined by the Ecumenical Council of Vatican I are present in scripture and in the writings of the Church Fathers and resolutions of Ecumenical Councils held in common by Catholics and Eastern Orthodox.

Immaculate Conception
Mary the ever-virgin Theotókos never contracted original sin and never committed personal sin.

Check out the progress on the Catholic wonderworker project here.
Check out the progress on the Eastern Orthodox wonderworker project here.

Right now I'm re-doing citations in MLA format; this will take a while!

Sunday, April 17, 2011

Happy Palm Sunday 2011!

Happy Palm Sunday of the Lord's Passion 2011! May the Lord make this a great Holy Week for all. Thank you, Lord Jesus, King of the Universe, for by Your Precious Blood You have redeemed the world! Dear readers, pray for me, a sinner. I pray that you all experience an abundance of God's grace and a growth of communion with Him on this day and all the days to come, that the merciful God will bring you to the top of the Ladder of Divine Ascent! Amen.

Wednesday, April 13, 2011

The 21 Ecumenical Councils

1 - Nicaea I (325)
-Hefele 1.1:335–632
-president was Bishop St. Hosius the Confessor of Cordoba, who was assisted by the papal legates Priests Victor and Vincent of Rome [Henri Leclercq]
-318 bishops [Henri Leclercq]
-"Cecilian of Carthage [311-325], Mark of Calabria, Nicasius of Dijon, [and] Donnus of Stridon in Pannonia" were the only other Roman Catholic bishops present [Henri Leclercq]
-20 canons [Hefele 1.2:528–620]

2 - Constantinople I (381)
-Hefele 2.1:1–48
-J. Bois in DTC 3.1:1227-1231
-successive Presidents of the Council called by the holy Emperor Theodosius I the Great (379-395) were Patriarch St. Meletius of Antioch (360-381), Archbishop St. Gregory Nazianzen the Theologian of Constantinople (Doctor; 379-381; †390), and Archbishop St. Nectarius of Constantinople (381-397)
-originally a General Council of the East; no involvement or representation of Pope St. Damasus I of Rome (366-384)

3 - Ephesus (431)

4 - Chalcedon (451)
-Pope St. Leo I the Great of Rome (Doctor; 440-461)
-27 canons

5 - Constantinople II (553)
-Mansi IX:163-658 (88-335)
-Hefele :
-J. Bois in DTC 3.1:1231-1259
-É. Amann in DTC 15.2:1268–1294

6 - Constantinople III (680-681)
-Mansi X:190-922 (101-467)
-Hefele 3.1:472–538
-J. Bois in DTC 3.1:1259-1274
-É. Amann in DTC 7.1:93-132
-Fr. Martin Jugie, A.A. in DTC 10.2:2307-2323
-Patriarch George I of Constantinople (679-686)
-Patriarch Peter V of Alexandria

7 - Nicaea II (787)
-Hefele 3.2:601–798
-G. Fritz in DTC 11.1:417-441

8 - Constantinople IV (869-870)
-Hefele 4.1:481-546
-Fr. Martin Jugie, A.A. in DTC 3:1273-1307
-E. Amann in DTC 12:1549-1582; 16:666-667
-Pope Adrian II of Rome (867-872)
-Patriarch St. Ignatius of Constantinople (847-858, 867-877)
-Patriarch Michael I of Alexandria (860-870) [AASS 6:V:84, §446 (126)] represented by Deacon Joseph [Mansi XVI:190B]
-Patriarch Nicholas II of Antioch (860-879) [AASS 7:IV:123A-C, §579-581 (153)] represented by Metropolitan Thomas of Tyre [ibid.]
-Patriarch Theodosius of Jerusalem (862-878) [AASS 5:III:xli, §180 (53)] represented by Presbyter Elijah the syncellus [ibid.]
-two of the 26 metropolitans who signed the Acts of the Eighth Ecumenical Council [Mansi XVI:190C-191D] signed the acts of the sixth session of the Robber Council of 879-880 [Mansi XVII-1:513]: Cyprian of Claudiopolis and Ignatius of Hierapolis

9 - Lateran I (1123)
-Mansi XXI:277-304 (148-161)
-Hefele 4.2:630-644
-F. Vernet in DTC 8.2:2628-2637
-Pope Callistus II of Rome (1119-1124) "presided in person"
-22 canons promulgated

10 - Lateran II (1139)
-Mansi XXI:523-546 (271-282)
-Hefele 5.1:721-738
-F. Vernet in DTC 8.2:2637-2644
-Pope Innocent II of Rome (1130-1143)

11 - Lateran III (1179)
-Mansi XXII:209-468 (118-247)
-Hefele 5.2:1086-1112
-F. Vernet in DTC 8.2:2644-2652
-Pope Alexander III of Rome (1159-1181)
-Latin Patriarch Amalric of Jerusalem (1158-1180) represented by Prior Peter of the Holy Sepulcher [Hefele 5.2:1087]

12 - Lateran IV (1215)
-Mansi XXII:953-1086 (490-556)
-Hefele 5.2:1316–1398
-F. Vernet in DTC 8.2:2652–2667
-Carroll III:188:
-Gill, Byzantium and the Papacy 34-36, 43-47:
-Pope Innocent III of Rome (1198-1216)
-Latin Patriarch Gervase of Constantinople (1215-1219)
-Latin Patriarch Raoul of Merencourt of Jerusalem (1214-1225)
-Maronite Patriarch Jeremiah II Amchiti (1199-1230) attended (Carroll III:188)
-vicar of Patriarch Nicholas I of Alexandria (1210-1243) attended (Carroll III:188)
-Was it a vicar of Patriarch Joachim of Antioch (1199-1219) who attended? (Cf. Carroll III:188)

13 - Lyons I (1245)
-Mansi XXIII:605-686 (303-343)
-Hefele 5.2:1633–1679
-Pope Innocent IV of Rome (1243-1254)
-Latin Patriarch Nicholas de Castro Arquato (1234–1251) [AASS 8:I:151C-F (177)]
-no involvement of Greek Orthodox Patriarch Gregory I of Alexandria (1243-1263) [J. Pargoire in 1903 DTC 1.1:796]
-Latin Patriarch Albert Rezzato of Antioch (1226–1245)
-Patriarch Berthold of Aquileia (1218-1251)
-Catholic Metropolitan Peter Akerovych of Kiev (1241-1246) came with Grand Prince St. Michael the Martyr, Wonderworker of Chernigov

14 - Lyons II (1274)
-Mansi XXIV:37-136 (25-75)
-Hefele 6.1:153–209
-F. Vernet in DTC 9.1:1361–1391
-Bl. Pope Gregory X of Rome (1271-1276) and 15 cardinals
-Titular Latin Patriarch Pantaleon Giustiani of Constantinople (1253–1278) [Hefele 6.1:168; F. Vernet in DTC 9.1:1376]
-Titular Latin Patriarch Opizo Fieschi of Antioch (1247–1292) [Hefele 6.1:168; F. Vernet in DTC 9.1:1376]
-Greek ex-Patriarch Germanus III of Constantinople (1267) [AASS 8:I:164A-165E (190-191)]
-no involvement of Greek Orthodox Patriarch Nicholas II of Alexandria (1263-1276) [J. Pargoire in 1903 DTC 1.1:796]
-It appears that Patriarch Athanasius III of Alexandria (1276-1316) and Theodosius IV of Antioch (1269-1276) were Catholic, at least for a time: Joseph Gill, S.J., Byzantium and the Papacy, 1198-1400 (Rutgers University Press, 1979), 183-185 nn. 6-8 (294).
-Fr. Yves Congar, O.P., I Believe in the Holy Spirit III:130: "it is not possible to say that the Greek Church was really represented"

15 - Vienne (1311-1312)
-Mansi XXV:367-416 (189-213)
-Hefele 6.2:643-719
-J. Leclercq in DTC 15.2:2973-2979
-Avignon Pope Clement V of Rome (1305-1314)
-Titular Latin Patriarch of Constantinople, Nicholas of Thebes (1308-1331) [Mansi XXV:380CD (195)]
-Titular Latin Patriarch of Jerusalem [Mansi XXV:380E (195)]
-Patriarch of Aquileia Ottobuono of Razzi (1302-1315) [Mansi XXV:380D (195)]
-Patriarch Angelo Motonense of Grado (1310-1313) [Mansi XXV:380DE (195)]

16 - Constance (1414-1418)
-Mansi XXVII:519-1240 (269-629); appendix in Mansi XXVIII:1-976 (10-497)
-Hefele 7.1
-A. Baudrillart in DTC 3.2:1200-1224
-no involvement of Greek Orthodox Patriarch Athanasius IV of Alexandria (1417-1425) [J. Pargoire in 1903 DTC 1.1:796]

17 - Basel-Ferrara-Florence (1431-1445)
-Hefele 7.2
-A. Vogt in DTC 6.1:24-50
-Pope Eugene IV of Rome (1431-1447)
-Patriarch Joseph II of Constantinople (5/21/1416-6/10/1439), who died a sincere Catholic
-Patriarch Philotheus of Alexandria (1435-1459) represented by the future Patriarch Gregory III Mammas of Constantinople; contrary to his official biography on the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate of Alexandria website, there was no anti-union synod of 1443 or 1450 and Patriarch Philotheus actually sent a Letter to Pope Eugene IV of Rome in which he says that anyone who does not accept the Council of Florence is a heretic [Fr. Gill 323; Mansi XXXI-2:1703-1704 (300)]
-Patriarch Dorotheus II of Antioch (1436-1454) represented by Metropolitan Isidore of Kiev
-Patriarch Joachim of Jerusalem (1431-1450) represented by Metropolitan Dositheus of Monembasia
-no anti-union synod of 1443 [Fr. Gill 354], nor was there an anti-union synod in 1450 [Fr. Gill 376 n. 3]
-Greek Church did not officially repudiate Council of Florence until 1484 [Fr. Gill 410]

18 - Lateran V (1512-1517)
-Mansi XXXII:649–1002 (332-508)
-Hefele 8.1:339–375, 396–548
-F. Vernet in DTC 8.2:2667–2686
-Pope Julius II of Rome (1503-1513) and Pope Leo X of Rome (1513-1521)
-Titular Latin Patriarch Jacques Cortès of Alexandria (1552-1568) [F. Vernet in DTC 8.2:2675]
-Titular Latin Patriarch of Antioch [F. Vernet in DTC 8.2:2675]

19 - Trent (1545-1563)
-Titular Latin Patriarch Anthony Helia of Jerusalem (1558-1575) [Hefele 9.2:717]
-Patriarch Daniel Matthew Alvise Barbaro (1550-1570) [Hefele 9.2:717]
-Patriarch Giovanni Trevisano of Venice (1560-1590) [Hefele 9.2:717]
-no involvement of Patriarch Joasaph II of Constantinople (1555-1565) even though Pope Pius IV of Rome (1555-1559) invited him [Hefele 9.2:1025]
-no involvement of anti-Catholic Patriarch Joachim I Pany of Alexandria (1487-1567), though Pope Pius IV of Rome (1555-1559) invited him [Hefele 9.2:1025], since "the Alexandrian Melkites finally severed relations with Rome after the Turkish conquest of Alexandria in 1517" [G. A. Maloney in NCE I:271]
-no involvement of Patriarch Joachim IV of Antioch (1543-1576), even though Pope Pius IV of Rome (1555-1559) invited him [Hefele 9.2:1025]

20 - Vatican I (1870)

21 - Vatican II (1962-1965)

Monday, April 11, 2011

Old Rome, Not New Rome 1

This is version 3.0 (2011) of part 1 of "Why God Led Me to Rome Instead of Constantinople." May God bless you with ever-growing communion with Him and may He bless you and yours with everlasting life. May He make use of this sinner to win people over to the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church by holiness of life and sound arguments from Sacred Scripture and Tradition and right reason. May God grant this sinner the strength to show, in these posts, that Catholicism, and not Eastern Orthodoxy, is the only true and saving faith, and that the Catholic Church is the bearer of the Four Marks of the Church. Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner.

Since the Eastern Orthodox Church does not have an infallible magisterium,{1} it has been unable to definitively solve issues such as the following{2}: the procession of the Holy Spirit; the nature of the primacy of the Pope; the validity of Catholic Baptism; the canon of Sacred Scripture; whether there is a real distinction in God between His essence and energy; the form of the Eucharist; the immediacy of retribution; Purgatory; and other issues.

Notes to Preface
{1} Fr. Martin Jugie, A.A. (†1954), Theologia dogmatica Christianorum orientalium ab Ecclesia Catholica dissidentium IV:525-529.
{2} Op. cit., 538-539.

A. Constantinople Not an Apostolic See

B. Heretical Patriarchs of Constantinople
Despite its share of saintly archbishops and patriarchs,{1} the see of Constantinople has been occupied by numerous heretics and even heresiarchs. Its three Arian occupants were Eusebius of Nicomedia (339-342),{2} Eudoxius of Antioch (360-370),{3} and Demophilus (370-380).{4} The semi-Arian heresiarch Macedonius (342-346, 351-360; †364){5} and the heresiarch Nestorius (428-431){6} also held the throne, as did five Monophysites: Acacius (472-489),{7} Fravitas (489),{8} Euphemius (489-495),{9} Timothy I (511-518),{10} and Anthimus I (535-536).{11} The Monothelite Patriarchs of Constantinople include the heresiarch Sergius I (610-638),{12} Pyrrhus (638-641, 654),{13} Paul II (641-653),{14} Peter (654-666),{15} and John VI (712-714).{16} Constantinople also had a series of Iconoclast Patriarchs: Anastasius (730-754),{17} Constantine II (754-766),{18} Nicetas I (766-780),{19} Paul IV (780-784),{20} Theodotus I Cassiteras (815-821),{21} Antony I Cassimatis (821-836),{22} and John VII Grammaticus (836-842).{23} Photius (877-886), whose first term was illegitimate,{24} was guilty of doctrinal innovations,{25} especially his opposition to the Filioque.{26} Cyril I Lucaris (1612, 1620-1623, 1623-1633, 1633-1634, 1634-1635, 1637-1638) was a Calvinist,{27} Cyril V (1748-1751, 1752-1757) held Anabaptist tenets,{28} and Meletius IV Metaxakis (1921-1923; †1935) was a Freemason who declared Anglican orders valid.{29}

If Catholicism is false, then even more Patriarchs of Constantinople were heretics, since they accepted distinctively Catholic dogmas (e.g., Filioque, papal primacy):  John XI Beccus (1275-1282; †1297),{30} Joseph II (1416-1439),{31} Metrophanes II (1440-1443),{32} Gregory III Mammas, a renowned wonderworker (1443-1459),{33} Dionysius II (1546-1555),{34} Neophytus II (1602-1603, 1607-1612),{35} Raphael II (1603-1607),{36} Cyril II Contares (1633, 1635-1636, 1638-1639; †1640),{37} Athanasius V (1709-1711),{38} and probably others.{39}

Since 1054, there has been no "Orthodox" Pope of Rome, whereas the post-1054 Orthodox succession lines of the following autocephalous sees and Churches include multiple Catholics:
Constantinople: nine or more (to 1711)

Germanus (GILL, Joseph, S.J. Byzantium and the Papacy, 1198-1400 (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1979), 132
For clues on the theology of John Vatatzes see GILL, Joseph, S.J. Byzantium and the Papacy, 1198-1400 (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1979), 92-95
See ibid. 194-196 nn. 54-60 (297) on the remote possibility of the Catholic conversion of Emperor Andronicus III Palaeologus (1328-1341)
Alexandria: three or more (to 1517)
Every 186 on Nicholas of Alexandria (1210-1243)
GILL, Joseph, S.J. Byzantium and the Papacy, 1198-1400 (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1979), 184-185: Athanasius of Alexandria was part of the Union of Lyons

Antioch: four or more; up to 25 (to 1724) [G. D. Gallaro in NCE IX:479]
"During the centuries of tumult in Antioch, there were several patriarchs who professed communion with the bishop of Rome despite the antagonism that had developed between the Old Rome and the New Rome (Constantinople). According to one estimate, between the twelfth and eighteenth centuries there were perhaps as many as 25 patriarchs of Antioch in communion with Rome. However, there was never a stable, enduring union between the Church of Antioch and the Church of Rome." -- Very Rev. George D. Gallaro,"Melkite Greek Catholic Church." New Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. 9, 2nd ed. Detroit: Gale, 2003, 479. I am not sure whose "estimate" this is; I will ask the Very Rev. George D. Gallaro.
GILL, Joseph, S.J. Byzantium and the Papacy, 1198-1400 (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1979), n. 18 on 274: Symeon II of Antioch was Catholic for a time; David of Antioch was Catholic but Euthymius of Antioch was Orthodox ("Setton, Crusades, II p. 566 ."
Gill 184: Theodosius of Antioch was part of the Union of Lyons (Theodosius IV:1269-1276)

Jerusalem: six or more (to 1503)

Every 182
Kiev: 15 or more (to 1596)
For proof see "Metropolitans of Kiev" by Will Huysman, 2/28/2011, with updates in September 2015. 
Before the 1054 schism (more info on the dating of the definitive East-West schism to follow), the following Metropolitans were certainly Catholic: Michael I of Kiev (988-992), Leontius (992-1008), John I (1019-1035), and Theopemptus (1035-1049)
After the Schism:
-The following 13 Metropolitans were certainly Catholic: Hilarion (1051-1055), Ephraim I (1055-1061), George (1062-1073), Nicholas I (1097-1101), Clement Smoliatich (1147-1154), Peter Akerovych (1241-1246), Gregory Tsamblak (1414-1420), Isidore (1436-1458; †1464), Gregory II the Bulgarian (1458-1472), Michael Drucki (1474-1480), Symeon (1481-1488), Jonah Gleznah (1492-1494), and Joseph II Bolgarynovich (1498–1501).
This Metropolitan was almost certainly Catholic: John IV (1164-1166)
These three Metropolitans may have been Catholic and data which implicates them as Orthodox may be unhistorical; details to follow in the hyperlinked post: John II (1080-1089), Nicephorus I (1104-1121), and Macarius (1495-1497).
Serbia: two or more (to 1321)
-St. Sava (1219-1233)
See the following:
Donald Attwater, Saints of the East (P.J. Kenedy & Sons, 1963), 143-144.
George Every, 189-190
Cf. Meyendorff
Bulgaria (Tarnovo and Ohrid): eight or more (to 1660)
Georgia: 15 or more (to 1240)
Every 182-185

Notes to Section B
{33} a. Siméon Vailhé, "Constantinople, Église de," in the 1907 DTC 3.2:1402, says that "the Catholic Patriarch Gregory Mammas ... had not abdicated and ... probably had not been deposed..." According to Fr. Joseph Gill, S.J. of happy memory, there was no anti-Catholic Patriarch Athanasius II of Constantinople (1450-1453); see The Council of Florence (Cambridge, 1959), p. 376 n. 3.
c. On the holy Gregory's reputation as a wonderworker, see his Greek biography on the Ecumenical Patriarchate website.
{34} a. Vailhé, op. cit., 1424-1425.
{36} a. Vailhé, op. cit., 1426.
{37} a.
{38} a. Vailhé, op. cit., 1432: "And concerning the Patriarch Athanasius V, we note that he was deposed in 1711, because he innovated in matters of faith and showed himself too favorable to Western ideas, that is to say to Catholicism."

C. Heretical Patriarchs of Alexandria

D. Heretical Patriarchs of Antioch

E. Heretical Patriarchs of Jerusalem

F. Alleged Counter-Examples proposed by Orthodox: Old Rome

G. The Russian Church
The first Christians of Russia were Catholic.{1} Princess St. Olga of Kiev was Catholic,{2} and so was her grandson, Grand Prince St. Vladimir I Sviatoslavich the Great.{3} From his conversion until the elevation of anti-Catholic Metropolitan Nicephorus I of Kiev (1104-1121),{4} all the metropolitans of Kiev were Catholic,{5} except for John II of Kiev (1080-1089).{6} These were St. Michael I of Kiev (988-992),{7} Leontius (992-1008),{8} John I (1019-1035),{9} Theopemptus (1035-1049),{10} Hilarion (1051-1055),{11} Ephraim I (1055-1061),{12} George (1062-1073),{13} John III (1089-1091),{14} and Nicholas I of Kiev (1097–1101).{15} Even between 1121 and the Ecumenical Council of Florence, not all the Metropolitans of Kiev were Orthodox; Catholic Metropolitans of Kiev during this time period include Clement Smoliatich (1147-1154){16} and Peter Akerovych (1241-1246){17}, and probably John IV (1164-1166).{18} There is no historical certainty that the following Metropolitans of Kiev were Orthodox: Nicetas (1122-1126),{19} Michael II (1130-1145),{20} Constantine I (1156-1159),{21} Theodore (1161-1163),{22} and Nicephorus II (1182-1198).{23} Peter of Kiev (1308-1326), who resided in Moscow starting in 1325, was Catholic for quite a while (until at least 1316),{24} but became Orthodox in 1324 at the latest.{25}

On Daniel of Galicia see GILL, Joseph, S.J. Byzantium and the Papacy, 1198-1400 (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1979), 74 n. 99 (272), 82 nn. 12-14 (274), 84

Notes to section G
{1} a.
{2} a.
{3} a.
b. Andrew Shipman, "St. Vladimir the Great," in the 1912 Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. 15.
{4} a.
{5} a. Fr. Stilting in AASS
b. Fr. Yves Congar, O.P., After Nine Hundred Years: The Background of the Schism Between the Eastern and Western Churches (Fordham University Press, 1959), p. 95, n. 7.
c. Fr. Joseph Schweigl, "Menologio graeco-slavico post annum 1054," Periodica de re morali, canonica, liturgica 3 (Rome 1941): 222.
{8} a.
c. Fr. Mauricio Gordillo, S.J. in the 1938 DTC 14.1:217: the letter denouncing unleavened bread is not by Leontius of Kiev, but by a metropolitan in Bulgaria after the time of the anti-Catholic bishops Leo of Ochrid and Michael Cerularius.
f. The Patriarchs of Constantinople were Catholic Sisinnius II (996-998) [Siméon Vailhé in 1907 DTC 3.2:1359] and Sergius II (1001-1019).
{9} a.
d. The Patriarchs of Constantinople were Sergius II (1001-1019), Eustathius (1019-1025), and Alexius I the Studite (1025-1043).
{10} a.
e. The Patriarchs of Constantinople were Alexius I the Studite (1025-1043) and the anti-Catholic Michael I Cerularius (1043-1058).
{11} a.
b. Fr. Congar, loc. cit.
{12} a.
b. Fr. Congar, loc. cit.
{13} a.
b. Fr. Congar, loc. cit.
c. Fr. Gordillo in op. cit., 218: the anti-Catholic letter said to be a 1072 work of Metropolitan George of Kiev is probably a 12th century work
e. The Patriarchs of Constantinople were Constantine III Leichoudes (1059-1063) and the anti-Catholic John VIII Xiphilinus (1064-1075) [AASS 8:I:127C-128D (153-154)], who frustrated an attempted reunion of the Churches in 1072 under Pope Alexander II of Rome (1061-1073) and Byzantine Emperor Michael VII Ducas (1071-1078; †1090) [Fr. Jugie I:402].
{14} a.
b. Fr. Congar, loc. cit.
{15} a.
b. Fr. Congar, loc. cit.
{18} a. Fr. Stilting, op. cit., xviii:EF, §75 (43), says "Joannes probabilius Catholicus", and according to Ignatius Kulczynski, O.S.B.M., he wrote a letter of obedience to Pope Alexander III of Rome at the command of Grand Prince Rostislav I Mstislavich of Kiev (1154, 1159–1167), whom the Eastern Orthodox commemorate on March 14 (see his OCA entry).
d. The Patriarch of Constantinople was Luke Chrysoberges (1156-1169) [AASS 8:I:139C-140C (165-166)].
{19} a. Fr. Stilting says, op. cit., xviii:EF, §73 (42), that he was in communion with the Patriarch of Constantinople, but it is uncertain if Nicetas was Catholic or schismatic.
b. Mgr. Pelesz I:293 (305) says, "über dessen Wirksamkeit keine Nachrichten vorhanden sind."
d. The Patriarch was John IX Agapetus of Constantinople (1111-1134) [AASS 8:I:131D-132B (157-158)].
{20} a. Fr. Stilting says, loc. cit., that he was in communion with the Patriarch of Constantinople, but it is uncertain if Michael II was Catholic or schismatic.
b. Mgr. Pelesz I:294-295 (306-307) is not clear on whether Michael II was Catholic or Orthodox.
e. The Patriarchs of Constantinople were John IX Agapetus (1111-1134) [AASS 8:I:131D-132B (157-158)], Leo Styppeiotes (1134-1143) [AASS 8:I:132B-133B (158-159)], and Michael II Kourkouas (1143-1146) [AASS 8:I:133C-E (159)].
{21} a. Fr. Stilting, op. cit., xviii:EF, §75 (43), says "de hisce nihil certi invenio".
e. The Patriarch of Constantinople was Luke Chrysoberges (1156-1169) [AASS 8:I:139C-140C (165-166)].
{22} a. Fr. Stilting, loc. cit., says "de hisce nihil certi invenio".
e. The Patriarch of Constantinople was Luke Chrysoberges (1156-1169) [AASS 8:I:139C-140C (165-166)].

H. The Serbian Church
-Jugie IV:373: Stephen Nemanja professed the Catholic faith to Pope Clement III, who gave the former his apostolic benediction in 1189 -- his two sons Stephen the First-Crowned (1196-1228) and Vukan (1202-1204) were Catholics
-Jugie IV:373: "Anno 1199, synodus Diocliæ habita, cui duo legati Innocentii III præfuerunt, suo sexto canone declarabat totam Serbiam profiteri Ecclesiam romanum omnium Ecclesiarum matrem ac magistram esse. Post Constantinopolim a Turcis captam, Sabas, Serbiæ metroplitanus, ab Honorio papa III coronam regiam pro frate suo Stephano Nemanitch obinuit. Mox vero Urochio regnante (1243-1276), union cum Ecclesia catholica rupta est; quam per aliquot annos instaurasse videtur Uorchius III (1321-1323?) Hic fidei professionem ad Joannem papam XXII misit, in qua hæc inter alia occurrebant: 'Primatum quoque ipsius sacrosanctæ Romanæ Ecclesiæ prout in præmissa serie continetur, ad ipsius Ecclesiæ obedientiam sponte veniens, fateor, recognosco, accepto ac sponte suscipio.'11 1. P. Balan, Delle relazione fra la Chiesa cattolica e gli Slavi, Romæ, 1880, p. 225. Markovitch, op. cit., t. I, p. 1-64; t. II, p. 305-560, plura habet de relationibus Serborum cum Sancta Sede; cf. etiam Fermengiu, in Starina, t. XXV."
-On Stefan Uroš II Milutin (1282-1321) see Gill 190 nn. 29-31, 34-36 (295). N. 34 on 295 says, "The interest of Uros in Catholicism was purely political. When Charles of Valois's expedition failed to materialise, Uros dropped his contacts with Avignon; Raynaldus, 1308, 29. John XXII wrote of him as 'that treacherous King of Serbia, nay, a schismatic and a thorough enemy of the Christian religion;' Raynaldus, 1318, 35."
-Jugie IV:373: Stephen Dusan pretended to submit to Pope Innocent VI, while punishing Catholics with death in the sixth article of his civil code: Jugie IV:373: "catholicæ Ecclesiæ infensus fuit, quamvis ad Innocentium papam VI ficto obsequio aliquando se converterit"; cf. GILL, Joseph, S.J. Byzantium and the Papacy, 1198-1400 (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1979), 208 n. 28 and, on Stephen Dusan's claims to have become Catholic and stopped persecuting Catholics, 238 n. 27

I. The Bulgarian Church
Jugie IV: Tsar Kaloyan of Bulgaria (1197-1207) professed papal primacy to Innocent III (Theiner, Vetera monomenta Slavorium meridionalium, I, 15-16
Jugie IV:372: Basil of Tarnovo professed papal primacy to Innocent III (Theiner, ibid., 17) - se Vailhé in DTC, "Bulgarie," II, 1189ff. and J. Markovitch, Gli Slavi ed i Papi, t. II, p. 502-608, Zagreb, 1897.
GILL, Joseph, S.J. Byzantium and the Papacy, 1198-1400 (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1979) 63: Pope Innocent III made Basil the "Primate of all Bulgaria"
GILL 190: Joachim of Tarnovo was a Catholic (1()

J. The Georgian Church
R. Janin
Cyril Toumanoff
Carroll III:169: the Georgian monks of Mt. Athos were in communion with Pope Innocent III

K. The Egyptian Church
GILL, Joseph, S.J. Byzantium and the Papacy, 1198-1400 (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1979), 52-53 nn. 10-11 on 268: The monks of Mt. Sinai were in communion with Pope Honorius III (1216-1227) as of 8/6/1217 and 12/4/1233, according to A. L. Tautu, Acta Honorii III et Gregorii IX (Rome, 1950), n. 17 and n. 122

M. The Photian Schism

N. The Council of Florence