The East Rejected Papal Claims: Fr. Richard Price On Reason & Theology

Today, Reason & Theology, a YouTube show largely focused around disproving Eastern Orthodoxy, co-hosted the infamous Latin Priest and Scholar, Fr. Dr. Richard Price, Professor of the History of Christianity at Heythrop College in London and Priest within the Archdiocese of Westminster.

Many theologians and students of history may already be familiar with Fr. Price’s works, but for those who are not, his major works consist of very popular translations of Theodoret of Cyrrhus, the Acts of the Councils of Chalcedon, Constantinople, Nicaea 2, and the Lateran Synod of 649.

The intention of this writing is not to dissect in detail what was presented on the show today, but rather, it is to present a portion of the show that is being overlooked by many viewers who may not have stuck around for the Q&A segment towards the end.

Quite simply and succinctly, Fr. Price makes a few bold claims that fly in the face of nearly every Latin apologist of the R&T bent.

Summed up in five main points:

  1. The East did not recognize nor “believe” papal infallibility nor papal supremacy. The East did want to maintain good relations with Old Rome.
  2. The East regarded the Bishop of Rome as a “senior bishop” out of respect for his office.
  3. The East did not require papal ratification for Ecumenical Synods, nor did the East believe that any Ecumenical Synods required affirmation by the Bishop of Rome to be validated. The East wanted Old Rome’s approval so that decrees could be merely “circulated in the West” by Old Rome–to be of one mind.
  4. The East believed the Emperor called Ecumenical Synods and instituted their decrees as law, as “God’s co-ruler” and as the “Guardian of the Church.”
  5. The Eastern provinces did not recognize Old Rome’s jurisdiction.

These are incredibly staggering affirmations by a scholar and Latin priest with the accolades of Fr. Richard Price, and they further reinforce Orthodox ecclesiology.

For reference, the segment that I am referring to can be found below. Please view and list your thoughts in the comments section!

Blessings in the Lord!

7 comments / Add your comment below

  1. i saw it earlier, loooool. their faces are everything while father price says what they have been arguing against for years. classic

  2. Interesting seeing a Latin saying this and not a Melkite or something. Both are inconsistent anyways but still. I wonder how the rt clan is going to cope with this? I’m sure they’ll have a typical lawyer response by tomorrow. They got slapped with this one unexpectedly.

  3. I thought his response to the Coptic guys question was pretty fair and balanced too but I have some disagreements being Coptic myself. His answers kind of confuse me because we regard the eo as Christians who were inconsistent about believing papal infallibility but he says outright that eo never believed it so there’s that.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *