The Formula of Hormisdas
The extant Latin text of the Formula or Libellus of
Hormisdas (an important document) contains several pro-Papal statements, and
has frequently been cited by apologists for the Papacy. The Easterners who
allegedly signed the Formula in 519 almost certainly signed in Greek, but that
text is not extant. The Formula of Hormisdas is not available in any Greek
original, and all that is extant is what claims to be the original Latin, and a
Greek version from the Latin Fourth Council of Constantinople in 869 (which is
actually lacking in the pro-Papal statements). Moreover, this formula is found
in the Collectio Avellana, a collection of papal documents which contains
various spurious letters, as noted previously. This document is actually anonymous,
even though it has been called the work of Hormisdas. I have grave doubts about
the authenticity of this document, and there are six versions with significant
textual differences, and a dedicated study is a desideratum.
For example, the German Roman Catholic bishop Joseph
Hergenröther (1824 - 1890), who was a leading ecclesiastical historian,
canonist, and professor, points out that in some Latin copies of the Formula of
Hormisdas, the following words are missing:
I hope to be worthy to be in that one communion with you,
which the Apostolic See enjoins, in which is the perfect and true solidity of
the Christian religion; promising also that the names of those who are
separated from the communion of the Catholic Church, that is, those who are not
united in mind with the Apostolic See, shall not be recited in the Holy
Mysteries.
The extant Latin text of the Libellus Hormisdae says,
"for in the apostolic see the Catholic religion has always been kept
immaculate." However, the See of the Bishop of Rome was far from
immaculate in religious matters, and some simple facts, among very numerous
others, such as their repeated and persistent corruption of the Nicene canons
and Liberius's subscription of an Arian creed (along with rejecting communion
with St. Athanasius), shows that the Roman See was a regular source of many
errors, and in no way can be even remotely "immaculate". Moreover,
this document requires conformity to Pope Leo's letters (when it says "we
accept and approve in their entirety the letters of blessed Pope Leo, which he
composed on the subject of the Christian religion.", and enjoins
"following the apostolic see in all respects and proclaiming all its
ordinances"), but those letters (if really his) are full of errors, such
as his denial of the ecumenicity of the Second Ecumenical Council, and
persistently claiming that Constantinople could not hold the second place among
the Patriarchates, which the Byzantine Emperors and Constantinopolitan
patriarchs rejected, as shown in the chapter on Canon XXVIII of Chalcedon. (“George,”
Errors
of the Latins: Notes on the Differences Between Traditional Roman Catholicism
and the Eastern Orthodox Church, and an Analysis of Their Historical Controversies
[June 25, 2021], 559)
To Support this Blog:
Email for Amazon Gift
card: ScripturalMormonism@gmail.com
Email for Logos.com Gift
Card: IrishLDS87@gmail.com
