OrthodoxChristianity.net
October 20, 2014, 06:28:27 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 »   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Roman Catholic view of Orthodox Church  (Read 38401 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #225 on: June 19, 2010, 01:05:45 AM »

On the other hand, the standard Eastern teaching is that rites outside of union with the Church of Christ can be valid but not licit nor even efficacious.
BTW, which is the Church of Christ? Is it the OO Church or the EO Church?
Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #226 on: June 19, 2010, 01:19:24 AM »

On the other hand, the standard Eastern teaching is that rites outside of union with the Church of Christ can be valid but not licit nor even efficacious.
BTW, which is the Church of Christ? Is it the OO Church or the EO Church?

I think that Chris is speaking from an OO point of view since the RC distinction between validiy and liceity is generally not admitted by Eastern Orthodox.
Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #227 on: June 19, 2010, 04:33:13 AM »

On the other hand, the standard Eastern teaching is that rites outside of union with the Church of Christ can be valid but not licit nor even efficacious.
BTW, which is the Church of Christ? Is it the OO Church or the EO Church?

I think that Chris is speaking from an OO point of view since the RC distinction between validiy and liceity is generally not admitted by Eastern Orthodox.
So the OO Church is the true Church of Christ?
Logged
scamandrius
Crusher of Secrets; House Lannister
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: I'm Greek and proud of it, damn it!
Posts: 6,127



« Reply #228 on: June 19, 2010, 02:44:49 PM »

^No, it's the EO, of course! Grin
Logged

I seek the truth by which no man was ever harmed--Marcus Aurelius

Those who do not read  history are doomed to get their facts from Hollywood--Anonymous

What earthly joy remains untouched by grief?--St. John Damascene
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #229 on: June 19, 2010, 03:07:27 PM »

^No, it's the EO, of course! Grin
One says the OO is the true Church of Christ, the other says the EO. Is there a simple proof which shows that it is one and not the other?
One OO poster says that Sacraments outside of the OO Church are not efficacious. An EO poster says that Baptism and other Sacraments outside of the EO Church are not valid and Baptism has to be repeated. This is getting to be confusing.
Logged
WetCatechumen
Roman Catholic
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic Christianity
Jurisdiction: Latin Rite - Archdiocese of Santa Fe; Ruthenian Byzantine Catholic Eparchy of Phoenix
Posts: 297



« Reply #230 on: June 19, 2010, 04:19:36 PM »

^No, it's the EO, of course! Grin
One says the OO is the true Church of Christ, the other says the EO. Is there a simple proof which shows that it is one and not the other?
One OO poster says that Sacraments outside of the OO Church are not efficacious. An EO poster says that Baptism and other Sacraments outside of the EO Church are not valid and Baptism has to be repeated. This is getting to be confusing.

"Although all heretics wish to be styled Catholic, yet if any one ask where is the Catholic place of worship none of them would venture to point out his own conventicle." - St. Augustine of Hippo

 Grin
Logged

"And because they have nothing better to do, they take cushion and chairs to Rome. And while the Pope is saying liturgy, they go, 'Oh, oh, oh, filioque!' And the Pope say, 'Filioque? That-uh sound nice! I think I divide-uh the Church over it!'" - Comrade Real Presence
GregoryLA
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Moving toward Eastern Orthodoxy
Jurisdiction: Western Japan
Posts: 377



« Reply #231 on: June 19, 2010, 06:27:31 PM »

^No, it's the EO, of course! Grin
One says the OO is the true Church of Christ, the other says the EO. Is there a simple proof which shows that it is one and not the other?
One OO poster says that Sacraments outside of the OO Church are not efficacious. An EO poster says that Baptism and other Sacraments outside of the EO Church are not valid and Baptism has to be repeated. This is getting to be confusing.

I'm not quite sure DeusEstVeritas qualifies as an OO poster. He hasn't been received into any OO church and his opinions as pertains the EO are often not shared by OO posters on this forum. He has also criticized OO hierarchs of been too liberal when it comes to the EO.

But why should it be surprising or confusing that both the EO and OO should consider themselves correct? 
Logged
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #232 on: June 19, 2010, 08:13:35 PM »

On the other hand, the standard Eastern teaching is that rites outside of union with the Church of Christ can be valid but not licit nor even efficacious.
BTW, which is the Church of Christ? Is it the OO Church or the EO Church?

I think that Chris is speaking from an OO point of view since the RC distinction between validiy and liceity is generally not admitted by Eastern Orthodox.

Actually, no, I am speaking of the EO perspective. The actual problem is that you are confusing validity with efficacy. Validity commonly refers to the rite having proper form, which the Latins theorized necessitates it being efficacious. EO Christians disagree, generally thinking that rites outside of the Church are not efficacious, though they may be valid in the sense of having proper ritual form. The properties that you are seeing as interconnected are actually efficacy and licitness, not validity and licitness.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #233 on: June 19, 2010, 08:13:54 PM »

On the other hand, the standard Eastern teaching is that rites outside of union with the Church of Christ can be valid but not licit nor even efficacious.
BTW, which is the Church of Christ? Is it the OO Church or the EO Church?

The OO Church to the exclusion of the EO.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #234 on: June 19, 2010, 08:14:17 PM »

On the other hand, the standard Eastern teaching is that rites outside of union with the Church of Christ can be valid but not licit nor even efficacious.
BTW, which is the Church of Christ? Is it the OO Church or the EO Church?

I think that Chris is speaking from an OO point of view since the RC distinction between validiy and liceity is generally not admitted by Eastern Orthodox.
So the OO Church is the true Church of Christ?

Yes.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #235 on: June 19, 2010, 08:17:59 PM »

Is there a simple proof which shows that it is one and not the other?

Not really. What qualifies the OO or EO as the Church of Christ is not a simple matter.

One OO poster says that Sacraments outside of the OO Church are not efficacious. An EO poster says that Baptism and other Sacraments outside of the EO Church are not valid and Baptism has to be repeated.

We're essentially both saying that rites outside of the Church are liable to not be efficacious.

This is getting to be confusing.

I don't see what's so confusing. You say the Roman church is the Church. Why is it so confusing if other historical faith communities make similar claims about their own?
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #236 on: June 19, 2010, 08:19:50 PM »

^No, it's the EO, of course! Grin
One says the OO is the true Church of Christ, the other says the EO. Is there a simple proof which shows that it is one and not the other?
One OO poster says that Sacraments outside of the OO Church are not efficacious. An EO poster says that Baptism and other Sacraments outside of the EO Church are not valid and Baptism has to be repeated. This is getting to be confusing.

"Although all heretics wish to be styled Catholic, yet if any one ask where is the Catholic place of worship none of them would venture to point out his own conventicle." - St. Augustine of Hippo

 Grin

It depends on what they mean by "Catholic". If they mean the standard watered down meaning of it being equivalent to Romanist, I would point out the nearest Romanist church. If they really meant "One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic", however, I would most certainly point them to the nearest OO church. So that quotes not applicable.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #237 on: June 19, 2010, 08:41:15 PM »

On the other hand, the standard Eastern teaching is that rites outside of union with the Church of Christ can be valid but not licit nor even efficacious.
BTW, which is the Church of Christ? Is it the OO Church or the EO Church?

I think that Chris is speaking from an OO point of view since the RC distinction between validiy and liceity is generally not admitted by Eastern Orthodox.

Actually, no, I am speaking of the EO perspective.

In that case you are not correct.  Do some reading on the Orthodox refusal to employ the Roman Catholic distinction of validity and liceity, even a refusal to use the words themselves.

Quote
The actual problem is that you are confusing validity with efficacy. Validity commonly refers to the rite having proper form, which the Latins theorized necessitates it being efficacious. EO Christians disagree, generally thinking that rites outside of the Church are not efficacious, though they may be valid in the sense of having proper ritual form. The properties that you are seeing as interconnected are actually efficacy and licitness, not validity and licitness.
Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #238 on: June 19, 2010, 08:49:03 PM »

On the other hand, the standard Eastern teaching is that rites outside of union with the Church of Christ can be valid but not licit nor even efficacious.
BTW, which is the Church of Christ? Is it the OO Church or the EO Church?

I think that Chris is speaking from an OO point of view since the RC distinction between validiy and liceity is generally not admitted by Eastern Orthodox.

Actually, no, I am speaking of the EO perspective.

What of the OO perspective which presumably you are more knowledgeable about?

Coptic Orthodox baptize Roman Catholics, and it is not because they consider their RC baptism invalid but because they consider the form unacceptable - in other words they refuse to accept a form of baptism which is not by triple immersion.

Now the weird (to me) thing is that they accept the validity of RC baptism.  In rebaptizing Roman Catholics Copts are simply administering the correct form.  No actual baptism takes place with the Coptic ceremony.  No grace is conferred since the RC baptism was already valid.

Could you say something about this?
« Last Edit: June 19, 2010, 08:51:09 PM by Irish Hermit » Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #239 on: June 19, 2010, 09:01:50 PM »


So the OO Church is the true Church of Christ?

^No, it's the EO, of course!

BTW, which is the Church of Christ? Is it the OO Church or the EO Church?

The OO Church to the exclusion of the EO.
I don't see what's so confusing. You say the Roman church is the Church. Why is it so confusing if other historical faith communities make similar claims about their own?
Because the claims are different.
The Roman Catholic Church recognizes the Sacraments of the EO and OO as valid and helpful to salvation.
The OO Church, being the true Church of Christ does not recognize the Sacraments of the EO or RC as being efficacious?
The EO Church, being the true Church of Christ according to a poster here, does not recognize even the Baptism outside of the EO Church and demands that it be repeated on entry into the EO Church.
Now shouldn’t a person concerned about his eternal salvation  be able to determine which is the Church of Christ and which Church has the efficacious Sacraments?  But when I ask you how we are going to determine this, you say:
What qualifies the OO or EO as the Church of Christ is not a simple matter.
[/quote]
Why would God make it so difficult for a person who is concerned about his eternal salvation and who is concerned about receiving valid, efficacious and true Sacraments from his Church? Is it reasonable to suppose that God would set it up  like this so that it is impossible to determine which Church has the true Sacraments ?
Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #240 on: June 19, 2010, 09:39:28 PM »


[Why would God make it so difficult for a person who is concerned about his eternal salvation and who is concerned about receiving valid, efficacious and true Sacraments from his Church? Is it reasonable to suppose that God would set it up  like this so that it is impossible to determine which Church has the true Sacraments ?


When two of our new immigrant children, Lebanese boys, were taken by their parents to be enrolled at one of the Catholic parochial schools, the parish priest (who has to approve non-Catholic enrolments) refused to allow their enrolment even thought they had baptismal certificates from Lebanon.   Before he would allow them to enroll at school he re-baptized them.

These boys now have a full immersion Orthodox baptism and a Catholic baptism by sprinkling.

Seems to me that Catholics get a bit fluffy minded about who has and who does not have true Sacraments.
Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #241 on: June 19, 2010, 10:11:12 PM »


[Why would God make it so difficult for a person who is concerned about his eternal salvation and who is concerned about receiving valid, efficacious and true Sacraments from his Church? Is it reasonable to suppose that God would set it up  like this so that it is impossible to determine which Church has the true Sacraments ?


When two of our new immigrant children, Lebanese boys, were taken by their parents to be enrolled at one of the Catholic parochial schools, the parish priest (who has to approve non-Catholic enrolments) refused to allow their enrolment even thought they had baptismal certificates from Lebanon.   Before he would allow them to enroll at school he re-baptized them.

These boys now have a full immersion Orthodox baptism and a Catholic baptism by sprinkling.

Seems to me that Catholics get a bit fluffy minded about who has and who does not have true Sacraments.
As you have described it this is not right of course.

But it does raise a few questions:
1.   Why would an Eastern Orthodox want to go to a Catholic school? I thought that all of the Catholic Sacraments were invalid anyway, and Catholics are heretics. So why endanger the eternal salvation of an Eastern Orthodox by sending him to a school run by heretics?
2.   As I know it to be,  non-Catholics are admitted freely into Catholic schools. In fact I know of a case where a Jewish student, enrolled in Catholic schools, went on to become a rabbi. There was no question of his having to convert to Roman Catholicism. However, there is a catch here. And that is that Catholics students pay a lower tuition rate than do non-Catholics. The  reason for this is that Catholic students are subsidized by the Church, since they are already making weekly contributions to the RCC. 
3.   Anyway, I know in our local area, of several  Orthodox families whose children  were allowed to attend Catholic elementary schools with no problem at all, except that they were asked to pay the non-Catholic rate of tuition.
Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #242 on: June 19, 2010, 10:31:51 PM »


1. Why would an Eastern Orthodox want to go to a Catholic school?

Catholic schools are perceived as having a better quality of education and of fostering good morality.  This was most certainly true when I was there in the 1950s but not so true these days, the surrounding culture of permissiveness has penetrated.

Quote
2. As I know it to be,  non-Catholics are admitted freely into Catholic schools.

In New Zealand the Catholic School system was extremely well developed, parallel to the state system.  There seemed to be a surfeit of nuns willing to enter the teaching orders and educate young Catholics.  But in the 1950s and 1960s it became impossible for the Catholic Church to maintain the system financially any longer.  The burden was too great.  It received NO financial assistance from the Government and depended on Catholic parents and school fees.

To continue operating Catholics reluctantly accepted integration into the State system (1975, IIRC.)  Their expenses were taken over by the State but they were allowed to retain the Catholic character of their schools.  But the Government insisted that they also had to accept a certain percentage of non-Catholic students.    In the cities where the majority of Orthodox live, the Catholic schools were quite happy to make up this mandatory percentage of non-Catholics with Orthodox students.
Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #243 on: June 19, 2010, 11:10:15 PM »


1. Why would an Eastern Orthodox want to go to a Catholic school?

Catholic schools are perceived as having a better quality of education and of fostering good morality.  This was most certainly true when I was there in the 1950s but not so true these days, the surrounding culture of permissiveness has penetrated.

Quote
2. As I know it to be,  non-Catholics are admitted freely into Catholic schools.

In New Zealand the Catholic School system was extremely well developed, parallel to the state system.  There seemed to be a surfeit of nuns willing to enter the teaching orders and educate young Catholics.  But in the 1950s and 1960s it became impossible for the Catholic Church to maintain the system financially any longer.  The burden was too great.  It received NO financial assistance from the Government and depended on Catholic parents and school fees.

To continue operating Catholics reluctantly accepted integration into the State system (1975, IIRC.)  Their expenses were taken over by the State but they were allowed to retain the Catholic character of their schools.  But the Government insisted that they also had to accept a certain percentage of non-Catholic students.    In the cities where the majority of Orthodox live, the Catholic schools were quite happy to make up this mandatory percentage of non-Catholics with Orthodox students.
I don’t see how the Catholic schools can foster good morality if they are run by heretics and if all of their Sacraments are invalid and inefficacious.  Why wouldn’t it be detrimental to the eternal salvation of an Eastern Orthodox Christian to attend a school run by heretics? There is a proximate danger that he might become infected with the dangerous heresy of Romanism and partake of invalid and inefficacious Sacraments and thereby place his eternal salvation in serious jeapordy?
Also,  does not God want each one of us to be able to partake of valid, true and efficacious Sacraments. Now we see that a poster here effectively indicates that it is impossible to determine which Church has the valid, true, and efficacious Sacraments. Why would God want to set it up in such a way as to make it impossible for the average person to determine which of the churches, EO or OO is the true Church of Christ, with the true Sacraments?
Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #244 on: June 19, 2010, 11:19:12 PM »

I don’t see how the Catholic schools can foster good morality if they are run by heretics


Hold on to your hat, Stan.  Some Orthodox parents realise that the standards in Roman Catholic schools have slipped over the last few decades and I can think of three families who are sending their children to the Jewish school.  Two families have opted for Montesorri.
Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #245 on: June 19, 2010, 11:26:54 PM »


There is a proximate danger that he might become infected with the dangerous heresy of Romanism

To be quite honest, the danger could be that the student will pick up on the prevailing cynical approach to religion by some of the teachers.

Quote
and partake of invalid and inefficacious Sacraments

Unlikely.  The Catholic bishops have published a small booklet for the guidance of Catholic schools which have Byzantine Catholic and Orthodox pupils.  In the case of the latter it is forbidden to administer Catholic sacraments to them.  When one school started to disregard this instruction and give commnion to Orthodox students, the Greek bishop visited the Cardinal and the practice was stopped by written directive of the Cardinal.

Logged
WetCatechumen
Roman Catholic
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic Christianity
Jurisdiction: Latin Rite - Archdiocese of Santa Fe; Ruthenian Byzantine Catholic Eparchy of Phoenix
Posts: 297



« Reply #246 on: June 19, 2010, 11:55:21 PM »

^No, it's the EO, of course! Grin
One says the OO is the true Church of Christ, the other says the EO. Is there a simple proof which shows that it is one and not the other?
One OO poster says that Sacraments outside of the OO Church are not efficacious. An EO poster says that Baptism and other Sacraments outside of the EO Church are not valid and Baptism has to be repeated. This is getting to be confusing.

"Although all heretics wish to be styled Catholic, yet if any one ask where is the Catholic place of worship none of them would venture to point out his own conventicle." - St. Augustine of Hippo

 Grin

It depends on what they mean by "Catholic". If they mean the standard watered down meaning of it being equivalent to Romanist, I would point out the nearest Romanist church. If they really meant "One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic", however, I would most certainly point them to the nearest OO church. So that quotes not applicable.

So, you're admitting that my church is the one called Catholic by most everyone, even though she's not Catholic.
Logged

"And because they have nothing better to do, they take cushion and chairs to Rome. And while the Pope is saying liturgy, they go, 'Oh, oh, oh, filioque!' And the Pope say, 'Filioque? That-uh sound nice! I think I divide-uh the Church over it!'" - Comrade Real Presence
LBK
Toumarches
************
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 11,130


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #247 on: June 20, 2010, 07:49:02 AM »

I don’t see how the Catholic schools can foster good morality if they are run by heretics and if all of their Sacraments are invalid and inefficacious.  Why wouldn’t it be detrimental to the eternal salvation of an Eastern Orthodox Christian to attend a school run by heretics? There is a proximate danger that he might become infected with the dangerous heresy of Romanism and partake of invalid and inefficacious Sacraments and thereby place his eternal salvation in serious jeapordy?
Also,  does not God want each one of us to be able to partake of valid, true and efficacious Sacraments. Now we see that a poster here effectively indicates that it is impossible to determine which Church has the valid, true, and efficacious Sacraments. Why would God want to set it up in such a way as to make it impossible for the average person to determine which of the churches, EO or OO is the true Church of Christ, with the true Sacraments?

My dear stanley123, where I live, for close to 40 years, schools which are nominally denominational (RC, Lutheran, Anglican) have, at the very least, not insisted that their students not of that denomination attend chapel, or receive religious instruction. Most have, in fact, completely respected the religious background of their students who are not of the religious tradition of the school, and won't push their denomination's beliefs and doctrines on the students not of the same faith.

The most common reason for folks to wish to enrol their children in religious schools is that, in many cases, there is a perception, rightly or wrongly, that such schools are more likely to have higher academic standards, better teachers, a more diligent approach to proper behavioral standards for students, compared to the local state-funded school.

Let's not forget that nominally Orthodox schools which cover all school grades are still somewhat thin on the ground.
Logged
GregoryLA
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Moving toward Eastern Orthodoxy
Jurisdiction: Western Japan
Posts: 377



« Reply #248 on: June 20, 2010, 08:48:25 AM »

^No, it's the EO, of course! Grin
One says the OO is the true Church of Christ, the other says the EO. Is there a simple proof which shows that it is one and not the other?
One OO poster says that Sacraments outside of the OO Church are not efficacious. An EO poster says that Baptism and other Sacraments outside of the EO Church are not valid and Baptism has to be repeated. This is getting to be confusing.

"Although all heretics wish to be styled Catholic, yet if any one ask where is the Catholic place of worship none of them would venture to point out his own conventicle." - St. Augustine of Hippo

 Grin

It depends on what they mean by "Catholic". If they mean the standard watered down meaning of it being equivalent to Romanist, I would point out the nearest Romanist church. If they really meant "One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic", however, I would most certainly point them to the nearest OO church. So that quotes not applicable.

So, you're admitting that my church is the one called Catholic by most everyone, even though she's not Catholic.

This isn't something shared by all languages.
Logged
Melodist
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: The Faith That Established The Universe
Jurisdiction: AOANA
Posts: 2,523



« Reply #249 on: June 20, 2010, 02:31:41 PM »

So, you're admitting that my church is the one called Catholic by most everyone, even though she's not Catholic.

Most people outside of either EO or OO (they also claim to be "catholic" as stated in the creed) who do not consider those particular churches to be "orthodox" still refer to them as "Orthodox" churches, including Roman Catholics.

Not to mention, "catholic" literally means "according to the whole".
Logged

And FWIW, these are our Fathers too, you know.

Made Perfect in Weakness - Latest Post: The Son of God
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,923



« Reply #250 on: June 20, 2010, 06:37:49 PM »

So, you're admitting that my church is the one called Catholic by most everyone, even though she's not Catholic.

Most people outside of either EO or OO (they also claim to be "catholic" as stated in the creed) who do not consider those particular churches to be "orthodox" still refer to them as "Orthodox" churches, including Roman Catholics.

Not to mention, "catholic" literally means "according to the whole".

Precisely, there is only One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. For us Eastern Orthodox, it is the Orthodox Catholic Church.

We refer to the Roman Catholics as Catholic because that is the title known around the world. Not because we believe the Roman Church is the true Catholic Church.
« Last Edit: June 20, 2010, 06:40:40 PM by 88Devin12 » Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #251 on: June 20, 2010, 07:21:28 PM »


Not to mention, "catholic" literally means "according to the whole".

Yes, exactly.

The Russian theologian Khomiakov has a small explanation of the meaning of the word "catholic" (from Greek kata holou - according to the whole.) 

He divides Christianity into three strands...


1. Catholic - kata holou - according to the whole - Orthodoxy

2. Kata-monou - according to one man - the Pope

3. Kata-ekastou - according to every individual - Protestantism (kind of an omni-papism, every man in the role of his own Pope.)


"The Apostolic Church is not the Church kath'hekastou (according to the understanding of each individual) as the Protestants teach,

"It is not the Church kata tou episkopou tes Romes (according to the understanding of the bishop of Rome) as the Latins preach;

"Orthodoxy is the Apostolic Church.  She is the Church kath'holou (according to the understanding of all within her unity), the Church as it was before the Western schism and as it is now for all whom the Lord has preserved from schism..."
Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #252 on: June 20, 2010, 08:59:47 PM »

I don’t see how the Catholic schools can foster good morality if they are run by heretics and if all of their Sacraments are invalid and inefficacious.  Why wouldn’t it be detrimental to the eternal salvation of an Eastern Orthodox Christian to attend a school run by heretics? There is a proximate danger that he might become infected with the dangerous heresy of Romanism and partake of invalid and inefficacious Sacraments and thereby place his eternal salvation in serious jeapordy?
Also,  does not God want each one of us to be able to partake of valid, true and efficacious Sacraments. Now we see that a poster here effectively indicates that it is impossible to determine which Church has the valid, true, and efficacious Sacraments. Why would God want to set it up in such a way as to make it impossible for the average person to determine which of the churches, EO or OO is the true Church of Christ, with the true Sacraments?

My dear stanley123, where I live, for close to 40 years, schools which are nominally denominational (RC, Lutheran, Anglican) have, at the very least, not insisted that their students not of that denomination attend chapel, or receive religious instruction. Most have, in fact, completely respected the religious background of their students who are not of the religious tradition of the school, and won't push their denomination's beliefs and doctrines on the students not of the same faith.

The most common reason for folks to wish to enrol their children in religious schools is that, in many cases, there is a perception, rightly or wrongly, that such schools are more likely to have higher academic standards, better teachers, a more diligent approach to proper behavioral standards for students, compared to the local state-funded school.

Let's not forget that nominally Orthodox schools which cover all school grades are still somewhat thin on the ground.
It looks like some of the good Eastern Orthodox Christian people here might be taking a step toward embracing the philosophy of ecumenism by sending their children to heretical Catholic, Lutheran and Anglican schools.
Logged
LBK
Toumarches
************
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 11,130


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #253 on: June 20, 2010, 09:46:35 PM »

Quote
It looks like some of the good Eastern Orthodox Christian people here might be taking a step toward embracing the philosophy of ecumenism by sending their children to heretical Catholic, Lutheran and Anglican schools.

stanley123, it seems you haven't bothered to read my post. The religious schools I referred to have a policy of not pushing their faith on their students not of their faith. What is taught in the classroom is overwhelmingly academic, with any religious component taught as separate subjects or modules, if, indeed, religion is taught at all. And, as I said before, there is no compulsory requirement of attendance of chapel in those schools which have a chapel on campus. If anything, the students not of the school's denomination are asked to check with their parents first if they approve of their child attending chapel.

While I was educated at State-funded schools, I have family members and close friends, who either teach at denominational schools (including Roman Catholic, Anglican and Presbyterian), or who were schooled in them. In none of their cases was their Orthodox faith compromised in any way, either as students or as teachers. All have maintained their ties with their Orthodox parishes, whether as common parishioners, or as church singers, readers, etc; those who have children have, without exception, baptised them Orthodox.

If family and church life is strong, then there is nothing to fear from sending Orthodox children to a denominational school. May I ask, Stanley, how much religion is taught at denominational schools, particularly Roman Catholic, where you are these days?

Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #254 on: June 20, 2010, 10:36:32 PM »

Quote
It looks like some of the good Eastern Orthodox Christian people here might be taking a step toward embracing the philosophy of ecumenism by sending their children to heretical Catholic, Lutheran and Anglican schools.

stanley123, it seems you haven't bothered to read my post. The religious schools I referred to have a policy of not pushing their faith on their students not of their faith. What is taught in the classroom is overwhelmingly academic, with any religious component taught as separate subjects or modules, if, indeed, religion is taught at all. And, as I said before, there is no compulsory requirement of attendance of chapel in those schools which have a chapel on campus. If anything, the students not of the school's denomination are asked to check with their parents first if they approve of their child attending chapel.

While I was educated at State-funded schools, I have family members and close friends, who either teach at denominational schools (including Roman Catholic, Anglican and Presbyterian), or who were schooled in them. In none of their cases was their Orthodox faith compromised in any way, either as students or as teachers. All have maintained their ties with their Orthodox parishes, whether as common parishioners, or as church singers, readers, etc; those who have children have, without exception, baptised them Orthodox.

If family and church life is strong, then there is nothing to fear from sending Orthodox children to a denominational school. May I ask, Stanley, how much religion is taught at denominational schools, particularly Roman Catholic, where you are these days?


If you send your children to Catholic schools, even though you may request and subsequently obtain permission to be absent from religion classes, nevertheless, there is still a certain amount of Catholic teaching and training which is unavoidable. For example, in the schools in our area, before each and every class, a Catholic prayer is said. Now as an Orthodox you would have to at least be present when these Catholic prayers are said, and as they are said before each and every class, and every day, you would gradually become accustomed to praying the Hail Mary in the Catholic form. I spoke to a Buddhist professor here, who went to Catholic schools in Hong Kong and he says that he still says the Hail Mary, even though he is not Catholic. And then there are the Catholic statues and crucifixes in each classroom. . The Roman crucifix is three dimensional and not an icon. Further there are the many statues of the Mother of God with the rosary in her hands and the expression: "I am the Immaculate Copnception." Oftentimes when Catholic students are praying the Hail Mary, they will turn to the Blessed Statue of Mary, the Mother of God. So there is the temptation to pray with the heretical Romans, as everyone else in the class is joining in at the beginning of the class. Of course, I personally don't see a problem with an Orthodox Christian doing this, but from what I have read on this board, many Orthodox believe that it is seriously and gravely wrong to pray with heretics.
This is why, I would say that it looks to me like many of the Orthodox Christians here might be seen as taking a step in the direction of the ecumenical movement, when they are sending their children to Catholic schools. BTW, if I were in an Orthodox country, such as Russia for example, and I had children to enroll in the schools there, I would not hesitate to have my children enrolled in the Orthodox religion classes in Russia. And I don't have any problem with praying with Orthodox Christians or attending their services in a respectful manner. I only mention this, because from what I read here, the feeling is not reciprocal.
Logged
LBK
Toumarches
************
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 11,130


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #255 on: June 20, 2010, 11:36:19 PM »

Like I said, if the child's family and church life is strong, then any non-Orthodox influences on the children would be quickly dealt with. Sending an Orthodox child to a non-Orthodox school has nothing to do with ecumenism, and everything to do with a perceived/actual higher academic and disciplinary standard. One small example: Of the Orthodox children I know (many of whom are now adults and parents) who attended denominational schools, how many cross themselves left-to-right? NONE.
Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #256 on: June 20, 2010, 11:50:35 PM »

Like I said, if the child's family and church life is strong, then any non-Orthodox influences on the children would be quickly dealt with. Sending an Orthodox child to a non-Orthodox school has nothing to do with ecumenism, and everything to do with a perceived/actual higher academic and disciplinary standard. One small example: Of the Orthodox children I know (many of whom are now adults and parents) who attended denominational schools, how many cross themselves left-to-right? NONE.
It is noteworthy that anti-ecumenical Orthodox Christians would rely on heretics in a Roman Catholic school to teach their children.
Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #257 on: June 21, 2010, 12:10:53 AM »

Like I said, if the child's family and church life is strong, then any non-Orthodox influences on the children would be quickly dealt with. Sending an Orthodox child to a non-Orthodox school has nothing to do with ecumenism, and everything to do with a perceived/actual higher academic and disciplinary standard. One small example: Of the Orthodox children I know (many of whom are now adults and parents) who attended denominational schools, how many cross themselves left-to-right? NONE.
It is noteworthy that anti-ecumenical Orthodox Christians would rely on heretics in a Roman Catholic school to teach their children.

He's got a point, LBK.  I remember how Greek parents became distressed when their daughter refused to join in prayers to the Mother of God, because she had been told at Catholic school that is not the proper way to pray!   Sad
Logged
LBK
Toumarches
************
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 11,130


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #258 on: June 21, 2010, 12:40:42 AM »

Like I said, if the child's family and church life is strong, then any non-Orthodox influences on the children would be quickly dealt with. Sending an Orthodox child to a non-Orthodox school has nothing to do with ecumenism, and everything to do with a perceived/actual higher academic and disciplinary standard. One small example: Of the Orthodox children I know (many of whom are now adults and parents) who attended denominational schools, how many cross themselves left-to-right? NONE.
It is noteworthy that anti-ecumenical Orthodox Christians would rely on heretics in a Roman Catholic school to teach their children.

He's got a point, LBK.  I remember how Greek parents became distressed when their daughter refused to join in prayers to the Mother of God, because she had been told at Catholic school that is not the proper way to pray!   Sad

What I have written is from my own life experience, and I'm happy to stand by what I've written. None of the Orthodox friends and family who have attended RC, Anglican or Presbyterian schools (because these schools had a good academic reputation, compared with the local State school) has had their Orthodox faith compromised through attending such schools.

Quote
I remember how Greek parents became distressed when their daughter refused to join in prayers to the Mother of God, because she had been told at Catholic school that is not the proper way to pray!   


This is indeed sad. However, if the parents, priest(s) and Sunday school teachers are diligent, then this girl, and others like her, would soon be put to right.
Logged
WetCatechumen
Roman Catholic
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic Christianity
Jurisdiction: Latin Rite - Archdiocese of Santa Fe; Ruthenian Byzantine Catholic Eparchy of Phoenix
Posts: 297



« Reply #259 on: June 21, 2010, 02:06:38 AM »

This isn't something shared by all languages.

Most people outside of either EO or OO (they also claim to be "catholic" as stated in the creed) who do not consider those particular churches to be "orthodox" still refer to them as "Orthodox" churches, including Roman Catholics.

Not to mention, "catholic" literally means "according to the whole".

Precisely, there is only One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. For us Eastern Orthodox, it is the Orthodox Catholic Church.

We refer to the Roman Catholics as Catholic because that is the title known around the world. Not because we believe the Roman Church is the true Catholic Church.

You are all are positing that your church is in fact the Catholic Church, but, if I ran up to you and asked you where the nearest Catholic Church was, none of you would point me to your own church.

Also, I think you all are taking my joke a little seriously.
Logged

"And because they have nothing better to do, they take cushion and chairs to Rome. And while the Pope is saying liturgy, they go, 'Oh, oh, oh, filioque!' And the Pope say, 'Filioque? That-uh sound nice! I think I divide-uh the Church over it!'" - Comrade Real Presence
Orthodoc
Supporter & Defender Of Orthodoxy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 2,526

Those who ignore history tend to repeat it.


« Reply #260 on: June 21, 2010, 08:37:18 AM »

This isn't something shared by all languages.

Most people outside of either EO or OO (they also claim to be "catholic" as stated in the creed) who do not consider those particular churches to be "orthodox" still refer to them as "Orthodox" churches, including Roman Catholics.

Not to mention, "catholic" literally means "according to the whole".

Precisely, there is only One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. For us Eastern Orthodox, it is the Orthodox Catholic Church.

We refer to the Roman Catholics as Catholic because that is the title known around the world. Not because we believe the Roman Church is the true Catholic Church.

You are all are positing that your church is in fact the Catholic Church, but, if I ran up to you and asked you where the nearest Catholic Church was, none of you would point me to your own church.
Also, I think you all are taking my joke a little seriously.

It's nice to know that you think you know us better than we know ourselves?  When that question is asked of me (and it has been) my response is always the same.... Do you mean Roman Catholic or Orthodox Catholic?  I'm always amazed when you RC's give the analogy about asking the average man or woman on the street where the nearest Catholic Church is and where they would direct you to.  Those of us who are Orthodox and know enough to defend the Catholicity of our faith, also know that our Catholic identity is not determined by the average person on the street but by the early church fathers and the ecumenical councils.  Ask those same people on the street if Mormons are Christians and they will most probably say yes.  That doesn't make it so.

Orthodoc
Logged

Oh Lord, Save thy people and bless thine inheritance.
Grant victory to the Orthodox Christians over their adversaries.
And by virtue of thy Cross preserve thy habitation.
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,249


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #261 on: June 21, 2010, 11:08:55 AM »

This isn't something shared by all languages.

Most people outside of either EO or OO (they also claim to be "catholic" as stated in the creed) who do not consider those particular churches to be "orthodox" still refer to them as "Orthodox" churches, including Roman Catholics.

Not to mention, "catholic" literally means "according to the whole".

Precisely, there is only One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. For us Eastern Orthodox, it is the Orthodox Catholic Church.

We refer to the Roman Catholics as Catholic because that is the title known around the world. Not because we believe the Roman Church is the true Catholic Church.

You are all are positing that your church is in fact the Catholic Church, but, if I ran up to you and asked you where the nearest Catholic Church was, none of you would point me to your own church.
Also, I think you all are taking my joke a little seriously.

It's nice to know that you think you know us better than we know ourselves?  When that question is asked of me (and it has been) my response is always the same.... Do you mean Roman Catholic or Orthodox Catholic?  I'm always amazed when you RC's give the analogy about asking the average man or woman on the street where the nearest Catholic Church is and where they would direct you to.  Those of us who are Orthodox and know enough to defend the Catholicity of our faith, also know that our Catholic identity is not determined by the average person on the street but by the early church fathers and the ecumenical councils.  Ask those same people on the street if Mormons are Christians and they will most probably say yes.  That doesn't make it so.

Orthodoc

BUT, Catholic Church, is the name of our church. Even is some people don't like it.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,923



« Reply #262 on: June 21, 2010, 11:53:32 AM »

This isn't something shared by all languages.

Most people outside of either EO or OO (they also claim to be "catholic" as stated in the creed) who do not consider those particular churches to be "orthodox" still refer to them as "Orthodox" churches, including Roman Catholics.

Not to mention, "catholic" literally means "according to the whole".

Precisely, there is only One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. For us Eastern Orthodox, it is the Orthodox Catholic Church.

We refer to the Roman Catholics as Catholic because that is the title known around the world. Not because we believe the Roman Church is the true Catholic Church.

You are all are positing that your church is in fact the Catholic Church, but, if I ran up to you and asked you where the nearest Catholic Church was, none of you would point me to your own church.

Also, I think you all are taking my joke a little seriously.

I wasn't aware it was supposed to be a joke.  Huh
Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #263 on: June 21, 2010, 02:12:49 PM »

Like I said, if the child's family and church life is strong, then any non-Orthodox influences on the children would be quickly dealt with. Sending an Orthodox child to a non-Orthodox school has nothing to do with ecumenism, and everything to do with a perceived/actual higher academic and disciplinary standard. One small example: Of the Orthodox children I know (many of whom are now adults and parents) who attended denominational schools, how many cross themselves left-to-right? NONE.
It is noteworthy that anti-ecumenical Orthodox Christians would rely on heretics in a Roman Catholic school to teach their children.

He's got a point, LBK.  I remember how Greek parents became distressed when their daughter refused to join in prayers to the Mother of God, because she had been told at Catholic school that is not the proper way to pray!   Sad
Unfortunately, some Roman Catholics are out of touch when it comes to Orthodox and even Eastern Catholics. At a local Church here, the R. Catholic priest invited a local  Orthodox priest to come and say a few words either in the Church or in the Church hall. However, he politely declined to do so. But at least after that, a Byzantine Catholic priest was invited and he said an Eastern Divine Liturgy for the Roman Catholics there. 
Logged
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #264 on: June 21, 2010, 02:14:37 PM »


Not from the Orthodox point of view.  For us, there are some things that are just plain wrong.  The whole Scholastic way of thinking about God, for example.  Sorry, but that is the way it is.  You are not obliged to like it.  And yes, I do believe that it is quite possible to be "Western" without incorporating a scholastic way of looking at God and the universe into one's consciousness.
What is wrong with the Thomist view of God?

Better to leave it as "scholastic"  It is more accurate in this context and does not necessarily have anything to do with the teachings of St. Thomas....There are few modern Thomists who illuminate St. Thomas.  Most self-professed Thomists follow down one scholastic trail or another trying to "improve" on what continues to be the unadulterated and classical position of the Angelic Doctor.  Some of the trails are simply in error.  Some of them follow errors that were interjected in Cardinal Cajetan, for example, that were never explicitly corrected in the 20th century.  But nobody is giving up their position to settle for the idea that their major premises or unspoken premises are in error, so you have scholastic error piled upon scholastic error and incorporated into all kinds of texts and sub-texts.

We are blessed that the Church carries on is spite of these ruminations.

Heaven help you if you simply say "That line of thought is in error."... Smiley

M.
Logged

Orthodoc
Supporter & Defender Of Orthodoxy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 2,526

Those who ignore history tend to repeat it.


« Reply #265 on: June 21, 2010, 02:21:33 PM »

This isn't something shared by all languages.

Most people outside of either EO or OO (they also claim to be "catholic" as stated in the creed) who do not consider those particular churches to be "orthodox" still refer to them as "Orthodox" churches, including Roman Catholics.

Not to mention, "catholic" literally means "according to the whole".

Precisely, there is only One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. For us Eastern Orthodox, it is the Orthodox Catholic Church.

We refer to the Roman Catholics as Catholic because that is the title known around the world. Not because we believe the Roman Church is the true Catholic Church.

You are all are positing that your church is in fact the Catholic Church, but, if I ran up to you and asked you where the nearest Catholic Church was, none of you would point me to your own church.
Also, I think you all are taking my joke a little seriously.

It's nice to know that you think you know us better than we know ourselves?  When that question is asked of me (and it has been) my response is always the same.... Do you mean Roman Catholic or Orthodox Catholic?  I'm always amazed when you RC's give the analogy about asking the average man or woman on the street where the nearest Catholic Church is and where they would direct you to.  Those of us who are Orthodox and know enough to defend the Catholicity of our faith, also know that our Catholic identity is not determined by the average person on the street but by the early church fathers and the ecumenical councils.  Ask those same people on the street if Mormons are Christians and they will most probably say yes.  That doesn't make it so.

Orthodoc

BUT, Catholic Church, is the name of our church. Even is some people don't like it.

One has to wonder why after centuries of usage the term ROMAN Catholic has become such no no for some RC's!  We Orthodox defend our Catholicity because the Church of Rome uses the term Catholic to revise history.  I've even read where claims are made that the land of Rus accepted Christianity from the Roman Catholics in 988 because it was 66 years before the Orthodox left the Catholic Church in 1054!  We never left the Catholic Church.  We are the original Catholic Church mentioned in the Creed.  We have not altered those teachings believed before the schism as Rome does.  If ya all want to call yourselves Catholic go right ahead but be ready for a challenge when you proclaim excluse rights to the word but not identifying just what type of Catholic you are.

Orthodoc
Logged

Oh Lord, Save thy people and bless thine inheritance.
Grant victory to the Orthodox Christians over their adversaries.
And by virtue of thy Cross preserve thy habitation.
FormerReformer
Convertodox of the convertodox
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: I'll take (e) for "all of the above"
Posts: 2,438



WWW
« Reply #266 on: June 21, 2010, 02:23:03 PM »

This isn't something shared by all languages.

Most people outside of either EO or OO (they also claim to be "catholic" as stated in the creed) who do not consider those particular churches to be "orthodox" still refer to them as "Orthodox" churches, including Roman Catholics.

Not to mention, "catholic" literally means "according to the whole".

Precisely, there is only One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. For us Eastern Orthodox, it is the Orthodox Catholic Church.

We refer to the Roman Catholics as Catholic because that is the title known around the world. Not because we believe the Roman Church is the true Catholic Church.

You are all are positing that your church is in fact the Catholic Church, but, if I ran up to you and asked you where the nearest Catholic Church was, none of you would point me to your own church.
Also, I think you all are taking my joke a little seriously.

It's nice to know that you think you know us better than we know ourselves?  When that question is asked of me (and it has been) my response is always the same.... Do you mean Roman Catholic or Orthodox Catholic?  I'm always amazed when you RC's give the analogy about asking the average man or woman on the street where the nearest Catholic Church is and where they would direct you to.  Those of us who are Orthodox and know enough to defend the Catholicity of our faith, also know that our Catholic identity is not determined by the average person on the street but by the early church fathers and the ecumenical councils.  Ask those same people on the street if Mormons are Christians and they will most probably say yes.  That doesn't make it so.

Orthodoc

BUT, Catholic Church, is the name of our church. Even is some people don't like it.

But, to build on Orthodoc's analogy, the official name of the Mormon church starts with "Church of Jesus Christ" (of Latterday Saints).  Having the word in your name doesn't make it so.
Logged

"Funny," said Lancelot, "how the people who can't pray say that prayers are not answered, however much the people who can pray say they are."  TH White

Oh, no: I've succumbed to Hyperdoxy!
WetCatechumen
Roman Catholic
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic Christianity
Jurisdiction: Latin Rite - Archdiocese of Santa Fe; Ruthenian Byzantine Catholic Eparchy of Phoenix
Posts: 297



« Reply #267 on: June 21, 2010, 02:31:42 PM »

This isn't something shared by all languages.

Most people outside of either EO or OO (they also claim to be "catholic" as stated in the creed) who do not consider those particular churches to be "orthodox" still refer to them as "Orthodox" churches, including Roman Catholics.

Not to mention, "catholic" literally means "according to the whole".

Precisely, there is only One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. For us Eastern Orthodox, it is the Orthodox Catholic Church.

We refer to the Roman Catholics as Catholic because that is the title known around the world. Not because we believe the Roman Church is the true Catholic Church.

You are all are positing that your church is in fact the Catholic Church, but, if I ran up to you and asked you where the nearest Catholic Church was, none of you would point me to your own church.

Also, I think you all are taking my joke a little seriously.

I wasn't aware it was supposed to be a joke.  Huh

I know that I am not well known in this forum, but I would have that no one would believe that I would actually try to defend the Catholicity of my faith based upon what it is commonly called. Also, I thought I put the Grin smiley after I quoted St. Augustine.
Logged

"And because they have nothing better to do, they take cushion and chairs to Rome. And while the Pope is saying liturgy, they go, 'Oh, oh, oh, filioque!' And the Pope say, 'Filioque? That-uh sound nice! I think I divide-uh the Church over it!'" - Comrade Real Presence
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #268 on: June 21, 2010, 02:36:15 PM »

 We have not altered those teachings believed before the schism as Rome does.  
Yes. the extent and number of changes in the Orthodox Churches is relatively miniscule, when compared with those which have taken place in the Roman Catholic Church over the past 60 years. But still, it
 looks to me like a few things have been modified in your Churches:
1. The calendar issue.
2. Women wearing headcovering in Church.
3. The question of artificial birth control.
4. The use of the organ in Church services.
5. The slavery question.
6. And of course, there is the question whether the Latin Sacraments are valid. Before 1054, they were. This teaching has since been changed.
Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #269 on: June 21, 2010, 02:44:29 PM »

But, to build on Orthodoc's analogy, the official name of the Mormon church starts with "Church of Jesus Christ" (of Latterday Saints).  Having the word in your name doesn't make it so.
Is it a bit silly to debate about the name of a particular Church?
For example, there is the *first* Baptist Church. Is it right to call it the *first* since the Orthodox Church was baptising before the Protestant Baptist Church came into existence? So, when someone asks for directions to the First Baptist Church, shall we say, well these are the directions, but actually, this is the Second Baptist Chruch because my Church baptised before your Church did?  And by the way, since your baptism is invalid, the correct name should be the Invalid Baptist Church?
Logged
Tags:
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 »   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.188 seconds with 72 queries.