OrthodoxChristianity.net
December 20, 2014, 02:43:05 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 All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Lord, They say you are not in the Catholic Sacraments ¿What do you say?  (Read 15093 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Alonso_castillo
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Arquidiósesis de Guadalajara (México)
Posts: 360


Me when younger


« on: January 22, 2010, 02:54:09 AM »

If you want to see it in real time this is the way:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91J0VCDewb0


This extraordinary miracle happened in Lourdes

Just during asking  the almighty Father to Santify the species by his Holy Spirit, to convert into Our Lord Jesus body (flesh)

A visible Epiclesis, as real as those not visible.


We pray yo to Sanctify this...



...By your Spirit  ( the Host convex at a jump)




Thanks Lord for answering,

Closer:





If you want to see it in real time this is the way:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91J0VCDewb0

If you want to see it in real time this is the way:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91J0VCDewb0

If you want to see it in real time this is the way:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91J0VCDewb0
Logged

Nisi Dominus aedificaverit Domum
in vanum laboraverunt qui aedifcant eam
Nisi Dominus custodierit civitatem
frustra vigilant qui custodit Eam
Alonso_castillo
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Arquidiósesis de Guadalajara (México)
Posts: 360


Me when younger


« Reply #1 on: January 22, 2010, 02:59:04 AM »

Closer Video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BcCHiI4KggA
Logged

Nisi Dominus aedificaverit Domum
in vanum laboraverunt qui aedifcant eam
Nisi Dominus custodierit civitatem
frustra vigilant qui custodit Eam
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 30,501



« Reply #2 on: January 22, 2010, 04:04:40 AM »

I don't see anything. What am I missing?
Logged

"By the way he dies as a human being he shows us what it is to be God." - Fr. John Behr
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #3 on: January 22, 2010, 04:50:16 AM »


I don't see anything. What am I missing?

In the original video the wafer appears to move at about 0:38.
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 #4 on: January 22, 2010, 04:51:10 AM »

You think the devil is not capable of performing such signs?
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
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 30,501



« Reply #5 on: January 22, 2010, 06:17:14 AM »


I don't see anything. What am I missing?

In the original video the wafer appears to move at about 0:38.

Ahh, I see. Maybe the first time through I thought that was just a hitch in the video due to poor quality or something. I guess I was looking for the wafer to get up and start dancing and singing a Frank Sinatra song or something. angel
Logged

"By the way he dies as a human being he shows us what it is to be God." - Fr. John Behr
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #6 on: January 22, 2010, 09:23:11 AM »


I don't see anything. What am I missing?

In the original video the wafer appears to move at about 0:38.

Ahh, I see. Maybe the first time through I thought that was just a hitch in the video due to poor quality or something. I guess I was looking for the wafer to get up and start dancing and singing a Frank Sinatra song or something. angel
I'd go with the poor quality: doesn't seem like the priests noticed anything.  And although it looked large, it still seeme to be those paper thin wafers they use: the billowing of those large sleaves.....

I remember someone either here or on CAF posted a video from Brazil I think, where they all danced in a circle and then the priest took the monstrans and they danced around it.

I personally think (as opposed to believe) that their wafers are Christ after consecration, but I'm hardly impressed here.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Alonso_castillo
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Arquidiósesis de Guadalajara (México)
Posts: 360


Me when younger


« Reply #7 on: January 22, 2010, 10:40:02 AM »

Be aware of not being hardening your hearts. Don't you be fighting against God.

Ex 4:21, 7:3, 7:13, 7:22, 8:11, 8:15, 8:28, 9:7, 9:12, 9:34-35, 10:1, 10:20, 10:27, 11:10, 14:4, 14:8, 14:17 etc.

Logged

Nisi Dominus aedificaverit Domum
in vanum laboraverunt qui aedifcant eam
Nisi Dominus custodierit civitatem
frustra vigilant qui custodit Eam
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 30,501



« Reply #8 on: January 22, 2010, 10:46:02 AM »

Be aware of not being hardening your hearts. Don't you be fighting against God.
Ex 4:21, 7:3, 7:13, 7:22, 8:11, 8:15, 8:28, 9:7, 9:12, 9:34-35, 10:1, 10:20, 10:27, 11:10, 14:4, 14:8, 14:17 etc.

According to the verses you quoted, it would be God hardening my heart...
Logged

"By the way he dies as a human being he shows us what it is to be God." - Fr. John Behr
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,417


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #9 on: January 22, 2010, 10:47:06 AM »

You think the devil is not capable of performing such signs?
Oh yes, all Christians in the west were suddenly denied the life giving Body and Blood of Christ just because of some squabble between a Cardinal and a Patriarch. EO sacramental theology makes no sense.
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,487


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #10 on: January 22, 2010, 10:49:03 AM »

Be aware of not being hardening your hearts. Don't you be fighting against God.

Ex 4:21, 7:3, 7:13, 7:22, 8:11, 8:15, 8:28, 9:7, 9:12, 9:34-35, 10:1, 10:20, 10:27, 11:10, 14:4, 14:8, 14:17 etc.



The canons of the Church outrank miracles.
Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching. Also, I served as an Orthodox priest from 2008-2013, before resigning.
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,487


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #11 on: January 22, 2010, 10:50:41 AM »

You think the devil is not capable of performing such signs?
Oh yes, all Christians in the west were suddenly denied the life giving Body and Blood of Christ just because of some squabble between a Cardinal and a Patriarch. EO sacramental theology makes no sense.

Any more than your sacramental theology that says the Body of Christ can exist wherever someone who has "valid apostolic succession" exists, thus ensuring that schismatics can perpetually blaspheme against God and condemn their souls to hell every time they celebrate the Liturgy? Holy Communion is a mystery OF the Church, and exists IN the Church, for those with Orthodox faith; otherwise it really just is "hocus pocus."

No one says Roman Catholics lost sacramental grace in 1054. It was a gradual process. But you already knew that (it just doesn't sound as snarky as saying what you did).
« Last Edit: January 22, 2010, 10:51:32 AM by Fr. Anastasios » Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching. Also, I served as an Orthodox priest from 2008-2013, before resigning.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #12 on: January 22, 2010, 10:54:40 AM »

Be aware of not being hardening your hearts. Don't you be fighting against God.

Ex 4:21, 7:3, 7:13, 7:22, 8:11, 8:15, 8:28, 9:7, 9:12, 9:34-35, 10:1, 10:20, 10:27, 11:10, 14:4, 14:8, 14:17 etc.



The canons of the Church outrank miracles.
let alone pseudomiracles.  Only an evil generation seeks a sign....
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,417


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #13 on: January 22, 2010, 10:59:17 AM »

You think the devil is not capable of performing such signs?
Oh yes, all Christians in the west were suddenly denied the life giving Body and Blood of Christ just because of some squabble between a Cardinal and a Patriarch. EO sacramental theology makes no sense.

Any more than your sacramental theology that says the Body of Christ can exist wherever someone who has "valid apostolic succession" exists, thus ensuring that schismatics can perpetually blaspheme against God and condemn their souls to hell every time they celebrate the Liturgy? Holy Communion is a mystery OF the Church, and exists IN the Church, for those with Orthodox faith; otherwise it really just is "hocus pocus."

No one says Roman Catholics lost sacramental grace in 1054. It was a gradual process. But you already knew that (it just doesn't sound as snarky as saying what you did).
Your mischaracterization of the Catholic view of Apostolic succession is just silly. Catholic don't believe that anybody who happens to be prayed over by a bishop suddenly becomes a priest. That is why even though some Anglicans who have received orders through the "Old Catholic" line are not considered valid priests. There has to be a reasonable adherence to the Apostolic faith as well as the intention to "do what the Church does" when ordaining and the is includes preparing some one to offer the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.
What is hocus pocus is to say that grace magically disappeared from my Church.
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #14 on: January 22, 2010, 11:09:29 AM »

You think the devil is not capable of performing such signs?
Oh yes, all Christians in the west were suddenly denied the life giving Body and Blood of Christ just because of some squabble between a Cardinal and a Patriarch. EO sacramental theology makes no sense.

Any more than your sacramental theology that says the Body of Christ can exist wherever someone who has "valid apostolic succession" exists, thus ensuring that schismatics can perpetually blaspheme against God and condemn their souls to hell every time they celebrate the Liturgy? Holy Communion is a mystery OF the Church, and exists IN the Church, for those with Orthodox faith; otherwise it really just is "hocus pocus."

No one says Roman Catholics lost sacramental grace in 1054. It was a gradual process. But you already knew that (it just doesn't sound as snarky as saying what you did).
Your mischaracterization of the Catholic view of Apostolic succession is just silly. Catholic don't believe that anybody who happens to be prayed over by a bishop suddenly becomes a priest. That is why even though some Anglicans who have received orders through the "Old Catholic" line are not considered valid priests. There has to be a reasonable adherence to the Apostolic faith as well as the intention to "do what the Church does" when ordaining and the is includes preparing some one to offer the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.
What is hocus pocus is to say that grace magically disappeared from my Church.
Unlike what the Vatican holds, most Orthodox do not hold that the defrocked are "priests forever according to the order of Melchizedek."  Hence Father's position.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,417


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #15 on: January 22, 2010, 11:15:13 AM »

You think the devil is not capable of performing such signs?
Oh yes, all Christians in the west were suddenly denied the life giving Body and Blood of Christ just because of some squabble between a Cardinal and a Patriarch. EO sacramental theology makes no sense.

Any more than your sacramental theology that says the Body of Christ can exist wherever someone who has "valid apostolic succession" exists, thus ensuring that schismatics can perpetually blaspheme against God and condemn their souls to hell every time they celebrate the Liturgy? Holy Communion is a mystery OF the Church, and exists IN the Church, for those with Orthodox faith; otherwise it really just is "hocus pocus."

No one says Roman Catholics lost sacramental grace in 1054. It was a gradual process. But you already knew that (it just doesn't sound as snarky as saying what you did).
Your mischaracterization of the Catholic view of Apostolic succession is just silly. Catholic don't believe that anybody who happens to be prayed over by a bishop suddenly becomes a priest. That is why even though some Anglicans who have received orders through the "Old Catholic" line are not considered valid priests. There has to be a reasonable adherence to the Apostolic faith as well as the intention to "do what the Church does" when ordaining and the is includes preparing some one to offer the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.
What is hocus pocus is to say that grace magically disappeared from my Church.
Unlike what the Vatican holds, most Orthodox do not hold that the defrocked are "priests forever according to the order of Melchizedek."  Hence Father's position.
I know. Its a weird position that Father has. Very weird indeed.
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 30,501



« Reply #16 on: January 22, 2010, 11:31:08 AM »

What is hocus pocus is to say that grace magically disappeared from my Church.

So, let's say that there is a Roman Catholic bishop. Now let's say that he began to teach something that was obviously heretical--for example, that there was a time when Jesus Christ was not, as Arius taught. Would the sacraments be without grace in his Church? Or would grace linger for a bit? Or would he always have grace in the sacraments?
« Last Edit: January 22, 2010, 11:31:39 AM by Asteriktos » Logged

"By the way he dies as a human being he shows us what it is to be God." - Fr. John Behr
Heracleides
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Patriarch of Jerusalem
Posts: 390


Kona-Kai


« Reply #17 on: January 22, 2010, 11:42:44 AM »

I remember someone either here or on CAF posted a video from Brazil I think, where they all danced in a circle and then the priest took the monstrans and they danced around it.

That would be the infamous Danza Liturgica wherein their "Jesus" gets up and dances with assistance at about the 2:30 minute mark of the video.

See it in all its splendor here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sRULNTperWE

I'll now sit back and wait for Papist to chime in with his usual nonsense about how this is an isolated event that few Catholics participate in (despite the Catholic Charismatic Renewal - sponsors of this event - having millions of adherents worldwide).  Wink
Logged

"And having found Heracleides there again, we instructed him to proclaim the Gospel of God..."  ~Acts of Barnabas
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #18 on: January 22, 2010, 11:48:40 AM »

I remember someone either here or on CAF posted a video from Brazil I think, where they all danced in a circle and then the priest took the monstrans and they danced around it.

That would be the infamous Danza Liturgica wherein their "Jesus" gets up and dances with assistance at about the 2:30 minute mark of the video.

See it in all its splendor here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sRULNTperWE

I'll now sit back and wait for Papist to chime in with his usual nonsense about how this is an isolated event that few Catholics participate in (despite the Catholic Charismatic Renewal - sponsors of this event - having millions of adherents worldwide).  Wink

HERACLEIDES! WHERE YOU BEEN? Cheesy
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,487


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #19 on: January 22, 2010, 11:57:01 AM »


Your mischaracterization of the Catholic view of Apostolic succession is just silly. Catholic don't believe that anybody who happens to be prayed over by a bishop suddenly becomes a priest. That is why even though some Anglicans who have received orders through the "Old Catholic" line are not considered valid priests. There has to be a reasonable adherence to the Apostolic faith as well as the intention to "do what the Church does" when ordaining and the is includes preparing some one to offer the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.
What is hocus pocus is to say that grace magically disappeared from my Church.

I haven't mischaracterized the Roman Catholic position at all, and I never said anyone that is prayed over automatically becomes a priest. I know what your theologians say is necessary. Valid intent, valid matter, valid minister, etc.  Not everyone has the intent part, but enough schismatics do to make your position untenable.

Anglicans who have ordination from Old Catholic bishops DO have apostolic succession according to what I know of your Church and its practice, but the problem is that it can't be sorted out because the co-consecrator might have been an Anglican, or there might be situations were one was ordained a priest by an Anglican and a bishop by an Old Catholic, etc.  That is why your Church sometimes ordains these people sub conditione, because they know they might already be priests. The issue is sorting it out, not that they are per se not already priests.

I did not say that grace magically disappears from the Church, either. What happens is that as bishops break from the Church, they first are considered parasynagogues, then schismatics, then gradually as heretics if they introduce new doctrines. The Roman Catholic Church did not leave the Church of Christ instantly in 1054 but the break was gradual; hence, the grace of the Holy Spirit departed gradually. The records are not totally clear in all cases when communion was broken, but it was most certainly broken by 1204.
Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching. Also, I served as an Orthodox priest from 2008-2013, before resigning.
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,487


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #20 on: January 22, 2010, 12:02:32 PM »


I know. Its a weird position that Father has. Very weird indeed.

I am sure you are familiar with the Council of Nicea's canon about the reception of Cathars.  Notice how they could be received as bishops or as priests. We say this demonstrates that they are outside the Church but they can be accepted economically as the Church deems necessary.  Your theologians would say that they are always bishops, but the Church took away their power to exercise the episcopacy.  It is "Latent" or "dormant" (which was the solution to deal with the problem of the secret married bishops in the Czech Republic during Communism who were turned in to Byzantine Catholic priests).

 In fact, your Church even seems to teach that all priests have the power of episcopacy, but that it has to be "activated" by the episcopal ordination prayers, except of course if the Pope allows it, which is why he allowed a priest to ordain another priest in the 13th century (cf. Primacy of Peter by Schmmemann, et al that documents this).  So who has the weird position:

1) The people that say that ordinations only happen IN the Church
2) The people that say ordinations can happen OUTSIDE the Church and that in fact, those holding one level of ordination actually can have that power of another level of ordination "suppressed" or "activated" by fiat of the Pope at will regardless of what prayers were prayed sacramentally over them?
« Last Edit: January 22, 2010, 12:03:31 PM by Fr. Anastasios » Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching. Also, I served as an Orthodox priest from 2008-2013, before resigning.
BoredMeeting
Loving the Life of a Council Member
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic Christian
Jurisdiction: Serbian Orthodox/OCA
Posts: 722



« Reply #21 on: January 22, 2010, 12:25:46 PM »

What is hocus pocus is to say that grace magically disappeared from my Church.
'Magically?'

Who said that, other than you?

I see someone has already noted it was a gradual process.
Logged
tuesdayschild
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 971



« Reply #22 on: January 22, 2010, 12:28:02 PM »

they first are considered parasynagogues, then schismatics

I'm having some trouble grasping the distinction here.  Would you please explain?
Logged
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,417


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #23 on: January 22, 2010, 12:32:00 PM »


I know. Its a weird position that Father has. Very weird indeed.

I am sure you are familiar with the Council of Nicea's canon about the reception of Cathars.  Notice how they could be received as bishops or as priests. We say this demonstrates that they are outside the Church but they can be accepted economically as the Church deems necessary.  Your theologians would say that they are always bishops, but the Church took away their power to exercise the episcopacy.  It is "Latent" or "dormant" (which was the solution to deal with the problem of the secret married bishops in the Czech Republic during Communism who were turned in to Byzantine Catholic priests).

 In fact, your Church even seems to teach that all priests have the power of episcopacy, but that it has to be "activated" by the episcopal ordination prayers, except of course if the Pope allows it, which is why he allowed a priest to ordain another priest in the 13th century (cf. Primacy of Peter by Schmmemann, et al that documents this).  So who has the weird position:

1) The people that say that ordinations only happen IN the Church
2) The people that say ordinations can happen OUTSIDE the Church and that in fact, those holding one level of ordination actually can have that power of another level of ordination "suppressed" or "activated" by fiat of the Pope at will regardless of what prayers were prayed sacramentally over them?
No. They can occur outside the Church IF, the person recieving and administering the sacrament professes the Nicene faith and both intend to do what the Church does. This applies to schims in which the difference between Churches is not so much that a one group is denying the Nicene faith. This is why Eastern Orthdox and Oriental Orthodox Christians have valid orders. I believe that in a sense, they profess the substance of the Catholic faith or at least the true substance of their faith is not inconsistent with the substance of the Catholic faith. Apostolic successin doesn't happen willy nilly for anyone who happens to have had the right prayers prayed over them. Its not magic.
As for the Pope or a Bishop suppressing a persons orders, yes the indelible mark on the clerics soul is not removed, only their authority to exercise it. This doesn't bother me at all in light of the idea of "Whatever you bind on earth is bound in heaven."

What is really weird to me is that idea that suddenly all the western Christians peasants who may have never even heard of the Patriarch of Constantinople were suddenly denied the Body and Blood of the Lord whom they loved. What I find unbelievalbe is that men and women who loved Jesus Christ as much as St. John of the Cross or St. Teresa of Avila did, were worshiping and receiving bread and wine and not Jesus Christ. Such profound spiritual growth seen in persons like St. John Viani or St. Padre Pio, would be impossible with "false and graceless sacraments". I think the EO position has to ignore the reality.
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,417


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #24 on: January 22, 2010, 12:32:47 PM »

What is hocus pocus is to say that grace magically disappeared from my Church.
'Magically?'

Who said that, other than you?

I see someone has already noted it was a gradual process.
How do sacraments "gradually" become fake. That is absurd.
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,487


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #25 on: January 22, 2010, 12:46:50 PM »


No. They can occur outside the Church IF, the person recieving and administering the sacrament professes the Nicene faith and both intend to do what the Church does. This applies to schims in which the difference between Churches is not so much that a one group is denying the Nicene faith. This is why Eastern Orthdox and Oriental Orthodox Christians have valid orders. I believe that in a sense, they profess the substance of the Catholic faith or at least the true substance of their faith is not inconsistent with the substance of the Catholic faith. Apostolic successin doesn't happen willy nilly for anyone who happens to have had the right prayers prayed over them. Its not magic.
As for the Pope or a Bishop suppressing a persons orders, yes the indelible mark on the clerics soul is not removed, only their authority to exercise it. This doesn't bother me at all in light of the idea of "Whatever you bind on earth is bound in heaven."

Why is the Nicene Faith (whatever that is) the yardstick?  This talk of a common substance and the like is a reduction to a common denominator that we cannot agree with.  It's all or nothing. Your Church was condemned by the Orthodox Church multiple times in history in Council and Encyclicals of the Patriarchs. It's not a "trivial difference."

Apostolic succession may not happen willy nilly according to your self-created definition, but, from an Orthodox perspective, the idea that people who have been separated for hundreds of years and have developed different faiths can have the same Christ (who is not divided) and same sacraments is magical thinking.

Suppressing an indelible mark is one argument (I think it's wrong too) but the idea that a person who is a priest can ordain another because the Pope told him to is a much bigger problem. Do you agree that all priests are bishops without the "key" being unlocked?

Quote
What is really weird to me is that idea that suddenly all the western Christians peasants who may have never even heard of the Patriarch of Constantinople were suddenly denied the Body and Blood of the Lord whom they loved. What I find unbelievalbe is that men and women who loved Jesus Christ as much as St. John of the Cross or St. Teresa of Avila did, were worshiping and receiving bread and wine and not Jesus Christ. Such profound spiritual growth seen in persons like St. John Viani or St. Padre Pio, would be impossible with "false and graceless sacraments". I think the EO position has to ignore the reality.

You say the same thing about Anglicans, though.
« Last Edit: January 22, 2010, 12:50:19 PM by Fr. Anastasios » Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching. Also, I served as an Orthodox priest from 2008-2013, before resigning.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #26 on: January 22, 2010, 12:48:17 PM »


I know. Its a weird position that Father has. Very weird indeed.

I am sure you are familiar with the Council of Nicea's canon about the reception of Cathars.  Notice how they could be received as bishops or as priests. We say this demonstrates that they are outside the Church but they can be accepted economically as the Church deems necessary.  Your theologians would say that they are always bishops, but the Church took away their power to exercise the episcopacy.  It is "Latent" or "dormant" (which was the solution to deal with the problem of the secret married bishops in the Czech Republic during Communism who were turned in to Byzantine Catholic priests).

 In fact, your Church even seems to teach that all priests have the power of episcopacy, but that it has to be "activated" by the episcopal ordination prayers, except of course if the Pope allows it, which is why he allowed a priest to ordain another priest in the 13th century (cf. Primacy of Peter by Schmmemann, et al that documents this).  So who has the weird position:

1) The people that say that ordinations only happen IN the Church
2) The people that say ordinations can happen OUTSIDE the Church and that in fact, those holding one level of ordination actually can have that power of another level of ordination "suppressed" or "activated" by fiat of the Pope at will regardless of what prayers were prayed sacramentally over them?
No. They can occur outside the Church IF, the person recieving and administering the sacrament professes the Nicene faith and both intend to do what the Church does. This applies to schims in which the difference between Churches is not so much that a one group is denying the Nicene faith. This is why Eastern Orthdox and Oriental Orthodox Christians have valid orders. I believe that in a sense, they profess the substance of the Catholic faith or at least the true substance of their faith is not inconsistent with the substance of the Catholic faith. Apostolic successin doesn't happen willy nilly for anyone who happens to have had the right prayers prayed over them. Its not magic.
As for the Pope or a Bishop suppressing a persons orders, yes the indelible mark on the clerics soul is not removed, only their authority to exercise it. This doesn't bother me at all in light of the idea of "Whatever you bind on earth is bound in heaven."

What is really weird to me is that idea that suddenly all the western Christians peasants who may have never even heard of the Patriarch of Constantinople were suddenly denied the Body and Blood of the Lord whom they loved. What I find unbelievalbe is that men and women who loved Jesus Christ as much as St. John of the Cross or St. Teresa of Avila did, were worshiping and receiving bread and wine and not Jesus Christ. Such profound spiritual growth seen in persons like St. John Viani or St. Padre Pio, would be impossible with "false and graceless sacraments". I think the EO position has to ignore the reality.
Just because a reality is painful doesn't nullify it as reality.  Not that I am saying that all those peasants were now deprived, just saying that the Truth is indifferent to how I feel about it.

The problem with such "proof" is that Muslims, Hindus and Buddhists bring forth their "proof."
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,487


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #27 on: January 22, 2010, 12:49:54 PM »

What is hocus pocus is to say that grace magically disappeared from my Church.
'Magically?'

Who said that, other than you?

I see someone has already noted it was a gradual process.
How do sacraments "gradually" become fake. That is absurd.


Individual cases are either yes or no. It's either the body of Christ or it's not. But what is gradual is the discernment of the Church as to when it has happened in another Church.  One piece of evidence is the acceleration of unorthodox doctrines and decrease in Orthodox praxis (such as what happened in the West with increasing frequency after the schism). But the patriarchates broke communion with Rome individually as they became convinced Rome was heretical.  Roman practices may not have completely infiltrated the highlands of Scotland immediately though. That is what we say is gradual. Not that there are half-sacraments, but that all the bishops under Rome instantly agreed with its schism, and introduced all of its innovations instantly, and as such lost grace instantly.  Instead, Rome enforced these things and as it did, the episcopacy and the Church died out in the West.
Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching. Also, I served as an Orthodox priest from 2008-2013, before resigning.
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,487


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #28 on: January 22, 2010, 12:52:11 PM »

they first are considered parasynagogues, then schismatics

I'm having some trouble grasping the distinction here.  Would you please explain?

St Basil makes a distinction in his First Canonical Epistle between divisions "IN" the Church (parasynagogue) and divisions "FROM" the Church (schism).  The former group of people would still be Orthodox but in an irregular situation (and the leaders guilty of some personal sin of disobedience).
Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching. Also, I served as an Orthodox priest from 2008-2013, before resigning.
Bogoliubtsy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,268



« Reply #29 on: January 22, 2010, 12:56:53 PM »



What is really weird to me is that idea that suddenly all the western Christians peasants who may have never even heard of the Patriarch of Constantinople were suddenly denied the Body and Blood of the Lord whom they loved. What I find unbelievalbe is that men and women who loved Jesus Christ as much as St. John of the Cross or St. Teresa of Avila did, were worshiping and receiving bread and wine and not Jesus Christ. Such profound spiritual growth seen in persons like St. John Viani or St. Padre Pio, would be impossible with "false and graceless sacraments". I think the EO position has to ignore the reality.

I agree. But are you willing to extend that argument to the Anglican Church? What about early Lutherans? What about Calvinists and all of their manifestations?
Logged

"When you give food to the poor, they call you a saint. When you ask why the poor have no food, they call you a communist". - Archbishop Hélder Pessoa Câmara
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,487


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #30 on: January 22, 2010, 01:01:33 PM »

I would like to reemphasize what I have said numerous times on this site, though; while I do not believe that sacramental grace exists outside the Church, I believe there is charismatic grace, and that God does not abandon ignorant people who have done nothing positive to break communion with the Church. (Nor do I think a loving God would create Native Americans from 33AD until the 1500's knowing they would all die without baptism and go to hell; there must be some provision for such people).
Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching. Also, I served as an Orthodox priest from 2008-2013, before resigning.
Bogoliubtsy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,268



« Reply #31 on: January 22, 2010, 01:02:58 PM »

I would like to reemphasize what I have said numerous times on this site, though; while I do not believe that sacramental grace exists outside the Church, I believe there is charismatic grace, and that God does not abandon ignorant people who have done nothing positive to break communion with the Church. (Nor do I think a loving God would create Native Americans from 33AD until the 1500's knowing they would all die without baptism and go to hell; there must be some provision for such people).

But didn't Jesus appear to the Native Americans in the book of Mormon?  Wink
Logged

"When you give food to the poor, they call you a saint. When you ask why the poor have no food, they call you a communist". - Archbishop Hélder Pessoa Câmara
ignatius
Baptacathadox
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic > Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA - Diocese of the South
Posts: 1,690


My Son Aidan... :-)


« Reply #32 on: January 22, 2010, 01:16:08 PM »

I would like to reemphasize what I have said numerous times on this site, though; while I do not believe that sacramental grace exists outside the Church, I believe there is charismatic grace, and that God does not abandon ignorant people who have done nothing positive to break communion with the Church. (Nor do I think a loving God would create Native Americans from 33AD until the 1500's knowing they would all die without baptism and go to hell; there must be some provision for such people).

Awesome, I'm ignorant! There is Hope!  Grin
Logged

St Basil the Great (330-379 A.D.): “I think then that the one goal of all who are really and truly serving the Lord ought to be to bring back to union the churches who have at different times and in diverse manners divided from one another.”
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,417


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #33 on: January 22, 2010, 01:44:47 PM »

I would like to reemphasize what I have said numerous times on this site, though; while I do not believe that sacramental grace exists outside the Church, I believe there is charismatic grace, and that God does not abandon ignorant people who have done nothing positive to break communion with the Church. (Nor do I think a loving God would create Native Americans from 33AD until the 1500's knowing they would all die without baptism and go to hell; there must be some provision for such people).
So you see no difference between the grace recieved by a Trinitarian Christian that is not in communion with the Eastern Orthodox Church and the grace received by a pagan?
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,417


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #34 on: January 22, 2010, 01:45:32 PM »

I would like to reemphasize what I have said numerous times on this site, though; while I do not believe that sacramental grace exists outside the Church, I believe there is charismatic grace, and that God does not abandon ignorant people who have done nothing positive to break communion with the Church. (Nor do I think a loving God would create Native Americans from 33AD until the 1500's knowing they would all die without baptism and go to hell; there must be some provision for such people).

Awesome, I'm ignorant! There is Hope!  Grin
Doesn't Change the fact that you and I are heretics with "fake" sacraments.   Wink
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #35 on: January 22, 2010, 03:04:14 PM »

Dear Alfonso  and Papist,

I believe you both say that the Orthodox are outside the Church and need to return. Since it is the teaching of the Church in her Ecumenical Councils that those outside the Church do not have valid sacraments the logical conclusion is that either you or we cannot have valid sacraments.  Sacraments exist only in the true Church.

We can see this teaching from Saint Basil the Great ...this is in the 4th century, after the Church had emerged from its 300 long years of persecution under the Roman Empire.  His teaching was later incorporated into the canon law of the Catholic Church at an Ecumenical Council.

(Notice the typical balance of the Church Fathers - while the principle of no Sacraments and no Apostolic Succession outside the Church is clearly enunciated, Saint Basil alsostates very clearly that for the sake of the good of the Church "economy" may beused if it is thought necessary in the case of Baptism.)


Epistle to Amphilochius (of which the "First Canon" of Saint Basil is a shorter
version)

---- "It seemed best to the ancients-I refer to Cyprian and our own
Firmilian-to subject all of these (Cathari, and Encratites, and Hydroparastatae)
to one vote of condemnation, because the beginning of this separation arose
through schism, and those who had broken away from the Church no longer had in
them the grace of the Holy Spirit, for the imparting of it failed because of the
severance of continuity.

"For those who separated first had ordination from the Fathers, and
through the imposition of their hands possessed the spiritual gift; but those
who had been cut off, becoming laymen, possessed the power neither of baptizing
nor of ordaining, being able no longer to impart to others the grace of the Holy
Spirit from which they themselves had fallen away. Therefore they commanded
those who had been baptized by them, as baptized by laymen, to come to the
Church and be purified by the true baptism of the Church.


"But since on the whole it has seemed best to some of those in Asia
that, by economy for the sake of the many, their baptism be accepted, let it be
accepted."
Logged
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,487


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #36 on: January 22, 2010, 03:19:30 PM »

I would like to reemphasize what I have said numerous times on this site, though; while I do not believe that sacramental grace exists outside the Church, I believe there is charismatic grace, and that God does not abandon ignorant people who have done nothing positive to break communion with the Church. (Nor do I think a loving God would create Native Americans from 33AD until the 1500's knowing they would all die without baptism and go to hell; there must be some provision for such people).
So you see no difference between the grace recieved by a Trinitarian Christian that is not in communion with the Eastern Orthodox Church and the grace received by a pagan?

Since grace is the uncreated energies of God, I see no difference in grace, since it is not a thing.  However, I believe the through-no-fault-of-his-own heterodox would have more aptitude to receive this grace due to his faith in Christ and attempts to live a Christian life. To be clear, we are firmly in the realm of my opinion at this point. I believe this is beyond revelation, but am commenting on my observations.
Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching. Also, I served as an Orthodox priest from 2008-2013, before resigning.
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #37 on: January 22, 2010, 03:20:44 PM »

Unlike what the Vatican holds, most Orthodox do not hold that the defrocked are "priests forever according to the order of Melchizedek."  Hence Father's position.
I know. Its a weird position that Father has. Very weird indeed.

Father Anastasios' position is the ancient and true theological position of the Church.  It is just unusual for you to have it applied against you!

The question boils down to - do bishops exist outside the Church and out of communion with the Church?.  I believe that the episcopate -the College of the Apostles- cannot exist outside the Church.  Without the episcopate there can be no Sacraments.  Do you know the writings of Fr Justin Popovich? - I tend to be a follower of his.

Now, I know that this is a harsh saying for a Roman Catholic to hear (about as harsh as when the Anglicans are told much the same about the invalidity of their Orders by Catholics.)  

BUT, on the other hand, we have to be honest and tell you that you will find Orthodox who accept the "validity" of the Roman Catholic episcopate and the Sacraments which flow from it.   Saint Philaret Metropolitan of Moscow is of this opinion.  Here are his words http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,13419.msg185558.html#msg185558

In fact for the last 400 years the Church of Russia has accepted the validity of Roman Catholic sacraments.  

BUT... ... on the other hand we find that in the 1980s at one of the Meetings of the Catholic-Orthodox International Theological Dialogue that the Orthodox bishops and theologians (including the Russian delegates) refused to recognise Catholic baptism per se.   A rejection of Catholic baptism obviously entails a fundamental rejection of all Catholic Sacraments.

How do we deal with this dichotomy? - some say Catholics have sacraments, some say they do not.   I suppose the best we can say it that the Orthodox do not know if Catholics have sacraments.  We could look at this little anecdote about Anglican baptism to get a handle on this Orthodox agnosticism......

There is an incident in the UK recorded by the Archbishop of Canterbury himself
(Lord Runcie if I remember) in an issue of "Eastern Churches Quarterly."

At a meeting in England of Anglican and Russian Orthodox bishops, the Anglicans
asked at supper: "Do you believe we are baptized?" The Orthodox asked to have
the night to think about it. At breakfast in the morning the Anglicans asked: "So,
what do you think? Are we baptized?" The Orthodox replied, "We do not know."


Logged
Alonso_castillo
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Arquidiósesis de Guadalajara (México)
Posts: 360


Me when younger


« Reply #38 on: January 22, 2010, 03:33:48 PM »

I only see hard hearts, not matter the facts I bring to you as Moses did, most here behave as Pharaoh did.

The Epiclesis that is visible in the video is something that goes further the understanding of those who like the pharisees say ..."Do you say that we are blind?"...  John 9:38-41

38 He said, "I do believe, Lord," and he worshiped him.
39 Then Jesus said, "I came into this world for judgment, so that those who do not see might see, and those who do see might become blind."
40 Some of the Pharisees who were with him heard this and said to him, "Surely we are not also blind, are we?"
41 Jesus said to them, "If you were blind, you would have no sin; but now you are saying, 'We see,' so your sin remains.


« Last Edit: January 22, 2010, 03:37:54 PM by Alonso_castillo » Logged

Nisi Dominus aedificaverit Domum
in vanum laboraverunt qui aedifcant eam
Nisi Dominus custodierit civitatem
frustra vigilant qui custodit Eam
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #39 on: January 22, 2010, 03:34:08 PM »

^We're quite fine Alonso. Why do you care what we say? Roll Eyes
« Last Edit: January 22, 2010, 03:36:14 PM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #40 on: January 22, 2010, 03:36:32 PM »

Unlike what the Vatican holds, most Orthodox do not hold that the defrocked are "priests forever according to the order of Melchizedek."  Hence Father's position.
I know. Its a weird position that Father has. Very weird indeed.

Father Anastasios' position is the ancient and true theological position of the Church.  It is just unusual for you to have it applied against you!

The question boils down to - do bishops exist outside the Church and out of communion with the Church?.  I believe that the episcopate -the College of the Apostles- cannot exist outside the Church.  Without the episcopate there can be no Sacraments.  Do you know the writings of Fr Justin Popovich? - I tend to be a follower of his.

Now, I know that this is a harsh saying for a Roman Catholic to hear (about as harsh as when the Anglicans are told much the same about the invalidity of their Orders by Catholics.) 

BUT, on the other hand, we have to be honest and tell you that you will find Orthodox who accept the "validity" of the Roman Catholic episcopate and the Sacraments which flow from it.   Saint Philaret Metropolitan of Moscow is of this opinion.  Here are his words http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,13419.msg185558.html#msg185558

In fact for the last 400 years the Church of Russia has accepted the validity of Roman Catholic sacraments. 

BUT... ... on the other hand we find that in the 1980s at one of the Meetings of the Catholic-Orthodox International Theological Dialogue that the Orthodox bishops and theologians (including the Russian delegates) refused to recognise Catholic baptism per se.   A rejection of Catholic baptism obviously entails a fundamental rejection of all Catholic Sacraments.

How do we deal with this dichotomy? - some say Catholics have sacraments, some say they do not.   I suppose the best we can say it that the Orthodox do not know if Catholics have sacraments.  We could look at this little anecdote about Anglican baptism to get a handle on this Orthodox agnosticism......

There is an incident in the UK recorded by the Archbishop of Canterbury himself
(Lord Runcie if I remember) in an issue of "Eastern Churches Quarterly."

At a meeting in England of Anglican and Russian Orthodox bishops, the Anglicans
asked at supper: "Do you believe we are baptized?" The Orthodox asked to have
the night to think about it. At breakfast in the morning the Anglicans asked: "So,
what do you think? Are we baptized?" The Orthodox replied, "We do not know."



^I have to say, for being the "true church," they do worry so about what we think of their sacraments.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,487


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #41 on: January 22, 2010, 03:39:03 PM »

Alonso, you are the one with the hard heart.

Your Church could never cure me of my sins, despite years of confession to your priests and reception of your sacraments.  But from the time of my baptism in the Orthodox Church, I have experienced what new life is, have grown in the love of Christ, and have experienced grace in a way that was absent previously. Doctrine trumps my personal testimony, but since you are accusing us of being heartless, I will offer my testimony. Orthodoxy is life.
Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching. Also, I served as an Orthodox priest from 2008-2013, before resigning.
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #42 on: January 22, 2010, 03:46:26 PM »

Dear Alonso,

I don't want to misrepresent you.....  you believe that the Orthodox are heretics?  you belive that our sacraments are invalid?

If that is what you believe, do not feel inhibited about saying so plainly.  We all appreciate honesty.
Logged
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,417


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #43 on: January 22, 2010, 04:00:28 PM »

Alonso, you are the one with the hard heart.

Your Church could never cure me of my sins, despite years of confession to your priests and reception of your sacraments.  But from the time of my baptism in the Orthodox Church, I have experienced what new life is, have grown in the love of Christ, and have experienced grace in a way that was absent previously. Doctrine trumps my personal testimony, but since you are accusing us of being heartless, I will offer my testimony. Orthodoxy is life.
Sounds like you just weren't that interested in transformation when you were a Catholic. I have countless friends who have turned to Jesus Christ in Catholic Chruch and transformed their lives. I see a myriad of Catholic Saints who done the same and more. I will offer you my testimony. Catholicism is life.
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
AlexanderOfBergamo
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Traditionalist Christian
Jurisdiction: The Original First Millennium Church
Posts: 706


« Reply #44 on: January 22, 2010, 04:43:10 PM »

Dear Alonso,

I don't want to misrepresent you.....  you believe that the Orthodox are heretics?  you belive that our sacraments are invalid?

If that is what you believe, do not feel inhibited about saying so plainly.  We all appreciate honesty.

This is curious. In the entire thread, it's the Orthodox party saying that Catholics don't have sacramental grace, not the other way around. Catholics call you schismatics, not heretics. Well, until you don't let you contamined by Protestantism (which seems a possibility, since too many Orthodox have begun rejecting the Deuterocanonical books as uninspired, or embracing a "Scripture first" logic when trying to disprove Purgatory and other Catholic doctrines).

As for me, I don't think the vid implies a miracle. God doesn't like to appear in the media.
Catholics have fulness of grace, and so Orthodoxy does. Grace comes from our Lord Jesus Christ through his sacraments. As I didn't think - when I was travelling towards Orthodoxy - that 1.14 billion Catholics worldwide had lost sacramental grace, so I still don't from the other side, now that I've returned to Roman Catholicism: those 250 million Eastern Orthodox and some million Oriental Christians haven't lost sacramental grace which comes from apostolic succession. Yes, I believe in the necessity of apostolic succession. You can't give what you haven't: the Holy Spirit can be given only through the episcopacy through the laying on of hands at Chrismation and Holy Orders, and without a valid episcopacy there's no Holy Spirit, and thus no sacramental grace. Protestant baptisms provide only a limited, extra-ordinary grace, and only to those who receive it according to the teachings of the Church (i.e. an actual restoration by grace of our lost perfect humanity). But the fullness of the Spirit isn't in them.

That's my opinion, of course.

In Christ,    Alex
Logged

"Also in the Catholic Church itself we take great care that we hold that which has been believed everywhere, always, by all. For that is truly and properly Catholic" (St. Vincent of Lérins, "The Commonitory")
Alonso_castillo
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Arquidiósesis de Guadalajara (México)
Posts: 360


Me when younger


« Reply #45 on: January 22, 2010, 04:44:56 PM »

Dear Alonso,

I don't want to misrepresent you.....  you believe that the Orthodox are heretics?  you belive that our sacraments are invalid?

If that is what you believe, do not feel inhibited about saying so plainly.  We all appreciate honesty.

It is not my opinion, but what I can know from the Church:

Taken from the Dominus Iesus

17.  Therefore, there exists a single Church of Christ, which subsists in the Catholic Church, governed by the Successor of Peter and by the Bishops in communion with him.58 The Churches which, while not existing in perfect communion with the Catholic Church, remain united to her by means of the closest bonds, that is, by apostolic succession and a valid Eucharist , are true particular Churches.59 Therefore, the Church of Christ is present and operative also in these Churches, even though they lack full communion with the Catholic Church, since they do not accept the Catholic doctrine of the Primacy, which, according to the will of God, the Bishop of Rome objectively has and exercises over the entire Church.60

Though I don't know if this is the case of your community.

Logged

Nisi Dominus aedificaverit Domum
in vanum laboraverunt qui aedifcant eam
Nisi Dominus custodierit civitatem
frustra vigilant qui custodit Eam
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #46 on: January 22, 2010, 04:51:58 PM »

Dear Alonso,

I don't want to misrepresent you.....  you believe that the Orthodox are heretics?  you belive that our sacraments are invalid?

If that is what you believe, do not feel inhibited about saying so plainly.  We all appreciate honesty.

It is not my opinion, but what I can know from the Church:

Taken from the Dominus Iesus

17.  Therefore, there exists a single Church of Christ, which subsists in the Catholic Church, governed by the Successor of Peter and by the Bishops in communion with him.58 The Churches which, while not existing in perfect communion with the Catholic Church, remain united to her by means of the closest bonds, that is, by apostolic succession and a valid Eucharist , are true particular Churches.59 Therefore, the Church of Christ is present and operative also in these Churches, even though they lack full communion with the Catholic Church, since they do not accept the Catholic doctrine of the Primacy, which, according to the will of God, the Bishop of Rome objectively has and exercises over the entire Church.60

Though I don't know if this is the case of your community.

I am a member of the Russian Orthodox Church.  My Patriarch is Patriarch Kirill of Moscow.  Are we a "true particular Church" and is "the Church of Christ present and operative also in" my Church?
« Last Edit: January 22, 2010, 04:53:14 PM by Irish Hermit » Logged
Alonso_castillo
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Arquidiósesis de Guadalajara (México)
Posts: 360


Me when younger


« Reply #47 on: January 22, 2010, 05:14:59 PM »

^We're quite fine Alonso. Why do you care what we say? Roll Eyes

Eze 3:18, 33:8

1 Tes 5:14

 2 Tes 3:15

Tit 3:10

Logged

Nisi Dominus aedificaverit Domum
in vanum laboraverunt qui aedifcant eam
Nisi Dominus custodierit civitatem
frustra vigilant qui custodit Eam
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #48 on: January 22, 2010, 05:16:17 PM »

Who is Tes?
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Alonso_castillo
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Arquidiósesis de Guadalajara (México)
Posts: 360


Me when younger


« Reply #49 on: January 22, 2010, 05:17:09 PM »

Dear Alonso,

I don't want to misrepresent you.....  you believe that the Orthodox are heretics?  you belive that our sacraments are invalid?

If that is what you believe, do not feel inhibited about saying so plainly.  We all appreciate honesty.

It is not my opinion, but what I can know from the Church:

Taken from the Dominus Iesus

17.  Therefore, there exists a single Church of Christ, which subsists in the Catholic Church, governed by the Successor of Peter and by the Bishops in communion with him.58 The Churches which, while not existing in perfect communion with the Catholic Church, remain united to her by means of the closest bonds, that is, by apostolic succession and a valid Eucharist , are true particular Churches.59 Therefore, the Church of Christ is present and operative also in these Churches, even though they lack full communion with the Catholic Church, since they do not accept the Catholic doctrine of the Primacy, which, according to the will of God, the Bishop of Rome objectively has and exercises over the entire Church.60

Though I don't know if this is the case of your community.

I am a member of the Russian Orthodox Church.  My Patriarch is Patriarch Kirill of Moscow.  Are we a "true particular Church" and is "the Church of Christ present and operative also in" my Church?

I guess that would be answered not by me but from the Congregation for the Unity of Christians. the One presided by Cardinal Walter Kasper.
« Last Edit: January 22, 2010, 05:20:25 PM by Alonso_castillo » Logged

Nisi Dominus aedificaverit Domum
in vanum laboraverunt qui aedifcant eam
Nisi Dominus custodierit civitatem
frustra vigilant qui custodit Eam
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #50 on: January 22, 2010, 05:21:26 PM »

Dear Alonso,

I don't want to misrepresent you.....  you believe that the Orthodox are heretics?  you belive that our sacraments are invalid?

If that is what you believe, do not feel inhibited about saying so plainly.  We all appreciate honesty.

It is not my opinion, but what I can know from the Church:

Taken from the Dominus Iesus

17.  Therefore, there exists a single Church of Christ, which subsists in the Catholic Church, governed by the Successor of Peter and by the Bishops in communion with him.58 The Churches which, while not existing in perfect communion with the Catholic Church, remain united to her by means of the closest bonds, that is, by apostolic succession and a valid Eucharist , are true particular Churches.59 Therefore, the Church of Christ is present and operative also in these Churches, even though they lack full communion with the Catholic Church, since they do not accept the Catholic doctrine of the Primacy, which, according to the will of God, the Bishop of Rome objectively has and exercises over the entire Church.60

Though I don't know if this is the case of your community.

I am a member of the Russian Orthodox Church.  My Patriarch is Patriarch Kirill of Moscow.  Are we a "true particular Church" and is "the Church of Christ present and operative also in" my Church?

I guess that would be answered not by me but from the Congregation for the Unity of Christians. the One presided by Cardinal Walter Kasper.

So you cannot say if we have a valid Eucharist or not.
Logged
Alonso_castillo
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Arquidiósesis de Guadalajara (México)
Posts: 360


Me when younger


« Reply #51 on: January 22, 2010, 05:22:18 PM »

Who is Tes?

Sorry it was in spanish, I meant Thessalonians
Logged

Nisi Dominus aedificaverit Domum
in vanum laboraverunt qui aedifcant eam
Nisi Dominus custodierit civitatem
frustra vigilant qui custodit Eam
Alonso_castillo
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Arquidiósesis de Guadalajara (México)
Posts: 360


Me when younger


« Reply #52 on: January 22, 2010, 05:25:37 PM »

Dear Alonso,

I don't want to misrepresent you.....  you believe that the Orthodox are heretics?  you belive that our sacraments are invalid?

If that is what you believe, do not feel inhibited about saying so plainly.  We all appreciate honesty.

It is not my opinion, but what I can know from the Church:

Taken from the Dominus Iesus

17.  Therefore, there exists a single Church of Christ, which subsists in the Catholic Church, governed by the Successor of Peter and by the Bishops in communion with him.58 The Churches which, while not existing in perfect communion with the Catholic Church, remain united to her by means of the closest bonds, that is, by apostolic succession and a valid Eucharist , are true particular Churches.59 Therefore, the Church of Christ is present and operative also in these Churches, even though they lack full communion with the Catholic Church, since they do not accept the Catholic doctrine of the Primacy, which, according to the will of God, the Bishop of Rome objectively has and exercises over the entire Church.60

Though I don't know if this is the case of your community.

I am a member of the Russian Orthodox Church.  My Patriarch is Patriarch Kirill of Moscow.  Are we a "true particular Church" and is "the Church of Christ present and operative also in" my Church?

I guess that would be answered not by me but from the Congregation for the Unity of Christians. the One presided by Cardinal Walter Kasper.

So you cannot say if we have a valid Eucharist or not.

I can imagine you have valid sacraments, that is  why we are trying to be in commmunion, Kasper and Zizoulas are cochairs from Catholicism and Orthodoxy, either if it is Greek or Russian, of the Theological Comision for Dialoge  Between Catholic-Orthodox.
Logged

Nisi Dominus aedificaverit Domum
in vanum laboraverunt qui aedifcant eam
Nisi Dominus custodierit civitatem
frustra vigilant qui custodit Eam
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #53 on: January 22, 2010, 05:44:12 PM »


I don't see anything. What am I missing?

In the original video the wafer appears to move at about 0:38.

Ahh, I see. Maybe the first time through I thought that was just a hitch in the video due to poor quality or something. I guess I was looking for the wafer to get up and start dancing and singing a Frank Sinatra song or something. angel

LOL
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 #54 on: January 22, 2010, 05:47:38 PM »

You think the devil is not capable of performing such signs?
Oh yes, all Christians in the west were suddenly denied the life giving Body and Blood of Christ just because of some squabble between a Cardinal and a Patriarch. EO sacramental theology makes no sense.

Who are you calling 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 #55 on: January 22, 2010, 05:51:01 PM »

You think the devil is not capable of performing such signs?
Oh yes, all Christians in the west were suddenly denied the life giving Body and Blood of Christ just because of some squabble between a Cardinal and a Patriarch. EO sacramental theology makes no sense.

Any more than your sacramental theology that says the Body of Christ can exist wherever someone who has "valid apostolic succession" exists, thus ensuring that schismatics can perpetually blaspheme against God and condemn their souls to hell every time they celebrate the Liturgy? Holy Communion is a mystery OF the Church, and exists IN the Church, for those with Orthodox faith; otherwise it really just is "hocus pocus."

No one says Roman Catholics lost sacramental grace in 1054. It was a gradual process. But you already knew that (it just doesn't sound as snarky as saying what you did).

Agreed. Only difference is I would say it was a process that began slightly in 449 (writing of the Tome of Leo) and began accelerating in 1014 (addition of the filioque at Rome).
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 #56 on: January 22, 2010, 05:52:09 PM »


What is hocus pocus is to say that grace magically disappeared from my Church.

It wasn't magical. It was the result of numerous choices to stray from the Apostolic faith.
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
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,417


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #57 on: January 22, 2010, 05:52:49 PM »


What is hocus pocus is to say that grace magically disappeared from my Church.

It wasn't magical. It was the result of numerous choices to stray from the Apostolic faith.
Bold faced lie.
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #58 on: January 22, 2010, 05:52:59 PM »


I know. Its a weird position that Father has. Very weird indeed.

 Roll Eyes
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 #59 on: January 22, 2010, 05:53:17 PM »


What is hocus pocus is to say that grace magically disappeared from my Church.

It wasn't magical. It was the result of numerous choices to stray from the Apostolic faith.
Bold faced lie.

Apparently you don't understand what a lie is.
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
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,417


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #60 on: January 22, 2010, 05:53:33 PM »


What is hocus pocus is to say that grace magically disappeared from my Church.

It wasn't magical. It was the result of numerous choices to stray from the Apostolic faith.
Bold faced lie.

Apparently you don't understand what a lie is.
I do. you don't.
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #61 on: January 22, 2010, 06:03:41 PM »


What is really weird to me is that idea that suddenly all the western Christians peasants who may have never even heard of the Patriarch of Constantinople were suddenly denied the Body and Blood of the Lord whom they loved.

Even if the laity are honest people with an orthodox spirit they cannot have grace mediated to them through heretics. If the clergy go heretical then they ruin the chance of their laity having grace administered to them through them. That's not to say that God won't find other ways of relating to them, but they certainly won't be receiving grace where it is dependent upon the mediation of a heretic. It's sort of like how things worked in the Fall. There may very well have been very decent people who did not "deserve" the consequences of what happened to them, but it nonetheless did.


What I find unbelievalbe is that men and women who loved Jesus Christ as much as St. John of the Cross or St. Teresa of Avila did, were worshiping and receiving bread and wine and not Jesus Christ. Such profound spiritual growth seen in persons like St. John Viani or St. Padre Pio, would be impossible with "false and graceless sacraments".

No, it really wouldn't. Look at the OT Fathers. They did it without sanctifying grace.
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
ignatius
Baptacathadox
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic > Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA - Diocese of the South
Posts: 1,690


My Son Aidan... :-)


« Reply #62 on: January 22, 2010, 06:05:31 PM »

The Romanist wafers?!  Shocked

I can appreciate your views that our Roman Church (RC for short) isn't Apostolic and all but my guess is your don't go out of your way making fun of Anglicans or Baptists in the same manner. Please don't make these disrespectful comments of our Holy Sacraments. That is just a personal request.
Logged

St Basil the Great (330-379 A.D.): “I think then that the one goal of all who are really and truly serving the Lord ought to be to bring back to union the churches who have at different times and in diverse manners divided from one another.”
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #63 on: January 22, 2010, 06:08:35 PM »


What is hocus pocus is to say that grace magically disappeared from my Church.

It wasn't magical. It was the result of numerous choices to stray from the Apostolic faith.
Bold faced lie.

Apparently you don't understand what a lie is.
I do. you don't.

I'm pretty sure you're wrong. Let me demonstrate. Here's Wikipedia's definition of a lie:

"A lie (also called prevarication, falsehood) is a type of deception in the form of an untruthful statement, especially with the intention to deceive others, often with the further intention to maintain a secret or reputation, protect someone's feelings or to avoid a punishment or repercussion for one's actions."

I honestly believe that your organization has strayed from the Apostolic faith. I am intending to bring you to the truth by telling you this. As such, what I said is clearly not a lie, even if it is, perhaps, a falsehood. At the very worst, thus, I am mistaken.
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 #64 on: January 22, 2010, 06:10:46 PM »

What is hocus pocus is to say that grace magically disappeared from my Church.
'Magically?'

Who said that, other than you?

I see someone has already noted it was a gradual process.
How do sacraments "gradually" become fake. That is absurd.

The proper conditions for them to be sacraments slowly fade until they get to the point that the grace drains out of them.
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 #65 on: January 22, 2010, 06:14:03 PM »


St Basil makes a distinction in his First Canonical Epistle between divisions "IN" the Church (parasynagogue) and divisions "FROM" the Church (schism).  The former group of people would still be Orthodox but in an irregular situation (and the leaders guilty of some personal sin of disobedience).

Would any groups today qualify as "parasynagogue", in your opinion? I'm not asking for the purpose of pointing fingers, per say, but simply for a more clear picture of your meaning.
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
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,417


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #66 on: January 22, 2010, 06:15:08 PM »

What is hocus pocus is to say that grace magically disappeared from my Church.
'Magically?'

Who said that, other than you?

I see someone has already noted it was a gradual process.
How do sacraments "gradually" become fake. That is absurd.

The proper conditions for them to be sacraments slowly fade until they get to the point that the grace drains out of them.
That's what I am saying. Its silly. How can a sacrament have less and less grace. What? One day the Eucharist was the body and blood of Christ, the next it was 1/2 of the Body and Blood of Christ, then the next is was 1/4, etc. ect? Or one day a person's sins were totally forgiven in confession but the next the were only 29/32 forgiven?
« Last Edit: January 22, 2010, 06:15:56 PM by Papist » Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #67 on: January 22, 2010, 06:15:36 PM »



What is really weird to me is that idea that suddenly all the western Christians peasants who may have never even heard of the Patriarch of Constantinople were suddenly denied the Body and Blood of the Lord whom they loved. What I find unbelievalbe is that men and women who loved Jesus Christ as much as St. John of the Cross or St. Teresa of Avila did, were worshiping and receiving bread and wine and not Jesus Christ. Such profound spiritual growth seen in persons like St. John Viani or St. Padre Pio, would be impossible with "false and graceless sacraments". I think the EO position has to ignore the reality.

I agree.

The only way that one could come to this understanding of holy people necessarily indicating the Church is if one does not understand the Orthodox understanding of the Church and its Sacraments.
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 #68 on: January 22, 2010, 06:16:33 PM »

What is hocus pocus is to say that grace magically disappeared from my Church.
'Magically?'

Who said that, other than you?

I see someone has already noted it was a gradual process.
How do sacraments "gradually" become fake. That is absurd.

The proper conditions for them to be sacraments slowly fade until they get to the point that the grace drains out of them.
That's what I am saying. Its silly. How can a sacrament have less and less grace. What? One day the Eucharist was the body and blood of Christ, the next it was 1/2 of the Body and Blood of Christ, then the next is was 1/4, etc. ect? Or one day a persons sins were totally forgiven in confession but the next the were only 29/32 forgiven?

It's already been explained by Fr. Anastasios that this is not what we mean. You're just grabbing at straws again.


Clerical title added to name to grant him the respect due his priestly office  -PtA
« Last Edit: January 22, 2010, 06:44:06 PM by PeterTheAleut » 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
John of the North
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christianity
Jurisdiction: Eparchy of Edmonton and the West
Posts: 3,533


Christ is Risen!

tgild
« Reply #69 on: January 22, 2010, 06:16:43 PM »


What is hocus pocus is to say that grace magically disappeared from my Church.

It wasn't magical. It was the result of numerous choices to stray from the Apostolic faith.
Bold faced lie.

Apparently you don't understand what a lie is.
I do. you don't.

I'm pretty sure you're wrong. Let me demonstrate. Here's Wikipedia's definition of a lie:

"A lie (also called prevarication, falsehood) is a type of deception in the form of an untruthful statement, especially with the intention to deceive others, often with the further intention to maintain a secret or reputation, protect someone's feelings or to avoid a punishment or repercussion for one's actions."

I honestly believe that your organization has strayed from the Apostolic faith. I am intending to bring you to the truth by telling you this. As such, what I said is clearly not a lie, even if it is, perhaps, a falsehood. At the very worst, thus, I am mistaken.

You are an inquirer to Oriental Orthodoxy after leaving Eastern Orthodoxy a short time after being received. You are still trying to figure what truth is yourself, why lecture Papist on it??
Logged

"Christianity is not a philosophy, not a doctrine, but life." - Elder Sophrony (Sakharov)
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,417


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #70 on: January 22, 2010, 06:17:18 PM »



What is really weird to me is that idea that suddenly all the western Christians peasants who may have never even heard of the Patriarch of Constantinople were suddenly denied the Body and Blood of the Lord whom they loved. What I find unbelievalbe is that men and women who loved Jesus Christ as much as St. John of the Cross or St. Teresa of Avila did, were worshiping and receiving bread and wine and not Jesus Christ. Such profound spiritual growth seen in persons like St. John Viani or St. Padre Pio, would be impossible with "false and graceless sacraments". I think the EO position has to ignore the reality.

I agree.

The only way that one could come to this understanding of holy people necessarily indicating the Church is if one does not understand the Orthodox understanding of the Church and its Sacraments.
Well please do share. Because from what I can tell, etremely holy persons such as Sts. John of the Cross and Teresa of Avila achieved great sanctity while worshiping bread.
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,487


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #71 on: January 22, 2010, 06:17:38 PM »

Alonso, you are the one with the hard heart.

Your Church could never cure me of my sins, despite years of confession to your priests and reception of your sacraments.  But from the time of my baptism in the Orthodox Church, I have experienced what new life is, have grown in the love of Christ, and have experienced grace in a way that was absent previously. Doctrine trumps my personal testimony, but since you are accusing us of being heartless, I will offer my testimony. Orthodoxy is life.
Sounds like you just weren't that interested in transformation when you were a Catholic.

Only God knows how much I struggled when I was a Roman Catholic. You don't.

Quote
I have countless friends who have turned to Jesus Christ in Catholic Chruch and transformed their lives. I see a myriad of Catholic Saints who done the same and more. I will offer you my testimony. Catholicism is life.

If I were to respond, it would necessitate denigrating your personal spiritual struggles, which I have decided would not be helpful.
Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching. Also, I served as an Orthodox priest from 2008-2013, before resigning.
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,417


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #72 on: January 22, 2010, 06:17:49 PM »

What is hocus pocus is to say that grace magically disappeared from my Church.
'Magically?'

Who said that, other than you?

I see someone has already noted it was a gradual process.
How do sacraments "gradually" become fake. That is absurd.

The proper conditions for them to be sacraments slowly fade until they get to the point that the grace drains out of them.
That's what I am saying. Its silly. How can a sacrament have less and less grace. What? One day the Eucharist was the body and blood of Christ, the next it was 1/2 of the Body and Blood of Christ, then the next is was 1/4, etc. ect? Or one day a persons sins were totally forgiven in confession but the next the were only 29/32 forgiven?

It's already been explained by Anastasios that this is not what we mean. You're just grabbing at straws again.
No I am not. I am showing why your position doesn't work.
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #73 on: January 22, 2010, 06:18:29 PM »

I would like to reemphasize what I have said numerous times on this site, though; while I do not believe that sacramental grace exists outside the Church, I believe there is charismatic grace, and that God does not abandon ignorant people who have done nothing positive to break communion with the Church. (Nor do I think a loving God would create Native Americans from 33AD until the 1500's knowing they would all die without baptism and go to hell; there must be some provision for such people).
So you see no difference between the grace recieved by a Trinitarian Christian that is not in communion with the Eastern Orthodox Church and the grace received by a pagan?

Not necessarily the case, but the former nonetheless does not have sacramental grace.
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
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,417


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #74 on: January 22, 2010, 06:18:48 PM »

Alonso, you are the one with the hard heart.

Your Church could never cure me of my sins, despite years of confession to your priests and reception of your sacraments.  But from the time of my baptism in the Orthodox Church, I have experienced what new life is, have grown in the love of Christ, and have experienced grace in a way that was absent previously. Doctrine trumps my personal testimony, but since you are accusing us of being heartless, I will offer my testimony. Orthodoxy is life.
Sounds like you just weren't that interested in transformation when you were a Catholic.

Only God knows how much I struggled when I was a Roman Catholic. You don't.

Quote
I have countless friends who have turned to Jesus Christ in Catholic Chruch and transformed their lives. I see a myriad of Catholic Saints who done the same and more. I will offer you my testimony. Catholicism is life.

If I were to respond, it would necessitate denigrating your personal spiritual struggles, which I have decided would not be helpful.
What does this have to do with my spiritual struggles. I was talking about many holy friends and then the undeniable sanctity of the saints.
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,417


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #75 on: January 22, 2010, 06:20:20 PM »

I would like to reemphasize what I have said numerous times on this site, though; while I do not believe that sacramental grace exists outside the Church, I believe there is charismatic grace, and that God does not abandon ignorant people who have done nothing positive to break communion with the Church. (Nor do I think a loving God would create Native Americans from 33AD until the 1500's knowing they would all die without baptism and go to hell; there must be some provision for such people).
So you see no difference between the grace recieved by a Trinitarian Christian that is not in communion with the Eastern Orthodox Church and the grace received by a pagan?

Not necessarily the case, but the former nonetheless does not have sacramental grace.
Well, according to the line of thinking I am seeing in this thread, neither has sacramental grace, and at best the two groups both can receive "charismatic grace" (whatever that means), and so non-Byzatine Trinitarian Christians are in the same boat as Pagans.
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,417


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #76 on: January 22, 2010, 06:22:27 PM »



Only God knows how much I struggled when I was a Roman Catholic. You don't.


Father, you right, I should not comment on your personal spiritual struggles. I was very wrong for doing this. I apologize.
« Last Edit: January 22, 2010, 06:29:29 PM by Papist » Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #77 on: January 22, 2010, 06:25:55 PM »

You think the devil is not capable of performing such signs?
Oh yes, all Christians in the west were suddenly denied the life giving Body and Blood of Christ just because of some squabble between a Cardinal and a Patriarch. EO sacramental theology makes no sense.

Who are you calling 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 #78 on: January 22, 2010, 06:28:08 PM »


but my guess is your don't go out of your way making fun of Anglicans or Baptists in the same manner. Please don't make these disrespectful comments of our Holy Sacraments. That is just a personal request.

Making fun of?

Disrespectful comments?

I was just expressing shock at ialmisry's seeming admission to believe in the Real Presence in Romanist ordinances.
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
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,417


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #79 on: January 22, 2010, 06:28:24 PM »

You think the devil is not capable of performing such signs?
Oh yes, all Christians in the west were suddenly denied the life giving Body and Blood of Christ just because of some squabble between a Cardinal and a Patriarch. EO sacramental theology makes no sense.

Who are you calling EO?
Eastern Orthodox
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #80 on: January 22, 2010, 06:30:41 PM »


What is hocus pocus is to say that grace magically disappeared from my Church.

It wasn't magical. It was the result of numerous choices to stray from the Apostolic faith.
Bold faced lie.

Apparently you don't understand what a lie is.
I do. you don't.

I'm pretty sure you're wrong. Let me demonstrate. Here's Wikipedia's definition of a lie:

"A lie (also called prevarication, falsehood) is a type of deception in the form of an untruthful statement, especially with the intention to deceive others, often with the further intention to maintain a secret or reputation, protect someone's feelings or to avoid a punishment or repercussion for one's actions."

I honestly believe that your organization has strayed from the Apostolic faith. I am intending to bring you to the truth by telling you this. As such, what I said is clearly not a lie, even if it is, perhaps, a falsehood. At the very worst, thus, I am mistaken.

You are an inquirer to Oriental Orthodoxy after leaving Eastern Orthodoxy a short time after being received. You are still trying to figure what truth is yourself, why lecture Papist on it??

My understanding of doctrinal truth has really not shifted all that much in the past 3 years. The only major difference that has occurred has been my perception of the orthodoxy of certain aspects of the Council of Chalcedon. It seems you are exaggerating the supposed lack of consistency in my doctrinal understandings.
« Last Edit: January 22, 2010, 06:31:03 PM by deusveritasest » 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 #81 on: January 22, 2010, 06:31:31 PM »

You think the devil is not capable of performing such signs?
Oh yes, all Christians in the west were suddenly denied the life giving Body and Blood of Christ just because of some squabble between a Cardinal and a Patriarch. EO sacramental theology makes no sense.

Who are you calling EO?
Eastern Orthodox

Yes, I'm wondering who you are calling Eastern Orthodox?
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 #82 on: January 22, 2010, 06:33:17 PM »



What is really weird to me is that idea that suddenly all the western Christians peasants who may have never even heard of the Patriarch of Constantinople were suddenly denied the Body and Blood of the Lord whom they loved. What I find unbelievalbe is that men and women who loved Jesus Christ as much as St. John of the Cross or St. Teresa of Avila did, were worshiping and receiving bread and wine and not Jesus Christ. Such profound spiritual growth seen in persons like St. John Viani or St. Padre Pio, would be impossible with "false and graceless sacraments". I think the EO position has to ignore the reality.

I agree.

The only way that one could come to this understanding of holy people necessarily indicating the Church is if one does not understand the Orthodox understanding of the Church and its Sacraments.
Well please do share. Because from what I can tell, etremely holy persons such as Sts. John of the Cross and Teresa of Avila achieved great sanctity while worshiping bread.

They did.  Smiley

That's exactly what I'm saying.

But not really. They were worshiping the Lord Jesus. They were directing their worship towards something they thought was a legitimate manifestation of Him. It was not. But nonetheless they were worshiping the Lord.
« Last Edit: January 22, 2010, 06:34:28 PM by deusveritasest » 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
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,417


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #83 on: January 22, 2010, 06:33:48 PM »

You think the devil is not capable of performing such signs?
Oh yes, all Christians in the west were suddenly denied the life giving Body and Blood of Christ just because of some squabble between a Cardinal and a Patriarch. EO sacramental theology makes no sense.

Who are you calling EO?
Eastern Orthodox

Yes, I'm wondering who you are calling Eastern Orthodox?
I am not calling you EO, I know you have not yet decided on that matter. But the position you are espousing is the EO position, though it may be shared by the OO churches as well. I don't know for certain.
Just know that by EO I am talking about the sacramental theology being espoused by many in this thread.
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,417


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #84 on: January 22, 2010, 06:34:45 PM »



What is really weird to me is that idea that suddenly all the western Christians peasants who may have never even heard of the Patriarch of Constantinople were suddenly denied the Body and Blood of the Lord whom they loved. What I find unbelievalbe is that men and women who loved Jesus Christ as much as St. John of the Cross or St. Teresa of Avila did, were worshiping and receiving bread and wine and not Jesus Christ. Such profound spiritual growth seen in persons like St. John Viani or St. Padre Pio, would be impossible with "false and graceless sacraments". I think the EO position has to ignore the reality.

I agree.

The only way that one could come to this understanding of holy people necessarily indicating the Church is if one does not understand the Orthodox understanding of the Church and its Sacraments.
Well please do share. Because from what I can tell, extremely holy persons such as Sts. John of the Cross and Teresa of Avila achieved great sanctity while worshiping bread.

They did.  Smiley

That's exactly what I'm saying.
So how do idolaters achieve such sanctity? I am really confused now.
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,417


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #85 on: January 22, 2010, 06:35:48 PM »



But not really. They were worshiping the Lord Jesus. They were directing their worship towards something they thought was a legitimate manifestation of Him. It was not. But nonetheless they were worshiping the Lord.
Didn't the Israelites in the desert believe that the golden calf was Yaweh?
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #86 on: January 22, 2010, 06:36:09 PM »

You think the devil is not capable of performing such signs?
Oh yes, all Christians in the west were suddenly denied the life giving Body and Blood of Christ just because of some squabble between a Cardinal and a Patriarch. EO sacramental theology makes no sense.

Who are you calling EO?
Eastern Orthodox

Yes, I'm wondering who you are calling Eastern Orthodox?
I am not calling you EO, I know you have not yet decided on that matter. But the position you are espousing is the EO position, though it may be shared by the OO churches as well. I don't know for certain.
Just know that by EO I am talking about the sacramental theology being espoused by many in this thread.

You were explicitly talking to me. I was the only one who had made a negative statement about the OP by that time. You explicitly called my position EO and also said that my view was based off of the schism between a Cardinal and the Bishop of Constantinople. It seems pretty strongly like you were confusing me for an 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 #87 on: January 22, 2010, 06:36:26 PM »



But not really. They were worshiping the Lord Jesus. They were directing their worship towards something they thought was a legitimate manifestation of Him. It was not. But nonetheless they were worshiping the Lord.
Didn't the Israelites in the desert believe that the golden calf was Yaweh?

Not so far as I know.
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
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,417


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #88 on: January 22, 2010, 06:38:22 PM »



But not really. They were worshiping the Lord Jesus. They were directing their worship towards something they thought was a legitimate manifestation of Him. It was not. But nonetheless they were worshiping the Lord.
Didn't the Israelites in the desert believe that the golden calf was Yaweh?

Not so far as I know.
I will have to look it up but didn't some say something to the effect of, "See, Israel, here is your god who lead you out of Egypt," with reference to the golden calf?
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #89 on: January 22, 2010, 06:38:52 PM »

What is hocus pocus is to say that grace magically disappeared from my Church.
'Magically?'

Who said that, other than you?

I see someone has already noted it was a gradual process.
How do sacraments "gradually" become fake. That is absurd.

The proper conditions for them to be sacraments slowly fade until they get to the point that the grace drains out of them.
That's what I am saying. Its silly. How can a sacrament have less and less grace. What? One day the Eucharist was the body and blood of Christ, the next it was 1/2 of the Body and Blood of Christ, then the next is was 1/4, etc. ect? Or one day a persons sins were totally forgiven in confession but the next the were only 29/32 forgiven?

It's already been explained by Anastasios that this is not what we mean. You're just grabbing at straws again.
No I am not. I am showing why your position doesn't work.

Seeing as how we never said that sacramental grace was at one point partially there, it's clearly a straw man. Fr. Anastasios clearly stated that it is "all or nothing". The gradual part of the process is the proper conditions for Sacraments disappearing and it happening at various times in various local churches. As to any particular local church, the sacramental grace is either there or not.


Post modified to prepend our admin's name with his proper clerical title.  Please remember to give Fr. Anastasios (and all our priests) the respect due their priestly office by referring to them by their proper titles.  Thank you.

- PeterTheAleut
« Last Edit: January 23, 2010, 08:44:48 AM by PeterTheAleut » 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
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,417


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #90 on: January 22, 2010, 06:39:23 PM »

You think the devil is not capable of performing such signs?
Oh yes, all Christians in the west were suddenly denied the life giving Body and Blood of Christ just because of some squabble between a Cardinal and a Patriarch. EO sacramental theology makes no sense.

Who are you calling EO?
Eastern Orthodox

Yes, I'm wondering who you are calling Eastern Orthodox?
I am not calling you EO, I know you have not yet decided on that matter. But the position you are espousing is the EO position, though it may be shared by the OO churches as well. I don't know for certain.
Just know that by EO I am talking about the sacramental theology being espoused by many in this thread.

You were explicitly talking to me. I was the only one who had made a negative statement about the OP by that time. You explicitly called my position EO and also said that my view was based off of the schism between a Cardinal and the Bishop of Constantinople. It seems pretty strongly like you were confusing me for an EO.
I apologize if that is the message you got. I think this is a side discussion, so shall we continue our discussion on sacramental theology?
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,417


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #91 on: January 22, 2010, 06:40:33 PM »

What is hocus pocus is to say that grace magically disappeared from my Church.
'Magically?'

Who said that, other than you?

I see someone has already noted it was a gradual process.
How do sacraments "gradually" become fake. That is absurd.

The proper conditions for them to be sacraments slowly fade until they get to the point that the grace drains out of them.
That's what I am saying. Its silly. How can a sacrament have less and less grace. What? One day the Eucharist was the body and blood of Christ, the next it was 1/2 of the Body and Blood of Christ, then the next is was 1/4, etc. ect? Or one day a persons sins were totally forgiven in confession but the next the were only 29/32 forgiven?

It's already been explained by Anastasios that this is not what we mean. You're just grabbing at straws again.
No I am not. I am showing why your position doesn't work.

Seeing as how we never said that sacramental grace was at one point partially there, it's clearly a straw man. Anastasios clearly stated that it is "all or nothing". The gradual part of the process is the proper conditions for Sacraments disappearing and it happening at various times in various local churches. As to any particular local church, the sacramental grace is either there or not.
So it was in one part of the Catholic Church and not in another? So Catholics in Ireland might have been receiving the Body and Blood of Christ while those in Rome were not? Would this be true even though those Catholics were in communion with Rome?
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #92 on: January 22, 2010, 06:41:27 PM »


What does this have to do with my spiritual struggles. I was talking about many holy friends and then the undeniable sanctity of the saints.

In case this hasn't been made clear enough, holy people exist outside of the Church and sacramental grace, even in the Augustinian view of Sacraments. I don't see why you're thus seeing it as proof of Sacraments being in your religious group.
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 #93 on: January 22, 2010, 06:43:01 PM »

I would like to reemphasize what I have said numerous times on this site, though; while I do not believe that sacramental grace exists outside the Church, I believe there is charismatic grace, and that God does not abandon ignorant people who have done nothing positive to break communion with the Church. (Nor do I think a loving God would create Native Americans from 33AD until the 1500's knowing they would all die without baptism and go to hell; there must be some provision for such people).
So you see no difference between the grace recieved by a Trinitarian Christian that is not in communion with the Eastern Orthodox Church and the grace received by a pagan?

Not necessarily the case, but the former nonetheless does not have sacramental grace.
Well, according to the line of thinking I am seeing in this thread, neither has sacramental grace, and at best the two groups both can receive "charismatic grace" (whatever that means), and so non-Byzatine Trinitarian Christians are in the same boat as Pagans.

Trinitarian Christians could easily be viewed as receiving greater charismatic grace than Pagans.
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
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,417


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #94 on: January 22, 2010, 06:45:44 PM »


What does this have to do with my spiritual struggles. I was talking about many holy friends and then the undeniable sanctity of the saints.

In case this hasn't been made clear enough, holy people exist outside of the Church and sacramental grace, even in the Augustinian view of Sacraments. I don't see why you're thus seeing it as proof of Sacraments being in your religious group.
Because I don't think people can become holy by worshiping bread.
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #95 on: January 22, 2010, 06:46:19 PM »



What is really weird to me is that idea that suddenly all the western Christians peasants who may have never even heard of the Patriarch of Constantinople were suddenly denied the Body and Blood of the Lord whom they loved. What I find unbelievalbe is that men and women who loved Jesus Christ as much as St. John of the Cross or St. Teresa of Avila did, were worshiping and receiving bread and wine and not Jesus Christ. Such profound spiritual growth seen in persons like St. John Viani or St. Padre Pio, would be impossible with "false and graceless sacraments". I think the EO position has to ignore the reality.

I agree.

The only way that one could come to this understanding of holy people necessarily indicating the Church is if one does not understand the Orthodox understanding of the Church and its Sacraments.
Well please do share. Because from what I can tell, extremely holy persons such as Sts. John of the Cross and Teresa of Avila achieved great sanctity while worshiping bread.

They did.  Smiley

That's exactly what I'm saying.
So how do idolaters achieve such sanctity? I am really confused now.

By the mercy of God.
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 #96 on: January 22, 2010, 06:46:58 PM »


What does this have to do with my spiritual struggles. I was talking about many holy friends and then the undeniable sanctity of the saints.

In case this hasn't been made clear enough, holy people exist outside of the Church and sacramental grace, even in the Augustinian view of Sacraments. I don't see why you're thus seeing it as proof of Sacraments being in your religious group.
Because I don't think people can become holy by worshiping bread.

You think people cannot be made holy without the Sacraments?
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
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,417


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #97 on: January 22, 2010, 06:47:03 PM »



What is really weird to me is that idea that suddenly all the western Christians peasants who may have never even heard of the Patriarch of Constantinople were suddenly denied the Body and Blood of the Lord whom they loved. What I find unbelievalbe is that men and women who loved Jesus Christ as much as St. John of the Cross or St. Teresa of Avila did, were worshiping and receiving bread and wine and not Jesus Christ. Such profound spiritual growth seen in persons like St. John Viani or St. Padre Pio, would be impossible with "false and graceless sacraments". I think the EO position has to ignore the reality.

I agree.

The only way that one could come to this understanding of holy people necessarily indicating the Church is if one does not understand the Orthodox understanding of the Church and its Sacraments.
Well please do share. Because from what I can tell, extremely holy persons such as Sts. John of the Cross and Teresa of Avila achieved great sanctity while worshiping bread.

They did.  Smiley

That's exactly what I'm saying.
So how do idolaters achieve such sanctity? I am really confused now.

By the mercy of God.
Strange, considering how God punshed idolotry in the Old Testament.
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,417


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #98 on: January 22, 2010, 06:47:17 PM »


What does this have to do with my spiritual struggles. I was talking about many holy friends and then the undeniable sanctity of the saints.

In case this hasn't been made clear enough, holy people exist outside of the Church and sacramental grace, even in the Augustinian view of Sacraments. I don't see why you're thus seeing it as proof of Sacraments being in your religious group.
Because I don't think people can become holy by worshiping bread.

You think people cannot be made holy without the Sacraments?
I don't see how people who worship bread instead of God can be made holy.
« Last Edit: January 22, 2010, 06:47:39 PM by Papist » Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #99 on: January 22, 2010, 06:48:02 PM »



But not really. They were worshiping the Lord Jesus. They were directing their worship towards something they thought was a legitimate manifestation of Him. It was not. But nonetheless they were worshiping the Lord.
Didn't the Israelites in the desert believe that the golden calf was Yaweh?

Not so far as I know.
I will have to look it up but didn't some say something to the effect of, "See, Israel, here is your god who lead you out of Egypt," with reference to the golden calf?

I don't know. Let's take a look at it.
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 #100 on: January 22, 2010, 06:49:59 PM »

What is hocus pocus is to say that grace magically disappeared from my Church.
'Magically?'

Who said that, other than you?

I see someone has already noted it was a gradual process.
How do sacraments "gradually" become fake. That is absurd.

The proper conditions for them to be sacraments slowly fade until they get to the point that the grace drains out of them.
That's what I am saying. Its silly. How can a sacrament have less and less grace. What? One day the Eucharist was the body and blood of Christ, the next it was 1/2 of the Body and Blood of Christ, then the next is was 1/4, etc. ect? Or one day a persons sins were totally forgiven in confession but the next the were only 29/32 forgiven?

It's already been explained by Anastasios that this is not what we mean. You're just grabbing at straws again.
No I am not. I am showing why your position doesn't work.

Seeing as how we never said that sacramental grace was at one point partially there, it's clearly a straw man. Anastasios clearly stated that it is "all or nothing". The gradual part of the process is the proper conditions for Sacraments disappearing and it happening at various times in various local churches. As to any particular local church, the sacramental grace is either there or not.
So it was in one part of the Catholic Church and not in another? So Catholics in Ireland might have been receiving the Body and Blood of Christ while those in Rome were not? Would this be true even though those Catholics were in communion with Rome?

Actually, there is a popular EO tradition that the church of the British Isles remained with grace until the Norman invasion in 1066.
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 #101 on: January 22, 2010, 06:53:01 PM »



What is really weird to me is that idea that suddenly all the western Christians peasants who may have never even heard of the Patriarch of Constantinople were suddenly denied the Body and Blood of the Lord whom they loved. What I find unbelievalbe is that men and women who loved Jesus Christ as much as St. John of the Cross or St. Teresa of Avila did, were worshiping and receiving bread and wine and not Jesus Christ. Such profound spiritual growth seen in persons like St. John Viani or St. Padre Pio, would be impossible with "false and graceless sacraments". I think the EO position has to ignore the reality.

I agree.

The only way that one could come to this understanding of holy people necessarily indicating the Church is if one does not understand the Orthodox understanding of the Church and its Sacraments.
Well please do share. Because from what I can tell, extremely holy persons such as Sts. John of the Cross and Teresa of Avila achieved great sanctity while worshiping bread.

They did.  Smiley

That's exactly what I'm saying.
So how do idolaters achieve such sanctity? I am really confused now.

By the mercy of God.
Strange, considering how God punshed idolotry in the Old Testament.

Honestly, I think it is a bit of a straw man because I never said that I believed the Roman Eucharist was idolatrous.
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 #102 on: January 22, 2010, 06:54:26 PM »


What does this have to do with my spiritual struggles. I was talking about many holy friends and then the undeniable sanctity of the saints.

In case this hasn't been made clear enough, holy people exist outside of the Church and sacramental grace, even in the Augustinian view of Sacraments. I don't see why you're thus seeing it as proof of Sacraments being in your religious group.
Because I don't think people can become holy by worshiping bread.

You think people cannot be made holy without the Sacraments?
I don't see how people who worship bread instead of God can be made holy.

They are worshiping God (in so far as this is possible in the context of your erroneous theology). They are mistakenly using bread as a vehicle for this worship thinking that it is God.
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
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,487


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #103 on: January 22, 2010, 07:21:57 PM »


What does this have to do with my spiritual struggles. I was talking about many holy friends and then the undeniable sanctity of the saints.

Exactly. Your, your friends, and your saints'. I am not interested in turning this in to a contest.
Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching. Also, I served as an Orthodox priest from 2008-2013, before resigning.
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,487


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #104 on: January 22, 2010, 07:22:54 PM »


What does this have to do with my spiritual struggles. I was talking about many holy friends and then the undeniable sanctity of the saints.

In case this hasn't been made clear enough, holy people exist outside of the Church and sacramental grace, even in the Augustinian view of Sacraments. I don't see why you're thus seeing it as proof of Sacraments being in your religious group.
Because I don't think people can become holy by worshiping bread.

You think people cannot be made holy without the Sacraments?
I don't see how people who worship bread instead of God can be made holy.

So you don't know any High Church Anglicans that are holy?
Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching. Also, I served as an Orthodox priest from 2008-2013, before resigning.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #105 on: January 22, 2010, 11:52:31 PM »

I would like to reemphasize what I have said numerous times on this site, though; while I do not believe that sacramental grace exists outside the Church, I believe there is charismatic grace, and that God does not abandon ignorant people who have done nothing positive to break communion with the Church. (Nor do I think a loving God would create Native Americans from 33AD until the 1500's knowing they would all die without baptism and go to hell; there must be some provision for such people).
So you see no difference between the grace recieved by a Trinitarian Christian that is not in communion with the Eastern Orthodox Church and the grace received by a pagan?

Not necessarily the case, but the former nonetheless does not have sacramental grace.
Well, according to the line of thinking I am seeing in this thread, neither has sacramental grace, and at best the two groups both can receive "charismatic grace" (whatever that means), and so non-Byzatine Trinitarian Christians are in the same boat as Pagans.

Trinitarian Christians could easily be viewed as receiving greater charismatic grace than Pagans.
and greater responsibility.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 30,501



« Reply #106 on: January 22, 2010, 11:54:16 PM »

Quote
What else do you expect on an Orthodox Forum... it's not like they are going to be overly kind to us... remember of the Massacre of the Latins? Let us count ourselves fortunate we don't live in the East!

Vwe have recorded your IP address, and through various covert means, vwe now know where you live! No one expects the OC.net inquisition! Mwahaha!
« Last Edit: January 22, 2010, 11:55:36 PM by Asteriktos » Logged

"By the way he dies as a human being he shows us what it is to be God." - Fr. John Behr
ChristusDominus
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Latin Rite
Posts: 936


Saint Aloysius Gonzaga


« Reply #107 on: January 23, 2010, 12:08:44 AM »

Quote
What else do you expect on an Orthodox Forum... it's not like they are going to be overly kind to us... remember of the Massacre of the Latins? Let us count ourselves fortunate we don't live in the East!

Vwe have recorded your IP address, and through various covert means, vwe now know where you live! No one expects the OC.net inquisition! Mwahaha!
Cheesy
Logged

There is no more evident sign that anyone is a saint and of the number of the elect, than to see him leading a good life and at the same time a prey to desolation, suffering, and trials. - Saint Aloysius Gonzaga
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #108 on: January 23, 2010, 12:15:01 AM »

What is hocus pocus is to say that grace magically disappeared from my Church.
'Magically?'

Who said that, other than you?

I see someone has already noted it was a gradual process.
How do sacraments "gradually" become fake. That is absurd.

The proper conditions for them to be sacraments slowly fade until they get to the point that the grace drains out of them.
That's what I am saying. Its silly. How can a sacrament have less and less grace. What? One day the Eucharist was the body and blood of Christ, the next it was 1/2 of the Body and Blood of Christ, then the next is was 1/4, etc. ect? Or one day a persons sins were totally forgiven in confession but the next the were only 29/32 forgiven?

It's already been explained by Anastasios that this is not what we mean. You're just grabbing at straws again.
No I am not. I am showing why your position doesn't work.

Seeing as how we never said that sacramental grace was at one point partially there, it's clearly a straw man. Anastasios clearly stated that it is "all or nothing". The gradual part of the process is the proper conditions for Sacraments disappearing and it happening at various times in various local churches. As to any particular local church, the sacramental grace is either there or not.
So it was in one part of the Catholic Church and not in another? So Catholics in Ireland might have been receiving the Body and Blood of Christ while those in Rome were not? Would this be true even though those Catholics were in communion with Rome?

Actually, there is a popular EO tradition that the church of the British Isles remained with grace until the Norman invasion in 1066.

And Ireland, they say, remained Orthodox until the Anglo-Norman invasion and Synod of Cashel of 1172.

We also need to recall that various Orthodox Churches remained in communion with Rome after 1054.  The cessation of communion took place over time.  I think that the Church of Antioch was the last to be in communion, until the mid-12th century?
« Last Edit: January 23, 2010, 12:16:16 AM by Irish Hermit » Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #109 on: January 23, 2010, 12:29:11 AM »


What does this have to do with my spiritual struggles. I was talking about many holy friends and then the undeniable sanctity of the saints.

In case this hasn't been made clear enough, holy people exist outside of the Church and sacramental grace, even in the Augustinian view of Sacraments. I don't see why you're thus seeing it as proof of Sacraments being in your religious group.
Because I don't think people can become holy by worshiping bread.

You think people cannot be made holy without the Sacraments?
I don't see how people who worship bread instead of God can be made holy.

They are worshiping God (in so far as this is possible in the context of your erroneous theology). They are mistakenly using bread as a vehicle for this worship thinking that it is God.

As we know, the Orthodox do not have a consistent teaching on this.  For at least the last 400 years the Russian Church has believed Catholic sacraments to be efficacious and grace-filled.  (So it cannot be dismissed as a modern position held by arch-ecumenists!)

Given the recent statements by Pope Shenouda and Bishop Bishoy about baptism among Catholics and Protestants we can draw the conclusion that the Coptic Orthodox would deny the reality of the Catholic Eucharist.  On the other hand, another OO Church, the Armenians, would affirm baptism and priesthood and eucharist for the Catholics.

« Last Edit: January 23, 2010, 12:40:36 AM by Irish Hermit » Logged
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,487


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #110 on: January 23, 2010, 10:18:14 AM »

For at least the last 400 years the Russian Church has believed Catholic sacraments to be efficacious and grace-filled.  (So it cannot be dismissed as a modern position held by arch-ecumenists!)

I don't think that is the case, really. From my reading of some of those documents, I get the impression that they are trying to fit traditional Orthodox teaching in to an Augustinian distinction between valid and licit (terms outside of Orthodox consensus).  When they say that Roman Catholic sacraments are valid, they don't mean per se. They mean they have valid form, which can be corrected by the Church (such as when the 3 million Byzantine Rite Catholics were restored to Orthodoxy in the 19th century en masse).

I am not denying that people like (St) Peter Moghila probably believed RC's had grace-filled sacraments, but I don't see "the" Russian Church for the past 400 years teaching that RC sacraments are grace-filled and efficacious. Also, grace-filled and efficacious are actually two different categories.  Those positing a distinction between valid and licit in the West would say that the sacraments of schismatics are valid but NOT efficacious, because of the sin of schism (thus my earlier quip that this doctrine ensures an unending supply of blasphemy, by schismatics being able to perpetually offer the Eucharist, even though it does them no personal good).  Modern RC thought has diverged a bit on this point to where "born Orthodox" are seen as somehow ok, while people like me (who left Roman Catholicism) are probably in big trouble (from their POV).
« Last Edit: January 23, 2010, 10:19:10 AM by Fr. Anastasios » Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching. Also, I served as an Orthodox priest from 2008-2013, before resigning.
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #111 on: January 23, 2010, 11:49:17 AM »

For at least the last 400 years the Russian Church has believed Catholic sacraments to be efficacious and grace-filled.  (So it cannot be dismissed as a modern position held by arch-ecumenists!)

I don't think that is the case, really. From my reading of some of those documents, I get the impression that they are trying to fit traditional Orthodox teaching in to an Augustinian distinction between valid and licit (terms outside of Orthodox consensus).  When they say that Roman Catholic sacraments are valid, they don't mean per se. They mean they have valid form, which can be corrected by the Church (such as when the 3 million Byzantine Rite Catholics were restored to Orthodoxy in the 19th century en masse).

Father,

I am not sure if you subscribe to orthodox-tradition where, for several weeks, Archpriest Alexander Lebedeff of the Russian Orthodox Church (Abroad) has been supplying documents from the past several hundred years showing that the Russian recognition of Roman Catholic sacraments is not "by form only" or "by economy" but simply outright recognition.

I have not kept these messages of his and trying to search Yahoo groups for messages more recent than  one year ago generally won't work these days.... but I could locate these documents and repost them here.  As you can imagine, it is Archbishop Hilarion's statements (2 of them) that the Russian Orthodox Church recognises Roman Catholic sacraments which gave rise to this thread on orthodox-tradition.

I gave my own position earlier - in message #37 in this thread and I imagine it is identical to yours...............

"I believe that the episcopate -the College of the Apostles- cannot exist outside the Church.
 Without the episcopate there can be no Sacraments.  Do you know the writings of Fr Justin
Popovich? - I tend to be a follower of his."


But I cannot claim that this is the universal Orthodox position.  There are varying opinions on how far the 1054 schism removed mysteriological grace from the Church of Rome.  Believe me, as you get older and encounter the varying positions, you learn not to agitated by them and you learn to live with the grey areas!    I know that you understand this since you have written of your personal doubts if mysteriological grace has been removed from the ancient Orthodox Patriarchates even though your own Church has issued official statements saying that it has. 
Logged
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,487


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #112 on: January 23, 2010, 12:07:13 PM »

Father,

I quit the Orthodox-tradition list years ago because of the low-brow quality of much of the discussion.  I would certainly be interested to read some of the statements that Fr Alexander provides, though, so please do provide them.

I recall that Fr John Shaw (now Bp Jerome) posted a few such statements some years ago, which did not strike me as really proving what he said they were saying, but I would be interested to read what Fr Alexander has dug up.

While I hope that I will enjoy as many years on the Earth as you have, I wouldn't guarantee that age produces moderation; after all, our saintly Archbishop Chrysostomos II is almost 90, and he has a rather strict position as far as I can tell...but I don't get agitated by such things at any rate. Facts are facts, and we have nothing to fear if we are seeking the truth.  But at any rate, to me these statements of the Russian Church in the past on RC mysteries go right along with their refusal to baptize Roman Catholics; it was a policy that existed for some couple hundred years, but it was a mistake.  It didn't invalidate them, but it has to be put in its proper historical position.  Times have changed, the Roman Catholic Church has slid further into heresy since even a few hundred years ago, and the context then is quite different than Archbishop Hilarion's unfortunate (and in my opinion heretical) statements on RC sacraments now (which fit in to an ecumenistic model, which is a different model and framework than such statements in the past).

The bottom line to me is, we can drudge up all sorts of things from the past (times were certainly odd during the time of Eustratios Argenti; see the book with that title by Timothy Ware [now Met. Kallistos]), but we should be careful whenever we try to use such statements or practices to prove our current case now.  I certainly think that applies to us Old Calendarists as well, to be fair.
Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching. Also, I served as an Orthodox priest from 2008-2013, before resigning.
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #113 on: January 23, 2010, 12:45:40 PM »


Christ said that when two or three pray in His name, He is in the midst of them, that is true.

Not really. What He said was that "where two or three OF YOU are gathered in my name.."

I'm happy to concede that He would probably say also  "where two or three OF THOSE NOT OF MY COMMUNITY are gathered in my name..." since His compassion is beyond measuring and He will never fail to respond to prayer.   Wink
Logged
NorthernPines
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 934



« Reply #114 on: January 23, 2010, 12:59:26 PM »


What does this have to do with my spiritual struggles. I was talking about many holy friends and then the undeniable sanctity of the saints.

In case this hasn't been made clear enough, holy people exist outside of the Church and sacramental grace, even in the Augustinian view of Sacraments. I don't see why you're thus seeing it as proof of Sacraments being in your religious group.
Because I don't think people can become holy by worshiping bread.

You think people cannot be made holy without the Sacraments?
I don't see how people who worship bread instead of God can be made holy.

Wait, what about all the saints who became sanctified who took Communion like once or twice in 50 years? St. Mary of Egypt is one example of a saint who I think received the Eucharist once in her life. She certainly became sanctified without the Sacraments. Granted she was baptized, and did partake once of the Eucharist, but at her conversion. I doubt that grace was merely "stored up" for the next 50 years. We've had many desert fathers (pre schism) who also fit a similar pattern. Granted we would say they are the exception rather than the rule, but I don't think it's impossible to become holy without the Sacraments. At the same time once can have the Sacraments daily and be horrible and totally unholy.

That's not a comment on RC Sacraments BTW as I too believe they are "real" Sacraments, just saying I don't think one must partake of them to be made holy. However it's probably a more direct path. Smiley

Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #115 on: January 23, 2010, 01:08:15 PM »


Christ said that when two or three pray in His name, He is in the midst of them, that is true.

Not really. What He said was that "where two or three OF YOU are gathered in my name.."

I'm happy to concede that He would probably say also  "where two or three OF THOSE NOT OF MY COMMUNITY are gathered in my name..." since His compassion is beyond measuring and He will never fail to respond to prayer.   Wink

LOL. I know Father.  I just wanted to demonstrate that even with the most generous latitude, using it as a proof text for the subject at hand falls short.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antioch
Posts: 4,998



« Reply #116 on: January 23, 2010, 01:18:59 PM »

I don't really see how a video can be an argument for validity... Every religion out there can produce "miracles" and "signs" that their religion is the true one...

If the Orthodox Church says your sacraments are not valid, then that is the way it is.

I feel like this thread was just created to create an argument against Orthodoxy and for Catholicism...
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #117 on: January 23, 2010, 01:39:07 PM »

I don't really see how a video can be an argument for validity... Every religion out there can produce "miracles" and "signs" that their religion is the true one...

If the Orthodox Church says your sacraments are not valid, then that is the way it is.

I feel like this thread was just created to create an argument against Orthodoxy and for Catholicism...
And for what purpose, I don't know.  We don't care what the Vatican says about our Holy Mysteries.  Why do they care so much about what we have to say about their sacraments?
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
augustin717
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: The other ROC
Posts: 5,636



« Reply #118 on: January 23, 2010, 01:41:51 PM »

Quote
In this circumstance, this makes me glad that I came back to Catholicism - I never noticed that Eastern Orthodoxy would transform me from a zealous person to an hateful fundamentalist, but that's what was happening to me.

Although I don't know you personally I wholly believe that what you did is wise. Rejecting one's (apostolic ) Christian heritage is not a decision to be lightly taken, sometimes just because of some infatuation with a more exotic "rite". Better wait for a corporate reunification in your ancient church of Rome an focus on more important matters like saving one's soul through faith and good works, than become unduly concerned with trifles like "who has grace, who doesn't" etc.
Logged
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 30,501



« Reply #119 on: January 23, 2010, 01:45:51 PM »

trifles like "who has grace, who doesn't" etc.

You're a real jokster, you know that? Cheesy
Logged

"By the way he dies as a human being he shows us what it is to be God." - Fr. John Behr
augustin717
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: The other ROC
Posts: 5,636



« Reply #120 on: January 23, 2010, 01:52:08 PM »

No, I really think that the debate about who "has grace" is really funny, a trifle, a waste of time and energy etc.
It is also an unwritten custom with many Orthodox priests to rather discourage individual conversions from RC, because, with them, we still kind of hope in a corporate reunion some day, some time, God willing.
Logged
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,417


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #121 on: January 23, 2010, 02:00:28 PM »


What does this have to do with my spiritual struggles. I was talking about many holy friends and then the undeniable sanctity of the saints.

In case this hasn't been made clear enough, holy people exist outside of the Church and sacramental grace, even in the Augustinian view of Sacraments. I don't see why you're thus seeing it as proof of Sacraments being in your religious group.
Because I don't think people can become holy by worshiping bread.

You think people cannot be made holy without the Sacraments?
I don't see how people who worship bread instead of God can be made holy.

Wait, what about all the saints who became sanctified who took Communion like once or twice in 50 years? St. Mary of Egypt is one example of a saint who I think received the Eucharist once in her life. She certainly became sanctified without the Sacraments. Granted she was baptized, and did partake once of the Eucharist, but at her conversion. I doubt that grace was merely "stored up" for the next 50 years. We've had many desert fathers (pre schism) who also fit a similar pattern. Granted we would say they are the exception rather than the rule, but I don't think it's impossible to become holy without the Sacraments. At the same time once can have the Sacraments daily and be horrible and totally unholy.

That's not a comment on RC Sacraments BTW as I too believe they are "real" Sacraments, just saying I don't think one must partake of them to be made holy. However it's probably a more direct path. Smiley


You are missing my point. Worshiping bread is a grave sin.
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
tuesdayschild
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 971



« Reply #122 on: January 23, 2010, 02:03:08 PM »

Archbishop Hilarion's statements (2 of them) that the Russian Orthodox Church recognises Roman Catholic sacraments

Have these statements been discussed in other threads on OC.net?  If so, please post a link.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #123 on: January 23, 2010, 03:43:46 PM »

No, I really think that the debate about who "has grace" is really funny, a trifle, a waste of time and energy etc.
It is also an unwritten custom with many Orthodox priests to rather discourage individual conversions from RC, because, with them, we still kind of hope in a corporate reunion some day, some time, God willing.

Or they don't want to deal with those of the wrong tribe. Neo-Pharisees.

The return of Rome would be nice, but no one's communion with the fullness of the Faith should be on hold for it.  Ditto with the WRO.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
augustin717
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: The other ROC
Posts: 5,636



« Reply #124 on: January 23, 2010, 03:59:34 PM »

No, I really think that the debate about who "has grace" is really funny, a trifle, a waste of time and energy etc.
It is also an unwritten custom with many Orthodox priests to rather discourage individual conversions from RC, because, with them, we still kind of hope in a corporate reunion some day, some time, God willing.

Or they don't want to deal with those of the wrong tribe. Neo-Pharisees.


Yeah, like the Hungarian tribe. Definitely the wrong one.
« Last Edit: January 23, 2010, 03:59:49 PM by augustin717 » Logged
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #125 on: January 23, 2010, 07:48:01 PM »


What does this have to do with my spiritual struggles. I was talking about many holy friends and then the undeniable sanctity of the saints.

In case this hasn't been made clear enough, holy people exist outside of the Church and sacramental grace, even in the Augustinian view of Sacraments. I don't see why you're thus seeing it as proof of Sacraments being in your religious group.
Because I don't think people can become holy by worshiping bread.

You think people cannot be made holy without the Sacraments?
I don't see how people who worship bread instead of God can be made holy.

They are worshiping God (in so far as this is possible in the context of your erroneous theology). They are mistakenly using bread as a vehicle for this worship thinking that it is God.

As we know, the Orthodox do not have a consistent teaching on this.  For at least the last 400 years the Russian Church has believed Catholic sacraments to be efficacious and grace-filled.  (So it cannot be dismissed as a modern position held by arch-ecumenists!)

Given the recent statements by Pope Shenouda and Bishop Bishoy about baptism among Catholics and Protestants we can draw the conclusion that the Coptic Orthodox would deny the reality of the Catholic Eucharist.  On the other hand, another OO Church, the Armenians, would affirm baptism and priesthood and eucharist for the Catholics.

I'm aware. I happen to take a more conservative position of not recognizing the Roman ordinances because of their heresies.
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 #126 on: January 23, 2010, 07:48:53 PM »


seems to be "Orthodox in communion with Rome."

What hogwash.
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 #127 on: January 23, 2010, 09:01:27 PM »


Didn't your branch of christianity go into schism in the 4th century? Yet you want to come across as Orthodox as the Eastern Orthodox. There's a reason why your Church is not in communion. In schism with Eastern Orthodoxy, yet Orthodox? That's has always been myth to me. We were in communion longer with the EO than you.

Whether it was the OO who went into schism in the 5th century or you and the EO is up for debate.

No, I don't want to come across "as orthodox" as the EO, I want to come across as more orthodox than the EO.

And how did the EO suddenly become the undisputed standard of orthodoxy such that your last statement even matters?
« Last Edit: January 23, 2010, 09:01:38 PM by deusveritasest » 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 #128 on: January 23, 2010, 09:08:41 PM »


Actually, from the OO point of view, it was the Chalcedonians who went into schism in the 5th century.  But we're nice about it and call the EO's Orthodox anyway.    Grin

Mostly on the premise that they "fixed" their faith in the post-Chalcedonian councils. If they had simply left it at Chalcedon I bet significantly less people would be willing to call them orthodox.
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
Salpy
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Armenian Church
Posts: 12,892


Pray for the Christians of Iraq and Syria.


« Reply #129 on: January 23, 2010, 09:10:36 PM »


Actually, from the OO point of view, it was the Chalcedonians who went into schism in the 5th century.  But we're nice about it and call the EO's Orthodox anyway.    Grin

Mostly on the premise that they "fixed" their faith in the post-Chalcedonian councils. If they had simply left it at Chalcedon I bet significantly less people would be willing to call them orthodox.

Yeah, I know, but it would be best to keep this particular tangent in the private forum.  This thread is a bit messy as it is.   Smiley
Logged

ChristusDominus
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Latin Rite
Posts: 936


Saint Aloysius Gonzaga


« Reply #130 on: January 23, 2010, 09:17:05 PM »


Actually, from the OO point of view, it was the Chalcedonians who went into schism in the 5th century.  But we're nice about it and call the EO's Orthodox anyway.    Grin

Mostly on the premise that they "fixed" their faith in the post-Chalcedonian councils. If they had simply left it at Chalcedon I bet significantly less people would be willing to call them orthodox.

Yeah, I know, but it would be best to keep this particular tangent in the private forum.  This thread is a bit messy as it is.   Smiley
I am sorry, I will no longer add to the confusion. I see an ice, cold, smooth one calling my name.  Smiley
Logged

There is no more evident sign that anyone is a saint and of the number of the elect, than to see him leading a good life and at the same time a prey to desolation, suffering, and trials. - Saint Aloysius Gonzaga
Salpy
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Armenian Church
Posts: 12,892


Pray for the Christians of Iraq and Syria.


« Reply #131 on: January 23, 2010, 11:20:44 PM »

My use of "Romanist" is tangential to this and is a reference to the fundamental role the See of Rome plays in the life of the church commonly referred to as the "Catholic Church".

But isn't the See of Rome now Constantinople, at least from the point of view of the EO's?  Isn't the Patriarch of Rome, from the EO point of view, His All Holiness Bartholomew?
Logged

deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #132 on: January 24, 2010, 12:11:23 AM »

My use of "Romanist" is tangential to this and is a reference to the fundamental role the See of Rome plays in the life of the church commonly referred to as the "Catholic Church".

But isn't the See of Rome now Constantinople, at least from the point of view of the EO's?  Isn't the Patriarch of Rome, from the EO point of view, His All Holiness Bartholomew?

Well, for one thing I don't view myself as any longer EO. So I don't see how it is relevant to my use of "Romanist".

Secondly, Constantinople was recognized as the "Second Rome" even when the "First Rome" was still in a somewhat stable condition of power. On a secular level it replaced the Old Rome as the capital of the Empire, but I think Rome is still Rome.
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
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 33,153


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #133 on: January 24, 2010, 01:15:46 AM »

The tangent on the application of the label "Romanist" to Catholics has been moved to Orthodox-Other Christian Private Discussions.

Deusveritasest Wants to Offend Catholics by Calling Them Romanists!
« Last Edit: January 24, 2010, 01:37:48 AM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #134 on: January 24, 2010, 02:34:51 AM »


The tangent on the application of the label "Romanist" to Catholics has been moved to Orthodox-Other Christian Private Discussions.

Deusveritasest Wants to Offend Catholics by Calling Them Romanists!


What's up with the thread title? I explicitly said that I am using this terminology with no interest or intention in offending those in union with Rome.
« Last Edit: January 24, 2010, 02:35:03 AM by deusveritasest » 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
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 33,153


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #135 on: January 24, 2010, 02:39:44 AM »


The tangent on the application of the label "Romanist" to Catholics has been moved to Orthodox-Other Christian Private Discussions.

Deusveritasest Wants to Offend Catholics by Calling Them Romanists!


What's up with the thread title? I explicitly said that I am using this terminology with no interest or intention in offending those in union with Rome.
If you want to take that up with me, please do so in a private message, for I will not entertain such questions of my moderatorial decisions here.  Thank you.
Logged
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 30,501



« Reply #136 on: January 24, 2010, 02:42:21 AM »


The tangent on the application of the label "Romanist" to Catholics has been moved to Orthodox-Other Christian Private Discussions.

Deusveritasest Wants to Offend Catholics by Calling Them Romanists!


What's up with the thread title? I explicitly said that I am using this terminology with no interest or intention in offending those in union with Rome.

The mods like to come up with snappy titles. For example, one time a mod split some posts off a thread and named the new thread "All These People Would Rather Talk About Gay Marriage Than Stay On Topic". The funny part in that case was that the same mod who came up with the title also had made posts that got put into the new thread. I guess even mods who get frustrated about others staying on topic going off topic can't always stay on topic themselves Cheesy

EDIT--I clarified what I meant, striking out what I had previously said.
« Last Edit: January 24, 2010, 02:58:31 AM by Asteriktos » Logged

"By the way he dies as a human being he shows us what it is to be God." - Fr. John Behr
Alonso_castillo
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Arquidiósesis de Guadalajara (México)
Posts: 360


Me when younger


« Reply #137 on: January 24, 2010, 02:53:44 AM »

I don't really see how a video can be an argument for validity... Every religion out there can produce "miracles" and "signs" that their religion is the true one...

If the Orthodox Church says your sacraments are not valid, then that is the way it is.

I feel like this thread was just created to create an argument against Orthodoxy and for Catholicism...
And for what purpose, I don't know.  We don't care what the Vatican says about our Holy Mysteries.  Why do they care so much about what we have to say about their sacraments?
Why do they care so much about what we have to say about their sacraments?

Because many of You go out there saying that they are fake, then someone has to heal the offence, and as I am unable to do that healing, and no priest is able to do it, because it comes to be a matter of what you believe and what we believe, then, We come to the point where the only one who shows the truth is Our Lord, acting directly by miracles.

Now, I also read that some guys here come with the idea that miracles are not valid, as they can be created by any religion. My answer would be that, such idea can be right if we were talking of the invocation of a false god to perform such an act. This is not the case here, where We the Catholic Church, are praying to God to perform the Transformation of our presents into the body and blood of our Lord by his Holy Spirit, as we were taught by the Saints Apostles Peter and Paul. Then the principle of insufficiency of miracles to prove the true comes to be invalid, due to the fact that this miracle is attributed to the true God whom we pray. 

Now, if the bread in the video, once the epiclesis has taken place, jumps, we catholics see this as a sign came from our Lord that induces us to believe stronger in the Holiness of the Eucharist of the true Church of Christ, the Catholic Church. 

You haven’t read at all, that I ever attempted to disqualify the sacrament of Orthodoxy, have you? But for sure, if I can show you a miracle either you trust it or not, that proves that God is present in Catholic Church Eucharist, I will do it as I did, that way I will be released of any responsibility of not showing you the true. And from now and hence forth you will not be able to say that you didn’t know it, or that no one spoke of this to you.
« Last Edit: January 24, 2010, 02:59:02 AM by Alonso_castillo » Logged

Nisi Dominus aedificaverit Domum
in vanum laboraverunt qui aedifcant eam
Nisi Dominus custodierit civitatem
frustra vigilant qui custodit Eam
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #138 on: January 24, 2010, 03:00:52 AM »

I don't really see how a video can be an argument for validity... Every religion out there can produce "miracles" and "signs" that their religion is the true one...

If the Orthodox Church says your sacraments are not valid, then that is the way it is.

I feel like this thread was just created to create an argument against Orthodoxy and for Catholicism...
And for what purpose, I don't know.  We don't care what the Vatican says about our Holy Mysteries.  Why do they care so much about what we have to say about their sacraments?
Why do they care so much about what we have to say about their sacraments?

Because many of You go out there saying that they are fake, then someone has to heal the offence, and as I am unable to do that healing, and no priest is able to do it, because it comes to be a matter of what you believe and what we believe, then, We come to the point where the only one who shows the truth is Our Lord, acting directly by miracles.

Now, I also read that some guys here come with the idea that miracles are not valid, as they can be created by any religion. My answer would be that, such idea can be right if we were talking of the invocation of a false god to perform such an act. This is not the case here, where We the Catholic Church, are praying to God to perform the Transformation of our presents into the body and blood of our Lord by his Holy Spirit, as we were taught by the Saints Apostles Peter and Paul. Then the principle of insufficiency of miracles to prove the true comes to be invalid, due to the fact that this miracle is attributed to the true God whom we pray. 

Now, if the bread in the video, once the epiclesis has taken place, jumps, we catholics see this as a sign came from our Lord that induces us to believe stronger in the Holiness of the Eucharist of the true Church of Christ, the Catholic Church. 

You haven’t read at all, that I ever attempted to disqualify the sacrament of Orthodoxy, have you? But for sure, if I can show you a miracle either you trust it or not, that proves that God is present in Catholic Church Eucharist, I will do it as I did, that way I will be released of any responsibility of not showing you the true. And from now and hence forth you will not be able to say that you didn’t know it, or that no one spoke of this to you.


If you are in heresy and in schism from the Church and don't even properly understand God as the Orthodox do, Satan can very well perform miracles for you for the sake of egging you on deeper into your errors.
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 #139 on: January 24, 2010, 03:34:54 AM »


Now, if the bread in the video, once the epiclesis has taken place, jumps, we catholics...

Are you picking up Orthodox theology, Alfonso?   laugh  It is the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church that the transformation takes place by power of the Words of Institution and an epiclesis is unnecessary.

If the host jumped only after the epiclesis (whatever that was in this case?) then it is proof to the Catholics that their theology on this point is wrong.
Logged
Alonso_castillo
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Arquidiósesis de Guadalajara (México)
Posts: 360


Me when younger


« Reply #140 on: January 24, 2010, 03:37:50 AM »

If you are in heresy and in schism from the Church and don't even properly understand God as the Orthodox do, Satan can very well perform miracles for you for the sake of egging you on deeper into your errors.
Miracles are performed to help people to believe, in the Lord, as we can see in the next verses.

John 2:11
John 2:23
John 3:22
John 4:48
John 6:2
John 9:16
John 11:47
John 12:37
John 20:30
Acts 2:18-19
Acts 2:43

We can say the same of you about evil performing miracles to cheat you. Though we don’t do it anymore, the miracle that is shown in the video is performed by the disciples of our Lord Jesus Christ, No one priest can claim to be the performer of such a miracle, and no one claims the miracle for himself, ¿Is the name of the fathers written in the video that would eventually be interpreted as making them to be falsely proud of themselves? No.

You base your principle in the next verses, though you miss something, they are referring to the antichrists who will proclaim themselves prophets and messiah, but in the video, we don’t see such a thing. No name is claiming the miracle to himself, rather this miracle is attributed to God, and the antichrist won’t do such thing.  
 
Mat 24:24
Mar 13:22
Logged

Nisi Dominus aedificaverit Domum
in vanum laboraverunt qui aedifcant eam
Nisi Dominus custodierit civitatem
frustra vigilant qui custodit Eam
Alonso_castillo
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Arquidiósesis de Guadalajara (México)
Posts: 360


Me when younger


« Reply #141 on: January 24, 2010, 03:39:16 AM »


Now, if the bread in the video, once the epiclesis has taken place, jumps, we catholics...

Are you picking up Orthodox theology, Alfonso?   laugh  It is the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church that the transformation takes place by power of the Words of Institution and an epiclesis is unnecessary.

If the host jumped only after the epiclesis (whatever that was in this case?) then it is proof to the Catholics that their theology on this point is wrong.


Can catholics perform epiclesis not believeing in it?
Logged

Nisi Dominus aedificaverit Domum
in vanum laboraverunt qui aedifcant eam
Nisi Dominus custodierit civitatem
frustra vigilant qui custodit Eam
Alonso_castillo
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Arquidiósesis de Guadalajara (México)
Posts: 360


Me when younger


« Reply #142 on: January 24, 2010, 03:41:16 AM »

By the way, it would be intersting to read the word epiclesis in the Sacred Scripture.
Logged

Nisi Dominus aedificaverit Domum
in vanum laboraverunt qui aedifcant eam
Nisi Dominus custodierit civitatem
frustra vigilant qui custodit Eam
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #143 on: January 24, 2010, 03:42:17 AM »


Now, if the bread in the video, once the epiclesis has taken place, jumps, we catholics...

Are you picking up Orthodox theology, Alfonso?   laugh  It is the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church that the transformation takes place by power of the Words of Institution and an epiclesis is unnecessary.

If the host jumped only after the epiclesis (whatever that was in this case?) then it is proof to the Catholics that their theology on this point is wrong.


Can catholics perform epiclesis not believeing in it?

If there is no epiclesis in the Catholic Mass, does the bread remain bread and the wine remain wine?  Would it not be heresy for you to say that?
Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #144 on: January 24, 2010, 03:54:11 AM »

By the way, it would be intersting to read the word epiclesis in the Sacred Scripture.

Indeed!  Where is Trinitas?  Pontifex Maximus?  Purgatorio?  Indulgentiae?  Conceptio Immaculata?  Mediatrix Omnium Gratiarum?
Logged
Alpo
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Jerkodox
Posts: 7,043



« Reply #145 on: January 24, 2010, 07:38:05 AM »

It is the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church that the transformation takes place by power of the Words of Institution

Ahoy, Catholics! I've understanded that the Assyrian liturgy doesn't include the Words of Institution. What Rome says about validity of their Eucharist? I'm also curious whether the Chaldean Catholics have inserted the Words of Institution into their liturgy.
« Last Edit: January 24, 2010, 07:39:53 AM by Alpo » Logged

Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #146 on: January 24, 2010, 08:33:37 AM »

It is the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church that the transformation takes place by power of the Words of Institution

Ahoy, Catholics! I've understanded that the Assyrian liturgy doesn't include the Words of Institution. What Rome says about validity of their Eucharist?

This has been discused. Rome has decided that 1) the intention to consecrate and transform the elements is evident throughout their Liturgy.  So Rome has made an exception to the requirement for the actual Words of Institution.   2) They have also advanced the argument that the Words of Institution are "scattered" in the body of the Eucharistic Canon - an argument I find a little odd!

Quote
I'm also curious whether the Chaldean Catholics have inserted the Words of Institution into their liturgy.

Rome has asked them to include the Words of Institution, on a voluntary basis.
Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #147 on: January 24, 2010, 08:44:51 AM »

Consecration in the Anaphora of Addai & Mari

Daniel J. Castellano (2007)

"In 2001, seven years after the Vatican's common declaration of faith with the (formerly Nestorian) Assyrian Church of the East, the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity issued its Guidelines for admission to the Eucharist between the Chaldean Church and the Assyrian Church of the East, in order to improve relations between Catholics and schismatics of the Chaldean rite. This document is most noted for its surprising affrimation of the sacramental validity of the Assyrian anaphora of Addai and Mari, a Eucharistic Prayer that does not literally recount the words of Christ at the Last Supper. The product of years of careful analysis, this declaration has been widely misinterpreted, though understandably, as denying the Church's millennial doctrine that the words of Christ spoken by the priest are the form of the sacrament that effects transubstantiation.

"To correct such misinterpretations, and to appreciate the real value of this document, we need only examine the Pontifical Council's words more carefully, in light of what is known about the anaphora in question. First of all, the Council does not say that the anaphora lacks an Institution Narrative, only that it lacks a "coherent Institution Narrative". The Council acknowledges that scholars are uncertain whether the Anaphora of Addai and Mari originally contained a more coherent Institution Narrative. We will examine this question ourselves later, but the Council does not presume to decide this intractable historical question. "The validity of the Eucharist celebrated with the Anaphora of Addai and Mari, therefore, should not be based on historical but on doctrinal arguments."

"Far from setting aside the Church's traditional doctrine, the Pontifical Council explicitly cites the Council of Florence: "The form of this sacrament are the words of the Saviour with which he effected this sacrament. A priest speaking in the person of Christ effects this sacrament. For, in virtue of those words, the substance of bread is changed into the body of Christ and the substance of wine into his blood." This solemn definition by the Council of Florence does not preclude variations in the specific wording of the Institution, as should be evident from the fact that such variations exist among valid orthodox rites, even to the extent of recounting the Institution in the third person. While the Church has no power to change the substance of the sacraments, "the Church does have the power to determine their concrete shaping, regarding both their sacramental sign (materia) and their words of administration (forma)," assuming such changes do not alter the substance of the sacrament.

"The doctrinal question before the Pontifical Council is whether the incoherent verbal form of the anaphora's Institution Narrative retains the substance of the sacrament. The Council decides that the "the words of the Institution are not absent in the Anaphora of Addai and Mari, but explicitly mentioned in a dispersed way, from the beginning to the end, in the most important passages of the Anaphora." [Emphasis added.] Thus the Council upholds the traditional requirement that the words of Institution must be explicitly present in a valid Eucharistic Prayer. The oddity of the Anaphora of Addai and Mari is that these words are dispersed throughout the liturgy, but are nonetheless explicitly present."

To continue reading please go to
http://www.arcaneknowledge.org/catholic/addai.htm
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #148 on: January 24, 2010, 09:20:04 AM »

It is the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church that the transformation takes place by power of the Words of Institution

Ahoy, Catholics! I've understanded that the Assyrian liturgy doesn't include the Words of Institution. What Rome says about validity of their Eucharist?

This has been discused. Rome has decided that 1) the intention to consecrate and transform the elements is evident throughout their Liturgy.  So Rome has made an exception to the requirement for the actual Words of Institution.   2) They have also advanced the argument that the Words of Institution are "scattered" in the body of the Eucharistic Canon - an argument I find a little odd!

Quote
I'm also curious whether the Chaldean Catholics have inserted the Words of Institution into their liturgy.

Rome has asked them to include the Words of Institution, on a voluntary basis.
Latinization?

This is a clear difference between the Western Rite Orthodox and the Vatican:what the latter so much as emphasized (and fought with us over for centuries) they say designate as "voluntary": only submission to the Supreme Pontiff of Rome is not voluntary.  For the WRO, there is a question about the epiclesis, so one is inserted to make it clear, and its not "voluntary." We must be reading off the same page if we are, and we are, of the same Faith.
« Last Edit: January 24, 2010, 09:23:45 AM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #149 on: January 24, 2010, 09:25:25 AM »

By the way, it would be intersting to read the word epiclesis in the Sacred Scripture.

Indeed!  Where is Trinitas?  Pontifex Maximus?  Purgatorio?  Indulgentiae?  Conceptio Immaculata?  Mediatrix Omnium Gratiarum?
Indeed: what about "pope?" (Patriarch does appear, btw).
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #150 on: January 24, 2010, 09:27:00 AM »


Now, if the bread in the video, once the epiclesis has taken place, jumps, we catholics...

Are you picking up Orthodox theology, Alfonso?   laugh  It is the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church that the transformation takes place by power of the Words of Institution and an epiclesis is unnecessary.

If the host jumped only after the epiclesis (whatever that was in this case?) then it is proof to the Catholics that their theology on this point is wrong.


Can catholics perform epiclesis not believeing in it?

If there is no epiclesis in the Catholic Mass, does the bread remain bread and the wine remain wine?  Would it not be heresy for you to say that?

I was wondering that too, given all the fighting the Vatican has done against us over the epiclesis in the past.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Alonso_castillo
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Arquidiósesis de Guadalajara (México)
Posts: 360


Me when younger


« Reply #151 on: January 24, 2010, 09:43:26 AM »


Now, if the bread in the video, once the epiclesis has taken place, jumps, we catholics...

Are you picking up Orthodox theology, Alfonso?   laugh  It is the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church that the transformation takes place by power of the Words of Institution and an epiclesis is unnecessary.

If the host jumped only after the epiclesis (whatever that was in this case?) then it is proof to the Catholics that their theology on this point is wrong.


Can catholics perform epiclesis not believeing in it?

If there is no epiclesis in the Catholic Mass, does the bread remain bread and the wine remain wine?  Would it not be heresy for you to say that?

May be I am creating a confusion, because what in modern times it is understood as the epiclesis, is not the prayer that orthodoxy mades after the consagration in order to perform the transformation of the bread and wine, but the word is currently used to define the very moment when the Holy Spirit descends and transforms the species into the Bobdy of Christ.

I hope that it is understand the use I am giving as communly understood now a days, I am not refering a post conscration prayer, as orthodox do.
« Last Edit: January 24, 2010, 09:49:57 AM by Alonso_castillo » Logged

Nisi Dominus aedificaverit Domum
in vanum laboraverunt qui aedifcant eam
Nisi Dominus custodierit civitatem
frustra vigilant qui custodit Eam
Alonso_castillo
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Arquidiósesis de Guadalajara (México)
Posts: 360


Me when younger


« Reply #152 on: January 24, 2010, 09:51:01 AM »

By the way, it would be intersting to read the word epiclesis in the Sacred Scripture.

Indeed!  Where is Trinitas?  Pontifex Maximus?  Purgatorio?  Indulgentiae?  Conceptio Immaculata?  Mediatrix Omnium Gratiarum?
Indeed: what about "pope?" (Patriarch does appear, btw).

Patri= Pater= Papa
Logged

Nisi Dominus aedificaverit Domum
in vanum laboraverunt qui aedifcant eam
Nisi Dominus custodierit civitatem
frustra vigilant qui custodit Eam
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #153 on: January 24, 2010, 09:53:45 AM »

I don't really see how a video can be an argument for validity... Every religion out there can produce "miracles" and "signs" that their religion is the true one...

If the Orthodox Church says your sacraments are not valid, then that is the way it is.

I feel like this thread was just created to create an argument against Orthodoxy and for Catholicism...
And for what purpose, I don't know.  We don't care what the Vatican says about our Holy Mysteries.  Why do they care so much about what we have to say about their sacraments?
Why do they care so much about what we have to say about their sacraments?

Because many of You go out there saying that they are fake,
So?  
Quote
then someone has to heal the offence, and as I am unable to do that healing, and no priest is able to do it, because it comes to be a matter of what you believe and what we believe, then, We come to the point where the only one who shows the truth is Our Lord, acting directly by miracles.
Only an evil and adulterous generation craves a sign. Matthew 12:39.  The Fathers teach that if you see a miracle, ignore it, advice that should have been heeded, for instance, at Fatima.  When I embraced Orthodoxy, I prayed that I not see a miracle until my Faith didn't need it.  That came less than three years later.

Quote
Now, I also read that some guys here come with the idea that miracles are not valid, as they can be created by any religion. My answer would be that, such idea can be right if we were talking of the invocation of a false god to perform such an act. This is not the case here, where We the Catholic Church, are praying to God to perform the Transformation of our presents into the body and blood of our Lord by his Holy Spirit, as we were taught by the Saints Apostles Peter and Paul.

That's not what your Vatican has been teaching: we pointed out the weakness of the explicit epiclesis in the Roman mass, and they argued it wasn't necessary.

Quote
Then the principle of insufficiency of miracles to prove the true comes to be invalid, due to the fact that this miracle is attributed to the true God whom we pray. 

The Protestants (especially the Televangelists) pray to the same God, and the Muslims and Jews claim to too.  You all can't be right.

Quote
Now, if the bread in the video, once the epiclesis has taken place, jumps, we catholics see this as a sign came from our Lord that induces us to believe stronger in the Holiness of the Eucharist of the true Church of Christ, the Catholic Church. 

Yes, the Orthodox Catholic Church, the one who has taught consistently the moment of the epiclesis.

Quote
You haven’t read at all, that I ever attempted to disqualify the sacrament of Orthodoxy, have you?

Not relevent.  Our One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church doesn't need your validation.  Consequently we are not obliged to reciprocate if you give it.

Quote
But for sure, if I can show you a miracle either you trust it or not, that proves that God is present in Catholic Church Eucharist, I will do it as I did, that way I will be released of any responsibility of not showing you the true. And from now and hence forth you will not be able to say that you didn’t know it, or that no one spoke of this to you.

Only an evil and adulterous generation craves a sign. Matthew 12:39.

Well, at least you eased your conscience.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #154 on: January 24, 2010, 09:54:32 AM »

By the way, it would be intersting to read the word epiclesis in the Sacred Scripture.

Indeed!  Where is Trinitas?  Pontifex Maximus?  Purgatorio?  Indulgentiae?  Conceptio Immaculata?  Mediatrix Omnium Gratiarum?
Indeed: what about "pope?" (Patriarch does appear, btw).

Patri= Pater= Papa
Yes, I am aware of that: do you pray "Our Pope who art in Heaven?"
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #155 on: January 24, 2010, 09:55:46 AM »


Now, if the bread in the video, once the epiclesis has taken place, jumps, we catholics...

Are you picking up Orthodox theology, Alfonso?   laugh  It is the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church that the transformation takes place by power of the Words of Institution and an epiclesis is unnecessary.

If the host jumped only after the epiclesis (whatever that was in this case?) then it is proof to the Catholics that their theology on this point is wrong.


Can catholics perform epiclesis not believeing in it?

If there is no epiclesis in the Catholic Mass, does the bread remain bread and the wine remain wine?  Would it not be heresy for you to say that?

May be I am creating a confusion, because what in modern times it is understood as the epiclesis, is not the prayer that orthodoxy mades after the consagration in order to perform the transformation of the bread and wine, but the word is currently used to define the very moment when the Holy Spirit descends and transforms the species into the Bobdy of Christ.

I hope that it is understand the use I am giving as communly understood now a days, I am not refering a post conscration prayer, as orthodox do.
It is not a post consecration prayer: it is THE consecration prayer.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Alonso_castillo
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Arquidiósesis de Guadalajara (México)
Posts: 360


Me when younger


« Reply #156 on: January 24, 2010, 09:58:04 AM »

By the way, it would be intersting to read the word epiclesis in the Sacred Scripture.

Indeed!  Where is Trinitas?  Pontifex Maximus?  Purgatorio?  Indulgentiae?  Conceptio Immaculata?  Mediatrix Omnium Gratiarum?
Indeed: what about "pope?" (Patriarch does appear, btw).

Patri= Pater= Papa
Yes, I am aware of that: do you pray "Our Pope who art in Heaven?"

We don't create confusion of terms.
« Last Edit: January 24, 2010, 10:02:36 AM by Alonso_castillo » Logged

Nisi Dominus aedificaverit Domum
in vanum laboraverunt qui aedifcant eam
Nisi Dominus custodierit civitatem
frustra vigilant qui custodit Eam
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #157 on: January 24, 2010, 10:05:50 AM »

By the way, it would be intersting to read the word epiclesis in the Sacred Scripture.

Indeed!  Where is Trinitas?  Pontifex Maximus?  Purgatorio?  Indulgentiae?  Conceptio Immaculata?  Mediatrix Omnium Gratiarum?
Indeed: what about "pope?" (Patriarch does appear, btw).

Patri= Pater= Papa
Yes, I am aware of that: do you pray "Our Pope who art in Heaven?"

We don't create confusion of terms.
filioque

I remember arguing with a guy on CAF who insisted that pope was in the Bible because it means father, and then proceeded to paste a concordance of the word Father in the NT.  Reading "pope" for "father" made John 8:44 interesting reading indeed! Tongue
« Last Edit: January 24, 2010, 10:12:08 AM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Alonso_castillo
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Arquidiósesis de Guadalajara (México)
Posts: 360


Me when younger


« Reply #158 on: January 24, 2010, 10:12:10 AM »


Now, if the bread in the video, once the epiclesis has taken place, jumps, we catholics...

Are you picking up Orthodox theology, Alfonso?   laugh  It is the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church that the transformation takes place by power of the Words of Institution and an epiclesis is unnecessary.

If the host jumped only after the epiclesis (whatever that was in this case?) then it is proof to the Catholics that their theology on this point is wrong.


Can catholics perform epiclesis not believeing in it?

If there is no epiclesis in the Catholic Mass, does the bread remain bread and the wine remain wine?  Would it not be heresy for you to say that?

May be I am creating a confusion, because what in modern times it is understood as the epiclesis, is not the prayer that orthodoxy mades after the consagration in order to perform the transformation of the bread and wine, but the word is currently used to define the very moment when the Holy Spirit descends and transforms the species into the Bobdy of Christ.

I hope that it is understand the use I am giving as communly understood now a days, I am not refering a post conscration prayer, as orthodox do.
It is not a post consecration prayer: it is THE consecration prayer.
You and I will never end in a commun point.  ( I am not saying tha "You" means  "the orthodox church" or thet "I" means (the Catholic Church)
« Last Edit: January 24, 2010, 10:18:25 AM by Alonso_castillo » Logged

Nisi Dominus aedificaverit Domum
in vanum laboraverunt qui aedifcant eam
Nisi Dominus custodierit civitatem
frustra vigilant qui custodit Eam
Alonso_castillo
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Arquidiósesis de Guadalajara (México)
Posts: 360


Me when younger


« Reply #159 on: January 24, 2010, 10:16:48 AM »

By the way, it would be intersting to read the word epiclesis in the Sacred Scripture.

Indeed!  Where is Trinitas?  Pontifex Maximus?  Purgatorio?  Indulgentiae?  Conceptio Immaculata?  Mediatrix Omnium Gratiarum?
Indeed: what about "pope?" (Patriarch does appear, btw).

Patri= Pater= Papa
Yes, I am aware of that: do you pray "Our Pope who art in Heaven?"

We don't create confusion of terms.
filioque

I remember arguing with a guy on CAF who insisted that pope was in the Bible because it means father, and then proceeded to paste a concordance of the word Father in the NT.  Reading "pope" for "father" made John 8:44 interesting reading indeed! Tongue

For the words you speak I imagine that you give him credit as speakig excathedra. I mean, it seams that you are giving to understand that this guy was speaking with authority of all the church. do you?

I dont think you ever believe him to be speaking in the name of the Catholic Church. So your point is ?
Logged

Nisi Dominus aedificaverit Domum
in vanum laboraverunt qui aedifcant eam
Nisi Dominus custodierit civitatem
frustra vigilant qui custodit Eam
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #160 on: January 24, 2010, 10:19:59 AM »

May be I am creating a confusion, because what in modern times it is understood as the epiclesis, is not the prayer that orthodoxy mades after the consagration in order to perform the transformation of the bread and wine, but the word is currently used to define the very moment when the Holy Spirit descends and transforms the species into the Bobdy of Christ.

When IS that moment?

As far as I aware the invocation of the Holy Spirit in the modern Roman Mass occurs before the Words of Institution.   Does this mean that the change of the bread and wine takes place before the priest says, 'This is my body... etc."

Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #161 on: January 24, 2010, 04:24:20 PM »

By the way, it would be intersting to read the word epiclesis in the Sacred Scripture.

Indeed!  Where is Trinitas?  Pontifex Maximus?  Purgatorio?  Indulgentiae?  Conceptio Immaculata?  Mediatrix Omnium Gratiarum?
Indeed: what about "pope?" (Patriarch does appear, btw).

Patri= Pater= Papa
Yes, I am aware of that: do you pray "Our Pope who art in Heaven?"

We don't create confusion of terms.
filioque

I remember arguing with a guy on CAF who insisted that pope was in the Bible because it means father, and then proceeded to paste a concordance of the word Father in the NT.  Reading "pope" for "father" made John 8:44 interesting reading indeed! Tongue

For the words you speak I imagine that you give him credit as speakig excathedra. I mean, it seams that you are giving to understand that this guy was speaking with authority of all the church. do you?

I dont think you ever believe him to be speaking in the name of the Catholic Church. So your point is ?
You tried to make the same point in trying to deal with the fact that neither the word nor concept of "Pope" in the sense of "Supreme Roman Pontiff" is found in the Bible. So what authority do you speak with?
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,417


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #162 on: January 24, 2010, 04:34:06 PM »

May be I am creating a confusion, because what in modern times it is understood as the epiclesis, is not the prayer that orthodoxy mades after the consagration in order to perform the transformation of the bread and wine, but the word is currently used to define the very moment when the Holy Spirit descends and transforms the species into the Bobdy of Christ.

When IS that moment?

As far as I aware the invocation of the Holy Spirit in the modern Roman Mass occurs before the Words of Institution.   Does this mean that the change of the bread and wine takes place before the priest says, 'This is my body... etc."


It happens at the words of institution. We are with St. John Chrysostem on this one.
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #163 on: January 24, 2010, 04:38:38 PM »

May be I am creating a confusion, because what in modern times it is understood as the epiclesis, is not the prayer that orthodoxy mades after the consagration in order to perform the transformation of the bread and wine, but the word is currently used to define the very moment when the Holy Spirit descends and transforms the species into the Bobdy of Christ.

When IS that moment?

As far as I aware the invocation of the Holy Spirit in the modern Roman Mass occurs before the Words of Institution.   Does this mean that the change of the bread and wine takes place before the priest says, 'This is my body... etc."


It happens at the words of institution. We are with St. John Chrysostem on this one.
Then you would be outside the consensus of the Church on this one.  What specifically do you have in mind about St. John?
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #164 on: January 24, 2010, 04:51:45 PM »

If you are in heresy and in schism from the Church and don't even properly understand God as the Orthodox do, Satan can very well perform miracles for you for the sake of egging you on deeper into your errors.
Miracles are performed to help people to believe, in the Lord, as we can see in the next verses.

John 2:11
John 2:23
John 3:22
John 4:48
John 6:2
John 9:16
John 11:47
John 12:37
John 20:30
Acts 2:18-19
Acts 2:43

We can say the same of you about evil performing miracles to cheat you. Though we don’t do it anymore, the miracle that is shown in the video is performed by the disciples of our Lord Jesus Christ, No one priest can claim to be the performer of such a miracle, and no one claims the miracle for himself, ¿Is the name of the fathers written in the video that would eventually be interpreted as making them to be falsely proud of themselves? No.

You base your principle in the next verses, though you miss something, they are referring to the antichrists who will proclaim themselves prophets and messiah, but in the video, we don’t see such a thing. No name is claiming the miracle to himself, rather this miracle is attributed to God, and the antichrist won’t do such thing.  
 
Mat 24:24
Mar 13:22


Like I said, given that you're not really following God in the way that the original Christians were, it's very clear that Satan can perform signs for you to reassure you in your heresy and thus lead you away from possibly returning to the Church.
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 #165 on: January 24, 2010, 04:53:05 PM »

It is the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church that the transformation takes place by power of the Words of Institution

Ahoy, Catholics! I've understanded that the Assyrian liturgy doesn't include the Words of Institution. What Rome says about validity of their Eucharist?

Rome has decided that there is an "implicit Words of Institution" present in their Liturgy and that it is thus still valid.
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
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,417


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #166 on: January 24, 2010, 04:54:06 PM »

It is the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church that the transformation takes place by power of the Words of Institution

Ahoy, Catholics! I've understanded that the Assyrian liturgy doesn't include the Words of Institution. What Rome says about validity of their Eucharist?

Rome has decided that there is an "implicit Words of Institution" present in their Liturgy and that it is thus still valid.
Yup, and those assyrians who entered into the Catholic Church are required to use the words of institution.
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
samkim
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 735



« Reply #167 on: January 24, 2010, 07:12:36 PM »

May be I am creating a confusion, because what in modern times it is understood as the epiclesis, is not the prayer that orthodoxy mades after the consagration in order to perform the transformation of the bread and wine, but the word is currently used to define the very moment when the Holy Spirit descends and transforms the species into the Bobdy of Christ.

When IS that moment?

As far as I aware the invocation of the Holy Spirit in the modern Roman Mass occurs before the Words of Institution.   Does this mean that the change of the bread and wine takes place before the priest says, 'This is my body... etc."


It happens at the words of institution. We are with St. John Chrysostem on this one.
Then you would be outside the consensus of the Church on this one.  What specifically do you have in mind about St. John?

Well, the Epiklesis in St. Basil's liturgy seems to suggest that the transmutation of the gifts already happened. Perhaps in the words of institution? No Orthodox  would deny the importance of the words of institution. They seem to me equally important to the Epiklesis. I think my priest told me this once.
Logged

주 예수 그리스도 하느님의 아들이시여 저 이 죄인을 불쌍히 여기소서.
Pravoslavbob
Section Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 3,194


St. Sisoes the Great


« Reply #168 on: January 24, 2010, 08:09:38 PM »

May be I am creating a confusion, because what in modern times it is understood as the epiclesis, is not the prayer that orthodoxy mades after the consagration in order to perform the transformation of the bread and wine, but the word is currently used to define the very moment when the Holy Spirit descends and transforms the species into the Bobdy of Christ.

When IS that moment?

As far as I aware the invocation of the Holy Spirit in the modern Roman Mass occurs before the Words of Institution.   Does this mean that the change of the bread and wine takes place before the priest says, 'This is my body... etc."


It happens at the words of institution. We are with St. John Chrysostem on this one.
Then you would be outside the consensus of the Church on this one.  What specifically do you have in mind about St. John?

Well, the Epiklesis in St. Basil's liturgy seems to suggest that the transmutation of the gifts already happened. Perhaps in the words of institution? No Orthodox  would deny the importance of the words of institution. They seem to me equally important to the Epiklesis. I think my priest told me this once.

The Latin Church has always insisted (since the high middle ages at least) that it is at the so-called words of institution that the elements are completely changed into the Body and Blood of our Lord.  The Orthodox have insisted that this change is not accomplished until the epiklesis, although they acknowledge that the entire liturgy up until that point, including the words of institution, are important in making the change happen.  Moreover, St. Nicholas Cabasilas accuses the Latins of being disingenuous, saying that they know "perfectly well" that they use an ancient prayer in their liturgy that accomplishes the same thing as an epiklesis, that being the supplices te rogamus prayer as follows:  "We humbly beseech thee, almighty God, command that these things be carried by the hands of thy Angel to thy altar on high before the sight of thy divine majesty: that so many of us as shall by this partaking at the altar receive the most holy Body and Blood of thy Son, may be fulfilled with all grace and heavenly benediction.  Through the same Christ our Lord." (Please see A Commentary on the Divine Liturgy by Nicholas Cabasilas, pages 76-77.)
(Interestingly, another form of this primitive "implicit epiklesis" continues to exist as a remnant in the litany after "and all mankind" in the Orthodox liturgy.)  The supplices te rogamus is after the words of institution in the Tridentine rite.  In the Novus Ordo, I think a form of it is often included.  However, since Vatican II the Latin Church has also created a new series of epiklesi that may be used, some more explicit than others, that have been inserted before the words of institution.  (Is the "new" Novus Ordo being used in the U.S. yet?  I live in Canada, and I don't think it will come into use here, at least not right away, so I may be a bit behind in terms of Roman Catholic usage in the rest of the English speaking world.)  I suppose that this has been done so that they can continue to insist that they have always said that it is the words of institution that effect the change in the elements, while at the same time satisfying critics who want to see an epiklesis included. 
Logged

Religion is a disease, and Orthodoxy is its cure.
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #169 on: January 24, 2010, 08:26:18 PM »


Well, the Epiklesis in St. Basil's liturgy seems to suggest that the transmutation of the gifts already happened.

How so?
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
samkim
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 735



« Reply #170 on: January 24, 2010, 08:54:35 PM »


Well, the Epiklesis in St. Basil's liturgy seems to suggest that the transmutation of the gifts already happened.

How so?

In St. John Chrysostom's epiklesis, the priest asks the gifts to be changed, while in St. Basil's the priest asks the gifts to be shown to have been the body and blood of Christ. From the GOARCH site, it looks like they substituted the Basilian epiklesis with the Johanine.

From the OCA site:
Quote
After the elevation of the eucharistic gifts to the Father, the celebrant of the Divine Liturgy prays for the Holy Spirit to come upon them, and upon all of the people, and to change (or as the Liturgy of St. Basil says, to show) the bread and wine offered in remembrance of Christ to be the very Body and Blood of the Lord.


My Priest has commented that St. Basil's epiklesis is "much weaker."
« Last Edit: January 24, 2010, 08:57:58 PM by samkim » Logged

주 예수 그리스도 하느님의 아들이시여 저 이 죄인을 불쌍히 여기소서.
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #171 on: January 24, 2010, 09:00:34 PM »

Maybe the Liturgy of Basil actually expresses a different theory of the Real Presence.
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
AlexanderOfBergamo
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Traditionalist Christian
Jurisdiction: The Original First Millennium Church
Posts: 706


« Reply #172 on: January 25, 2010, 08:39:01 AM »

Maybe the Liturgy of Basil actually expresses a different theory of the Real Presence.

I can answer to all your doubts using a reliable Catholic source on the matter. This is a part of article "The Blessed Eucharist as a Sacrament" facing the problem of the role and position of the Epiklesis:

Quote
Not only did such renowned Fathers as Justin (First Apology 66), Irenæus (Against Heresies V.2.3), Gregory of Nyssa (The Great Catechism, no. 37), Chrysostom (Hom. i, de prod. Judæ, n. 6), and John Damascene (Exposition of the Faith IV.13) hold this view, but the ancient Greek Liturgies bear testimony to it, so that Cardinal Bessarion in 1439 at Florence called the attention of his fellow-countrymen to the fact, that as soon as the words of Institution have been pronounced, supreme homage and adoration are due to the Holy Eucharist, even though the famous Epiklesis follows some time after.

Quote
The venerable antiquity of the Oriental Epiklesis, its peculiar position in the Canon of the Mass, and its interior spiritual unction, oblige the theologian to determine its dogmatic value and to account for its use. Take, for instance, the Epiklesis of the Ethiopian Liturgy: "We implore and beseech Thee, O Lord, to send forth the Holy Spirit and His Power upon this Bread and Chalice and convert them into the Body and Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ." Since this prayer always follows after the words of Institution have been pronounced, the theological question arises, as to how it may be made to harmonize with the words of Christ, which alone possess the consecrated power. Two explanations have been suggested which, however, can be merged in one. The first view considers the Epiklesis to be a mere declaration of the fact, that the conversion has already taken place, and that in the conversion just as essential a part is to be attributed to the Holy Spirit as Co-Consecrator as in the allied mystery of the Incarnation. Since, however, because of the brevity of the actual instant of conversion, the part taken by the Holy Spirit could not be expressed, the Epiklesis takes us back in imagination to the precious moment and regards the Consecration as just about to occur. A similar purely psychological retrospective transfer is met with in other portions of the Liturgy, as in the Mass for the Dead, wherein the Church prays for the departed as if they were still upon their bed of agony and could still be rescued from the gates of hell. Thus considered, the Epiklesis refers us back to the Consecration as the center about which all the significance contained in its words revolves. A second explanation is based, not upon the enactedConsecration, but upon the approaching Communion, inasmuch as the latter, being the effective means of uniting us more closely in the organized body of the Church, brings forth in our hearts the mystical Christ, as is read in the Roman Canon of the Mass: "Ut nobis corpus et sanguis fiat", i.e. that it may be made for us the body and blood. It was in this purely mystical manner that the Greeks themselves explained the meaning of the Epiklesis at the Council of Florence (Mansi, Collect. Concil., XXXI, 106). Yet since much more is contained in the plain words than this true and deep mysticism, it is desirable to combine both explanations into one, and so we regard the Epiklesis, both in point of liturgy and of time, as the significant connecting link, placed midway between the Consecration and the Communion in order to emphasize the part taken by the Holy Spirit in the Consecration of bread and wine, and, on the other hand, with the help of the same Holy Spirit to obtain the realization of the true Presence of the Body and Blood of Christ by their fruitful effects on both priest and people.

I will provide here, for the sake of clarity, the two best proof texts used in the first quotation to demonstrate that the transubstantiation occurs at the Words of Institution for at least two Church Fathers, Justin martyr and Gregory of Nyssa (the other two texts I judged to be weak proofs so let's ignore them, they're useless for our purposes):

Quote
And this food is called among us Εὐχαριστία  [the Eucharist], of which no one is allowed to partake but the man who believes that the things which we teach are true, and who has been washed with the washing that is for the remission of sins, and unto regeneration, and who is so living as Christ has enjoined. For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh.  For the apostles, in the memoirs composed by them, which are called Gospels, have thus delivered unto us what was enjoined upon them; that Jesus took bread, and when He had given thanks, said, "This do in remembrance of Me, this is My body;" and that, after the same manner, having taken the cup and given thanks, He said, "This is My blood;" and gave it to them alone. Which the wicked devils have imitated in the mysteries of Mithras, commanding the same thing to be done. For, that bread and a cup of water are placed with certain incantations in the mystic rites of one who is being initiated, you either know or can learn. (Justin martyr, First Apology, 66)

Quote
For that Body was once, by implication, bread, but has been consecrated by the inhabitation of the Word that tabernacled in the flesh. Therefore, from the same cause as that by which the bread that was transformed in that Body was changed to a Divine potency, a similar result takes place now. For as in that case, too, the grace of the Word used to make holy the Body, the substance of which came of the bread, and in a manner was itself bread, so also in this case the bread, as says the Apostle, "is sanctified by the Word of God and prayer"; not that it advances by the process of eating  to the stage of passing into the body of the Word, but it is at once changed into the body by means of the Word, as the Word itself said, "This is My Body." (The Great Catechism Part III, 37, Gregory of Nyssa)

Hope this helps in clarifying the position of the Catholic Church as much as possible.

In Christ,   Alex
Logged

"Also in the Catholic Church itself we take great care that we hold that which has been believed everywhere, always, by all. For that is truly and properly Catholic" (St. Vincent of Lérins, "The Commonitory")
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #173 on: January 25, 2010, 09:46:07 AM »


Well, the Epiklesis in St. Basil's liturgy seems to suggest that the transmutation of the gifts already happened.

How so?

In St. John Chrysostom's epiklesis, the priest asks the gifts to be changed, while in St. Basil's the priest asks the gifts to be shown to have been the body and blood of Christ. From the GOARCH site, it looks like they substituted the Basilian epiklesis with the Johanine.

From the OCA site:
Quote
After the elevation of the eucharistic gifts to the Father, the celebrant of the Divine Liturgy prays for the Holy Spirit to come upon them, and upon all of the people, and to change (or as the Liturgy of St. Basil says, to show) the bread and wine offered in remembrance of Christ to be the very Body and Blood of the Lord.


My Priest has commented that St. Basil's epiklesis is "much weaker."

This is what we are accustomed to in Saint Basil's Liturgy in the Russian and Serbian Churches.  I do not know if it is identical to what is said in the Greek Churches.

After the words of institution and while the deacon points to the diskos and the holy Bread, the priest says:

"For this bread is in very truth the precious Body of our Lord and God and Saviour Jesus Christ"

and then he says while the deacon is pointing to the chalice:

"For this chalice is truly the precious Blood of our Lord and God and Saviour Jesus Christ which was poured out for the life of the world"

Deacon:  "Bless both, Master."

"Transmuting them by thy Holy Spirit."

This "transmuting them by thy Holy Spirit" is the exact phrase also used in the Liturgy of Saint John Chrysostom.  I do not really see how it is "weaker" in Saint Basil's than Saint John's Liturgy.

« Last Edit: January 25, 2010, 09:48:22 AM by Irish Hermit » Logged
Pravoslavbob
Section Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 3,194


St. Sisoes the Great


« Reply #174 on: January 25, 2010, 12:48:22 PM »

This "transmuting them by thy Holy Spirit" is the exact phrase also used in the Liturgy of Saint John Chrysostom.  I do not really see how it is "weaker" in Saint Basil's than Saint John's Liturgy.

AFAIK this phrase represents a very late addition to the Liturgy of St. Basil which was inserted to "Chrysostomize" it.  In any event, referring to the epiklesis of St. Basil as "weaker" might not be the best option.  It might be better to say that the epiklesis is not quite as explicit as that of St. John, while still showing very clearly that it is only through the presence of the Holy Spirit that the gifts can be transformed.  


I can answer to all your doubts using a reliable Catholic source on the matter. This is a part of article "The Blessed Eucharist as a Sacrament" facing the problem of the role and position of the Epiklesis:

Quote
Not only did such renowned Fathers as Justin (First Apology 66), Irenæus (Against Heresies V.2.3), Gregory of Nyssa (The Great Catechism, no. 37), Chrysostom (Hom. i, de prod. Judæ, n. 6), and John Damascene (Exposition of the Faith IV.13) hold this view, but the ancient Greek Liturgies bear testimony to it, so that Cardinal Bessarion in 1439 at Florence called the attention of his fellow-countrymen to the fact, that as soon as the words of Institution have been pronounced, supreme homage and adoration are due to the Holy Eucharist, even though the famous Epiklesis follows some time after.

Quote
The venerable antiquity of the Oriental Epiklesis, its peculiar position in the Canon of the Mass, and its interior spiritual unction, oblige the theologian to determine its dogmatic value and to account for its use. Take, for instance, the Epiklesis of the Ethiopian Liturgy: "We implore and beseech Thee, O Lord, to send forth the Holy Spirit and His Power upon this Bread and Chalice and convert them into the Body and Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ." Since this prayer always follows after the words of Institution have been pronounced, the theological question arises, as to how it may be made to harmonize with the words of Christ, which alone possess the consecrated power. Two explanations have been suggested which, however, can be merged in one. The first view considers the Epiklesis to be a mere declaration of the fact, that the conversion has already taken place, and that in the conversion just as essential a part is to be attributed to the Holy Spirit as Co-Consecrator as in the allied mystery of the Incarnation. Since, however, because of the brevity of the actual instant of conversion, the part taken by the Holy Spirit could not be expressed, the Epiklesis takes us back in imagination to the precious moment and regards the Consecration as just about to occur. A similar purely psychological retrospective transfer is met with in other portions of the Liturgy, as in the Mass for the Dead, wherein the Church prays for the departed as if they were still upon their bed of agony and could still be rescued from the gates of hell. Thus considered, the Epiklesis refers us back to the Consecration as the center about which all the significance contained in its words revolves. A second explanation is based, not upon the enactedConsecration, but upon the approaching Communion, inasmuch as the latter, being the effective means of uniting us more closely in the organized body of the Church, brings forth in our hearts the mystical Christ, as is read in the Roman Canon of the Mass: "Ut nobis corpus et sanguis fiat", i.e. that it may be made for us the body and blood. It was in this purely mystical manner that the Greeks themselves explained the meaning of the Epiklesis at the Council of Florence (Mansi, Collect. Concil., XXXI, 106). Yet since much more is contained in the plain words than this true and deep mysticism, it is desirable to combine both explanations into one, and so we regard the Epiklesis, both in point of liturgy and of time, as the significant connecting link, placed midway between the Consecration and the Communion in order to emphasize the part taken by the Holy Spirit in the Consecration of bread and wine, and, on the other hand, with the help of the same Holy Spirit to obtain the realization of the true Presence of the Body and Blood of Christ by their fruitful effects on both priest and people.

I will provide here, for the sake of clarity, the two best proof texts used in the first quotation to demonstrate that the transubstantiation occurs at the Words of Institution for at least two Church Fathers, Justin martyr and Gregory of Nyssa (the other two texts I judged to be weak proofs so let's ignore them, they're useless for our purposes):

Quote
And this food is called among us Εὐχαριστία  [the Eucharist], of which no one is allowed to partake but the man who believes that the things which we teach are true, and who has been washed with the washing that is for the remission of sins, and unto regeneration, and who is so living as Christ has enjoined. For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh.  For the apostles, in the memoirs composed by them, which are called Gospels, have thus delivered unto us what was enjoined upon them; that Jesus took bread, and when He had given thanks, said, "This do in remembrance of Me, this is My body;" and that, after the same manner, having taken the cup and given thanks, He said, "This is My blood;" and gave it to them alone. Which the wicked devils have imitated in the mysteries of Mithras, commanding the same thing to be done. For, that bread and a cup of water are placed with certain incantations in the mystic rites of one who is being initiated, you either know or can learn. (Justin martyr, First Apology, 66)

Quote
For that Body was once, by implication, bread, but has been consecrated by the inhabitation of the Word that tabernacled in the flesh. Therefore, from the same cause as that by which the bread that was transformed in that Body was changed to a Divine potency, a similar result takes place now. For as in that case, too, the grace of the Word used to make holy the Body, the substance of which came of the bread, and in a manner was itself bread, so also in this case the bread, as says the Apostle, "is sanctified by the Word of God and prayer"; not that it advances by the process of eating  to the stage of passing into the body of the Word, but it is at once changed into the body by means of the Word, as the Word itself said, "This is My Body." (The Great Catechism Part III, 37, Gregory of Nyssa)

Hope this helps in clarifying the position of the Catholic Church as much as possible.

In Christ,   Alex

Well, perhaps it helps clarify that some Catholic scholars might not be willing to accept Orthodox arguments on this issue.  From our point of view, neither of the quotes you have provided conclusively "proves" anything, though the quote from St. Gregory does provide some food for thought.  The quotes do show that the so-called words of institution are a very important component involved in consecrating the gifts.  But what proof-texting like this cannot demonstrate is how the Christian East has always been very concious that it is only by being in the Spirit that the liturgy can be accomplished.  As time went on, more and more explicit references to the Holy Spirit were added to Eastern liturgy.  Liturgical scholars of all confessions are generally united in the belief that non-acknowledgement of the presence of the Spirit is a problem in Western liturgy.

In any event, why do you think that the supplices te rogamus prayer was included in the old Latin mass?  Surely you don't believe that it is literally calling for an angel to come and take the gifts away into heaven, do you? I notice that you have not responded to any of  my arguments about it up until this point.
« Last Edit: January 25, 2010, 07:44:15 PM by Pravoslavbob » Logged

Religion is a disease, and Orthodoxy is its cure.
stashko
Protokentarchos