OrthodoxChristianity.net
October 20, 2014, 04:34:02 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  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Catholic vs. Orthodox view of original/ansestoral sin  (Read 5345 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #45 on: November 20, 2010, 11:26:23 AM »

The system won't let me report my own posts to a Moderator so could I ask a Moderator to please remove my posts 42 and 43.

I'll initiate another thread in the topic.
« Last Edit: November 20, 2010, 11:27:16 AM by Irish Hermit » Logged
LakaYaRabb
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Posts: 209



WWW
« Reply #46 on: November 20, 2010, 11:28:42 AM »

No fruitful and true dialogue happens on internet forums. Mostly insults. Anathema-tainment.

However, I think the heart of the issue is that in Orthodoxy, synergy is a key component and focus. It is really driven home in the Fathers of the Church and continued to be part of the living tradition of the Church. One might say we always "err" on the side of synergy.

Where we diverge with Roman Catholics is not in the fact of whether synergy is absent (it is not) in their Theology. It is rather its importance and function. Synergy is more vague in Roman Catholic thought. I think they "err" on the side of reason.
Logged
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #47 on: November 20, 2010, 11:31:51 AM »

No fruitful and true dialogue happens on internet forums. Mostly insults. Anathema-tainment.

However, I think the heart of the issue is that in Orthodoxy, synergy is a key component and focus. It is really driven home in the Fathers of the Church and continued to be part of the living tradition of the Church. One might say we always "err" on the side of synergy.

Where we diverge with Roman Catholics is not in the fact of whether synergy is absent (it is not) in their Theology. It is rather its importance and function. Synergy is more vague in Roman Catholic thought. I think they "err" on the side of reason.

Then you are paying attention to the wrong writings and the wrong saints to really have a full grasp of Catholic spirituality.  I don't mean devotions and the like.  I mean the full spirituality of Catholic life.  

I am not joking here.  

But, as you say, this is probably not the right place to convince you.
« Last Edit: November 20, 2010, 11:32:28 AM by elijahmaria » Logged

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

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #48 on: November 20, 2010, 11:37:55 AM »


No fruitful and true dialogue happens on internet forums. Mostly insults. Anathema-tainment.
 

Yes and No!   The dialogue on CAF brought about 3 dozen people into Orthodoxy.
Logged
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #49 on: November 20, 2010, 11:42:42 AM »


No fruitful and true dialogue happens on internet forums. Mostly insults. Anathema-tainment.
 

Yes and No!   The dialogue on CAF brought about 3 dozen people into Orthodoxy.

 laugh laugh laugh laugh

Right-o and Mary Lanser speaks to unnamed Orthodox bishops too!!!!

Let's hear from the three dozen.

And frankly, the more I talk to converts to Orthodoxy from the catholic Church the more I realize we are actually some better off without them and the confusion that they radiate.
Logged

Shlomlokh
主哀れめよ!
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Bulgarian
Posts: 1,262



« Reply #50 on: November 20, 2010, 12:22:54 PM »

This cut and paste is not only taken out of context it is off topic.

Do you see the lengths some Orthodox will go to derail any kind of fruitful dialogue.

Well...We expect these kinds of running disingenuous communiques from you.



But the deal breaker is the Council of Carthage of 418 that speaks of washing away original sin in Baptism and that Council was ratified at Ephesus and Second Nicea.

I  especially like Canon 17 of this Council which excommunicates anybody who makes an appeal to Rome.  Now there is a real deal breaker!   Cheesy laugh Wink

Can. 17 “If priests, deacons, and inferior clerics complain of a sentence of their own bishop, they shall, with the
consent of their bishop, have recourse to the neighboring bishops, who shall settle the dispute. If they desire to make
a further appeal, it must only be to their primates or to African Councils. But whoever appeals to a court on the other
side of the sea (Rome), may not again be received into communion by any one in Africa.”

Ratified by TWO Ecumenical Councils!!


That's a rather wonderful and strong support of the Orthodox position since TWO Popes ratified the canon, at Ephesus and Nicea II,  which forbids appeals to Rome under pain of excommunication.

Please show us the context then, Mary. I would like to see it in its proper context.

Why do you always assume the worst out of Orthodox? I find that highly offensive and annoying. This dichotomy of "Roman Catholic=noble and smart" coupled with "Orthodox=deceptive and ignorant" rears its ugly head in a lot of postings from our RC members. While you did not directly say it here, I see it in a lot of your postings and I don't think it does any credit to your arguments or your cause, whatever that may be.

I'll take it further and say that some of us posters are here and can be boneheaded and difficult, too. Smiley Please forgive us for that, but please don't keep making sweeping generalizations about all of the Orthodox on here.

Just an opinion from someone lurking into threads without anything really substantive to contribute.  Wink

In Christ,
Andrew
« Last Edit: November 20, 2010, 12:23:19 PM by Shlomlokh » Logged

"I will pour out my prayer unto the Lord, and to Him will I proclaim my grief; for with evils my soul is filled, and my life unto hades hath drawn nigh, and like Jonah I will pray: From corruption raise me up, O God." -Ode VI, Irmos of the Supplicatory Canon to the Theotokos
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #51 on: November 20, 2010, 12:36:23 PM »

This cut and paste is not only taken out of context it is off topic.

Do you see the lengths some Orthodox will go to derail any kind of fruitful dialogue.

Well...We expect these kinds of running disingenuous communiques from you.



But the deal breaker is the Council of Carthage of 418 that speaks of washing away original sin in Baptism and that Council was ratified at Ephesus and Second Nicea.

I  especially like Canon 17 of this Council which excommunicates anybody who makes an appeal to Rome.  Now there is a real deal breaker!   Cheesy laugh Wink

Can. 17 “If priests, deacons, and inferior clerics complain of a sentence of their own bishop, they shall, with the
consent of their bishop, have recourse to the neighboring bishops, who shall settle the dispute. If they desire to make
a further appeal, it must only be to their primates or to African Councils. But whoever appeals to a court on the other
side of the sea (Rome), may not again be received into communion by any one in Africa.”

Ratified by TWO Ecumenical Councils!!


That's a rather wonderful and strong support of the Orthodox position since TWO Popes ratified the canon, at Ephesus and Nicea II,  which forbids appeals to Rome under pain of excommunication.

Please show us the context then, Mary. I would like to see it in its proper context.

Why do you always assume the worst out of Orthodox? I find that highly offensive and annoying. This dichotomy of "Roman Catholic=noble and smart" coupled with "Orthodox=deceptive and ignorant" rears its ugly head in a lot of postings from our RC members. While you did not directly say it here, I see it in a lot of your postings and I don't think it does any credit to your arguments or your cause, whatever that may be.

I'll take it further and say that some of us posters are here and can be boneheaded and difficult, too. Smiley Please forgive us for that, but please don't keep making sweeping generalizations about all of the Orthodox on here.

Just an opinion from someone lurking into threads without anything really substantive to contribute.  Wink

In Christ,
Andrew

It is not that I think most Orthodox are deceptive and ignorant.  It is not real that I think that without qualification, and in other circumstances, I would defend Orthodox faithful to the death!!  That is true.

I do think Father Ambrose in his way is full of anger at the Catholic Church personally and he has revealed some of that over the years to me, so I have very little patience for any monk, from any confession, who does the kinds of things that he does out of the motives that he has described to me.  There is NOTHING there that smacks of the Orthodox hospital or forgiveness in any way.   So you won't see me in any good light when I am talking to him.  The same for Isa.  They are deceptive in what they do and the way they do it here.  It disgusts me at a very fundamental level because it is so deceitful in its manner and presentation.

I DO believe and I will say it that many Catholics who leave the Catholic Church for Orthodoxy were nominal and in many ways ignorant, in the first place, and remain ignorant, and often aggressively so, of Catholic teaching while in Orthodoxy.

Ignorance is not a sin.  Ignorance is not a fault.  I am ignorant of so much that it frightens me!!  But I am not ignorant of what my Church teaches and has taught and some of the history involved.

So I apologize to you if I've appeared harsh and judgmental.  I don't set out to be but being pushed and shoved and buffeted without the appropriate kind of moderating that would force a discussion back onto a more fruitful path, the whole discussion becomes serendipitous.  Sometimes one can make a dent in the barriers and shine a little light in, but the struggle to get there can, as you so aptly noted, do real damage.  I realize that and hope that the little light may help make up for the rest.

In Christ, and thank you for the reminder

Mary

Logged

LakaYaRabb
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Posts: 209



WWW
« Reply #52 on: November 20, 2010, 01:48:22 PM »

Quote
Then you are paying attention to the wrong writings and the wrong saints to really have a full grasp of Catholic spirituality.  I don't mean devotions and the like.  I mean the full spirituality of Catholic life.   

I am not joking here. 

But, as you say, this is probably not the right place to convince you.

I am afraid that we are at an impasse. To continue talking on this subject would me in my mind talking past each other. This is the real fruit of dialogue between Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism, sadly.

The is major differences in our Theological understanding of many issues. Until we can admit that an speak about is honestly, dialogue will be held captive by the bonds of the idea of division based on mutual misunderstanding.

It is clear that we emphasize the Greek Fathers much differently than Roman Catholics. Roman Catholics allege adherence to Western Fathers, but which ones and how? St. Augustine's wording is taken, but not his teaching. St. Anselm is credited with the teaching of Atonement, but the theology of it is rejected. Who do you have? Thomas Aquinas? Who else? Which Saint's theology has been dynamically adopted into your Liturgy, your devotions, your spirituality? Where is you St. John  Chysostom, your Saint Basil, your Saint Romanos, your St. Andrew of Crete, your Saint John Koukouzelis, your Saint Gregory Palamas? 
Logged
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #53 on: November 20, 2010, 01:55:30 PM »

Quote
Then you are paying attention to the wrong writings and the wrong saints to really have a full grasp of Catholic spirituality.  I don't mean devotions and the like.  I mean the full spirituality of Catholic life.   

I am not joking here. 

But, as you say, this is probably not the right place to convince you.

I am afraid that we are at an impasse. To continue talking on this subject would me in my mind talking past each other. This is the real fruit of dialogue between Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism, sadly.

The is major differences in our Theological understanding of many issues. Until we can admit that an speak about is honestly, dialogue will be held captive by the bonds of the idea of division based on mutual misunderstanding.

It is clear that we emphasize the Greek Fathers much differently than Roman Catholics. Roman Catholics allege adherence to Western Fathers, but which ones and how? St. Augustine's wording is taken, but not his teaching. St. Anselm is credited with the teaching of Atonement, but the theology of it is rejected. Who do you have? Thomas Aquinas? Who else? Which Saint's theology has been dynamically adopted into your Liturgy, your devotions, your spirituality? Where is you St. John  Chysostom, your Saint Basil, your Saint Romanos, your St. Andrew of Crete, your Saint John Koukouzelis, your Saint Gregory Palamas? 

 laugh laugh

We follow the patristic and desert Father just as you do.  That is why I say.  You clearly have no idea what our saints have written and whose lives they modeled their own lives after.

When I speak to Orthodox believers, nameless of course, who do not have their minds closed as you do and who actually know something about the saints and doctors of the Catholic Church we have wonderful discussions and spiritually fruitful.

Ahh well...Your mind is closed.

In Christ,

M.
Logged

LakaYaRabb
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Posts: 209



WWW
« Reply #54 on: November 20, 2010, 02:09:20 PM »

I attended your Masses for many years, spread your theology in your youth groups and receiving a degree from you catholic university considered by many of roman catholics as bastion of orthodoxy. In your Masses, I never chanted theology. Chanting Mass parts, even with Sacred chant and polyphony is not the same. Where is your hymnography to Thomas Aquinas proclaiming to the faithful in the Mass his theology? Where is the story of his piety in song? Where are your saints actually celebrated in the Mass of your Church?

Of course I am close minded. I'll let Chesterton tell you why.
"An open mind is really a mark of foolishness, like an open mouth. Mouths and minds were made to shut; they were made to open only in order to shut."
"The object of opening the mind, as of opening the mouth, is to shut it again on something solid."

To you, I am ignorant. Which is fine. Whether I am or not doesn't change the reality of the division between Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism. Clarity isn't going to change that ever. What will change that, if it can be changed is the work of the Holy Spirit. I think  we can both agree on that.
Logged
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #55 on: November 20, 2010, 02:13:38 PM »

I attended your Masses for many years, spread your theology in your youth groups and receiving a degree from you catholic university considered by many of roman catholics as bastion of orthodoxy. In your Masses, I never chanted theology. Chanting Mass parts, even with Sacred chant and polyphony is not the same. Where is your hymnography to Thomas Aquinas proclaiming to the faithful in the Mass his theology? Where is the story of his piety in song? Where are your saints actually celebrated in the Mass of your Church?

Of course I am close minded. I'll let Chesterton tell you why.
"An open mind is really a mark of foolishness, like an open mouth. Mouths and minds were made to shut; they were made to open only in order to shut."
"The object of opening the mind, as of opening the mouth, is to shut it again on something solid."

To you, I am ignorant. Which is fine. Whether I am or not doesn't change the reality of the division between Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism. Clarity isn't going to change that ever. What will change that, if it can be changed is the work of the Holy Spirit. I think  we can both agree on that.

We don't even agree here.  The work of the Holy Spirit is illumination.  If that does not bring clarity then perhaps you are working with a different spirit. 

You learned little in your pass-through. 

Logged

Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #56 on: November 20, 2010, 02:29:41 PM »


No fruitful and true dialogue happens on internet forums. Mostly insults. Anathema-tainment.
 

Yes and No!   The dialogue on CAF brought about 3 dozen people into Orthodoxy.
It's pretty pathetic to change religions based on conversations on the internet. I joined a Catholic forum only after I had been Catholic for awhile, and forums played no part in my conversion (thanks be to God).
Logged
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #57 on: November 20, 2010, 02:56:58 PM »

What Father Ambrose does not realize is that the Catholic Church today is not opposed to such rulings and has not been for a very very long time.

When someone sends the Vatican a letter of complaint against any one of her bishops, that letter, no matter who sends it, is delivered immediately to the desk of the "offending" bishop.  Nothing further is done on the matter.  The bishop is expected to be informed and to keep his house in order.

So this is not nearly the "shocker" that monk Ambrose intended.


But the deal breaker is the Council of Carthage of 418 that speaks of washing away original sin in Baptism and that Council was ratified at Ephesus and Second Nicea.

I  especially like Canon 17 of this Council which excommunicates anybody who makes an appeal to Rome.  Now there is a real deal breaker!   Cheesy laugh Wink

Can. 17 “If priests, deacons, and inferior clerics complain of a sentence of their own bishop, they shall, with the
consent of their bishop, have recourse to the neighboring bishops, who shall settle the dispute. If they desire to make
a further appeal, it must only be to their primates or to African Councils. But whoever appeals to a court on the other
side of the sea (Rome), may not again be received into communion by any one in Africa.”

Ratified by TWO Ecumenical Councils!!
Logged

Rufus
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: leet


Nafpliotis with sunglasses and a cigar.


« Reply #58 on: November 20, 2010, 04:09:34 PM »

You’re jaded from arguing. You had a knee-jerk reacton to my post. Let's take one more look at it.

And then you have Bishop Hilarion, in his catechetical text on Faith, teaching that it can be translated correctly either way, and it has more than one interpretation.  And he leaves it at that.
As I said, it’s quite ambiguous. I happen to disagree with Bishop Hilarion, despite the fact that he’s my hero. It seems to me a stretch for the pronoun to be referring to Adam, when death was mentioned much more recently.

One aspect of this verse that may  support the Thomist rendering is the verb tense of “sinned”: hemarton, aorist tense, indicating a point-in-time action, i.e. all humanity sinned beforehand in Adam. This, of course, lends itself to a variety of theological interpretations, which it is not by goal to set forth. It could also just mean that “all have commited sin on account of death.”

The Augustinian interpretation “because all sinned” is another valid possibility for the meaning of “eph’ ho.”

Quote
But the deal breaker is the Council of Carthage of 418 that speaks of washing away original sin in Baptism and that Council was ratified at Ephesus and Second Nicea.
Context, please.

Quote
So it appears that the Church has always understood that the laver of regeneration heals some part of the ancestral sin.
I never even presumed to say anything amounting to this. If our entire human nature is regenerated in baptism, then obviously that has consequences for the corruption (aka consequences of the ancestral sin) we inherit.

Quote
And no.  My Catholic Church never did teach that Adam's personal guilt is our personal guilt.
Are you accusing me of accusing you of saying this? Because I said:
Quote
I apologize for a really dry post, but hopefully it will help clarify the discussion, and add some more substance to it.
I did not say, “This proves we are right,” or anything amouting to that.

If you wish for some fruitful dialogue, and don’t want to derail it, a good place to start would be by explaining what exactly the Thomist language does mean, and why people (including catechized Catholics) misconstrue it so often.

Rufus

I believe a key cause of the Original Sin issue is the interpretation of the verse Romans 5:12:
Quote
Dia touto hosper di' henos anthropou he hamartia eis ton kosmon eiselthen kai dia dia tes hamartias ho thanatos, kai houtos eis pantas anthropous ho thanatos dielthen, eph' ho pantes hemarton

δια τουτο ωσπερ δι ενος ανθρωπου η αμαρτια εις τον κοσμον εισηλθεν και δια της αμαρτιας ο θανατος και ουτως εις παντας ανθρωπους ο θανατος διηλθεν εφ ω παντες ημαρτον

This is a verse that I have never ever seen translated accurately, except by the Orthodox New Testament, by Holy Apostles Convent. Here are some different versions of this verse:

Vulgate:
Quote
Propterea sicut per unum hominem in hunc mundum peccatum intravit et per peccatum mors et ita in omnes homines mors pertransiit in quo omnes peccaverunt

Modern English translations usually get it something like this:
Quote
Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned

The patristic rendering of the verse is:
Quote
Therefore, just as through one man sin came into the world, and through sin [or, the sin] death, and thus death passed through to all men, on account of which all sinned. (My translation; Holy Apostles Convent also says "on account of which.")

The phrase "eph' ho/in quo" was mistakenly taken to mean "in whom" (i.e. in Adam) in the Latin tradition, hence we all sinned "in Adam."

However, the very ambiguous preposition "epi" literally means "on," and by extension, it often means "because of." The relative pronoun's antecedent is death, not Adam. Technically, it is ambiguous, but it would have to refer all the way back to the beginning of the sentence to be indicating Adam.

Let's look at some historical interpretations of this verse.

Thomas Aquinas, from Summa:
Quote
The Apostle says (Rom. 5:12): "Death passed upon all men in whom all have sinned."

I answer that, According to the Catholic Faith we must firmly believe that, Christ alone excepted, all men descended from Adam contract original sin from him; else all would not need redemption [*Cf. Translator's note inserted before TP, Q[27]] which is through Christ; and this is erroneous. The reason for this may be gathered from what has been stated (A[1]), viz. that original sin, in virtue of the sin of our first parent, is transmitted to his posterity, just as, from the soul's will, actual sin is transmitted to the members of the body, through their being moved by the will. Now it is evident that actual sin can be transmitted to all such members as have an inborn aptitude to be moved by the will. Therefore original sin is transmitted to all those who are moved by Adam by the movement of generation.

Reply to Objection 1: It is held with greater probability and more commonly that all those that are alive at the coming of our Lord, will die, and rise again shortly, as we shall state more fully in the TP (XP, Q[78], A[1], OBJ[1]). If, however, it be true, as others hold, that they will never die, (an opinion which Jerome mentions among others in a letter to Minerius, on the Resurrection of the Body---Ep. cxix), then we must say in reply to the objection, that although they are not to die, the debt of death is none the less in them, and that the punishment of death will be remitted by God, since He can also forgive the punishment due for actual sins.

Reply to Objection 1: Original sin is taken away by Baptism as to the guilt, in so far as the soul recovers grace as regards the mind. Nevertheless original sin remains in its effect as regards the "fomes," which is the disorder of the lower parts of the soul and of the body itself, in respect of which, and not of the mind, man exercises his power of generation. Consequently those who are baptized transmit original sin: since they do not beget as being renewed in Baptism, but as still retaining something of the oldness of the first sin.

Reply to Objection 3: Just as Adam's sin is transmitted to all who are born of Adam corporally, so is the grace of Christ transmitted to all that are begotten of Him spiritually, by faith and Baptism: and this, not only unto the removal of sin of their first parent, but also unto the removal of actual sins, and the obtaining of glory.
--Summa, part I, question 81, article 3.
***
This interpretation is a little different from that of St. Augustine, whose commentary on Romans I unfortunately cannot find online. However, here is a link where you can find his interpretation of it: http://books.google.com/books?id=zJh2iwKAdYYC&printsec=frontcover&dq=augustine%27s+commentary+on+romans&source=bl&ots=7At796sio2&sig=eef8EJ4aDzcQMZJklq_cFkoNnkg&hl=de&ei=8ETnTKrMOIW8lQfmsaHxCw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=7&ved=0CFQQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&q&f=false

Just for fun, John Calvin:
Quote
Sin entered into the world, etc. Observe the order which he keeps here; for he says, that sin preceded, and that from sin death followed. There are indeed some who contend, that we are so lost through Adam’s sin, as though we perished through no fault of our own, but only, because he had sinned for us. But Paul distinctly affirms, that sin extends to all who suffer its punishment: and this he afterwards more fully declares, when subsequently he assigns a reason why all the posterity of Adam are subject to the dominion of death; and it is even this — because we have all, he says, sinned. But to sin in this case, is to become corrupt and vicious; for the natural depravity which we bring, from our mother’s womb, though it brings not forth immediately its own fruits, is yet sin before God, and deserves his vengeance: and this is that sin which they call original.
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/calvin/calcom38.ix.vi.html

Apparently, St. Augustine and Calvin follow the "because all sinned" interpretation, although they still disagree as to the doctrine itself. (IMO, Calvin's interpretation that all men deserve condemnation for actual sins, thus justifying condemnation for Original Sin, is a cop-out for having to explain injustice in God.)

Now, St. John Chrysostom:
Quote
How then did death come in and prevail? “Through the sin of one.” But what means, “for that all have sinned?” This: he having once fallen, even they that had not eaten of the tree did from him, all of them, become mortal.
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf111.vii.xii.html

St. John emphasizes the inheritance of mortality. Why mortality leads to sin he does not explain. (It's typical of him to bypass the theological issue and hurry towards the verses most pertinent to a layman.)

This view fits in uncannily well with the Eastern emphasis on humanity's dual enslavement to sin and death, the inseperability of sin and death, and the fact that Christ saved us by abolishing the two. See Hebrews 2:14-15:

Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil; And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.
***

I apologize for a really dry post, but hopefully it will help clarify the discussion, and add some more substance to it.

Rufus
Logged
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #59 on: November 20, 2010, 04:58:27 PM »

You’re jaded from arguing. You had a knee-jerk reacton to my post. Let's take one more look at it.

Yield.  You have a valid point.

I'll not come back to it today but I will come back to it.  Might even start a new thread.

What do you mean when you ask for the conciliar context that I mentioned?  What are you looking for there?

Mary
Logged

Rufus
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: leet


Nafpliotis with sunglasses and a cigar.


« Reply #60 on: November 20, 2010, 05:11:14 PM »

You’re jaded from arguing. You had a knee-jerk reacton to my post. Let's take one more look at it.

Yield.  You have a valid point.

I'll not come back to it today but I will come back to it.  Might even start a new thread.

What do you mean when you ask for the conciliar context that I mentioned?  What are you looking for there?

Mary


Not really sure...you were bringing it up as a counter-point, so I wanted to see the text for itself. It would be interesting to see how the council defined their terminology, whether they included terminology of guilt, and what language the canons were written in (Latin?).
Logged
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #61 on: November 20, 2010, 05:14:32 PM »

You’re jaded from arguing. You had a knee-jerk reacton to my post. Let's take one more look at it.

Yield.  You have a valid point.

I'll not come back to it today but I will come back to it.  Might even start a new thread.

What do you mean when you ask for the conciliar context that I mentioned?  What are you looking for there?

Mary


Not really sure...you were bringing it up as a counter-point, so I wanted to see the text for itself. It would be interesting to see how the council defined their terminology, whether they included terminology of guilt, and what language the canons were written in (Latin?).

Ok...I have a translation somewhere in my files...Most likely have to seek out a source in any event.
Logged

ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
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: 37,960



« Reply #62 on: November 20, 2010, 06:14:13 PM »


No fruitful and true dialogue happens on internet forums. Mostly insults. Anathema-tainment.
 

Yes and No!   The dialogue on CAF brought about 3 dozen people into Orthodoxy.
It's pretty pathetic to change religions based on conversations on the internet.

Why pathetic? It's no different from converting from a debate in person.


Quote
I joined a Catholic forum only after I had been Catholic for awhile, and forums played no part in my conversion (thanks be to God).
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
Warned
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: 37,960



« Reply #63 on: November 20, 2010, 06:16:02 PM »

I attended your Masses for many years, spread your theology in your youth groups and receiving a degree from you catholic university considered by many of roman catholics as bastion of orthodoxy. In your Masses, I never chanted theology. Chanting Mass parts, even with Sacred chant and polyphony is not the same. Where is your hymnography to Thomas Aquinas proclaiming to the faithful in the Mass his theology? Where is the story of his piety in song? Where are your saints actually celebrated in the Mass of your Church?

Of course I am close minded. I'll let Chesterton tell you why.
"An open mind is really a mark of foolishness, like an open mouth. Mouths and minds were made to shut; they were made to open only in order to shut."
"The object of opening the mind, as of opening the mouth, is to shut it again on something solid."

To you, I am ignorant. Which is fine. Whether I am or not doesn't change the reality of the division between Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism. Clarity isn't going to change that ever. What will change that, if it can be changed is the work of the Holy Spirit. I think  we can both agree on that.

We don't even agree here.  The work of the Holy Spirit is illumination.  If that does not bring clarity then perhaps you are working with a different spirit. 

You learned little in your pass-through. 


Learned enough.
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
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #64 on: November 20, 2010, 07:28:37 PM »

I attended your Masses for many years, spread your theology in your youth groups and receiving a degree from you catholic university considered by many of roman catholics as bastion of orthodoxy. In your Masses, I never chanted theology. Chanting Mass parts, even with Sacred chant and polyphony is not the same. Where is your hymnography to Thomas Aquinas proclaiming to the faithful in the Mass his theology? Where is the story of his piety in song? Where are your saints actually celebrated in the Mass of your Church?

Of course I am close minded. I'll let Chesterton tell you why.
"An open mind is really a mark of foolishness, like an open mouth. Mouths and minds were made to shut; they were made to open only in order to shut."
"The object of opening the mind, as of opening the mouth, is to shut it again on something solid."

To you, I am ignorant. Which is fine. Whether I am or not doesn't change the reality of the division between Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism. Clarity isn't going to change that ever. What will change that, if it can be changed is the work of the Holy Spirit. I think  we can both agree on that.

We don't even agree here.  The work of the Holy Spirit is illumination.  If that does not bring clarity then perhaps you are working with a different spirit. 

You learned little in your pass-through. 


Learned enough.

Hardly.  Not from what I can see from your correspondences. 

Logged

Aindriú
Faster! Funnier!
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Cynical
Jurisdiction: Vestibule of Hell
Posts: 3,918



WWW
« Reply #65 on: November 20, 2010, 07:35:06 PM »

Nuh Uh!


Uh huh!


*raspberry*


 Cheesy
Logged


I'm going to need this.
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #66 on: November 20, 2010, 07:38:36 PM »

Nuh Uh!


Uh huh!


*raspberry*


 Cheesy


LOL....

Fine!!  Then he learned enough to wage a dirty campaign against the Catholic Church but not nearly enough to wage a truthful on...either against her, or in her service.

M.
Logged

akimel
Fr Aidan
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ROCOR (Western Rite)
Posts: 520



WWW
« Reply #67 on: November 20, 2010, 08:01:14 PM »

Egads!  Does anyone really believe that the "correct" understanding of original/ancestral sin hinges on the "correct" exegesis of a single biblical verse?  Polemics may thrive on these kinds of debates, but this is the death of theology and faith. 
Logged

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

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #68 on: November 20, 2010, 08:05:21 PM »


I do think Father Ambrose in his way is full of anger at the Catholic Church personally and he has revealed some of that over the years to me,


I think that you frequently make things dirty and personal and you are often wrong in the motivations and emotions you think you discern in others.

Quote

 so I have very little patience for any monk, from any confession, who does the kinds of things that he does out of the motives that he has described to me.

I would say that you are knowingly offering a falsehood.  Please tell us *what* motives have I described to you?


Quote
 

There is NOTHING there that smacks of the Orthodox hospital or forgiveness in any way.

Another personal attack which seems to smack more of "I'll find a way to cut him down" than an honest appraisal.

Quote


So you won't see me in any good light when I am talking to him.  The same for Isa.  They are deceptive in what they do and the way they do it here.  It disgusts me at a very fundamental level because it is so deceitful in its manner and presentation.

And the nastiness just keeps on rolling out.  Rest of your message snipped.

.
Logged
Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #69 on: November 21, 2010, 02:58:20 AM »

Why pathetic? It's no different from converting from a debate in person.
Which I also wouldn't do. I would not just listen to people spout off a bunch of negative things about a certain religion and simply take their word for it. I would research it myself. I also wouldn't read a slew of posts on a forum with a list of quotes "proving" why a certain religion is wrong. I don't appreciate nor respond to negativity. Instead of harping on what Eastern Orthodoxy is not (i.e. not Roman Catholic) why don't you start talking about what it is. You attract more flies with honey than with vinegar.
Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #70 on: November 21, 2010, 12:21:33 PM »


No fruitful and true dialogue happens on internet forums. Mostly insults. Anathema-tainment.
 

Yes and No!   The dialogue on CAF brought about 3 dozen people into Orthodoxy.

 laugh laugh laugh laugh

Right-o and Mary Lanser speaks to unnamed Orthodox bishops too!!!!

Let's hear from the three dozen.


Make that three dozen plus 4.  I had a message from someone yesterday, saying that he and his family were chrismated into Orthodoxy last weekend and it was the time on CAF which initiated his faith journey into the Orthodoxy Church.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
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: 37,960



« Reply #71 on: November 21, 2010, 02:23:27 PM »

Why pathetic? It's no different from converting from a debate in person.
Which I also wouldn't do. I would not just listen to people spout off a bunch of negative things about a certain religion and simply take their word for it.
You assUme that they simply take our word for it, when we point out that the claims of a certain religion are founded on sand. Case in point

And it is a weak position. Fr, do you acknowledge that the EO Church no longer believes what the Fathers believed about birth control?

We actually do not have enough from the Holy Fathers to form a solid consensus of teaching.

The Roman Catholics prove this.

If you go to sites such as CAF and their articles against contraception they will have a small quote mine of quotes from the Fathers.   BUT, when you look at them, you realise that they are not in fact about birth control at all!  Give it a try.
I find it funny that when the Catholic Church teaches something not explicitly taught by the Fathers that we are heretical, but it is completely acceptable for the Orthodox to do so apparently (as in the case of birth control). I am curious about something. Whenever there is not a clear consensus on a teaching by the Fathers, how does an Orthodox Christian know what to believe? As a Catholic, it is easy for me because I look to the teaching authority of my Church, the Magisterium. Orthodoxy has no Magisterium, however, so how are issues like this dealt with in Orthodoxy? Is everyone just allowed to have their own opinion on it if there isn't patristic consensus?
Did you give it a try?
http://www.catholic.com/library/Contraception_and_Sterilization.asp
with your magisterium's a-OK
Quote
NIHIL OBSTAT: I have concluded that the materials
presented in this work are free of doctrinal or moral errors.
Bernadeane Carr, STL, Censor Librorum, August 10, 2004

IMPRIMATUR: In accord with 1983 CIC 827
permission to publish this work is hereby granted.
+Robert H. Brom, Bishop of San Diego, August 10, 2004

I would research it myself.
And the many who have thanked my feeble efforts on behalf of the Church for bringing them to her have. Why do you assUme otherwise?

I also wouldn't read a slew of posts on a forum with a list of quotes "proving" why a certain religion is wrong.
You mean like CAF?
http://www.catholic.com/library/noncatholic_groups.asp
e.g. http://www.catholic.com/library/Eastern_Orthodoxy.asp
and the a-OK of the magisterium
Quote
NIHIL OBSTAT: I have concluded that the materials
presented in this work are free of doctrinal or moral errors.
Bernadeane Carr, STL, Censor Librorum, August 10, 2004

IMPRIMATUR: In accord with 1983 CIC 827
permission to publish this work is hereby granted.
+Robert H. Brom, Bishop of San Diego, August 10, 2004

I don't appreciate nor respond to negativity. Instead of harping on what Eastern Orthodoxy is not (i.e. not Roman Catholic)
nor Protestantism, nor Judaism, nor Islam, nor Buddhism, etc.-I touch on all of the above when appropriate.

why don't you start talking about what it is.
I have at profusion. That that doesn't interest you, well,....those are the blinders you have chosen.

You attract more flies with honey than with vinegar.
and a corpse attracts the most of all.  I'm more interested in busy bees, but I don't mind attracting flies off death and decay.

But back to your boast:
Quote
As a Catholic, it is easy for me because I look to the teaching authority of my Church, the Magisterium[/b
Well, sounds nice, but then we ask for details and we get a lot of hmming and huhing, not to mention "uh...."
« Last Edit: November 21, 2010, 02:24:16 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
LakaYaRabb
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Posts: 209



WWW
« Reply #72 on: November 21, 2010, 02:57:55 PM »

Quote
Yes and No!   The dialogue on CAF brought about 3 dozen people into Orthodoxy.

Father Bless!
My post was only a contextual assertion of my opinion about internet forum discussions. It was not meant to downplay the reality that many have encountered the Orthodoxy Church via internet forum. My comment did not even remotely relate to the kinds of interactions you have had that have led to conversions to Holy Orthodoxy. I am not an expert on these matters and please forgive me if I sounded critical. Before the dismantling of the Eastern Chrisitan forum at CAF, my time in interacting with you and other Orthodox Christians there, played a partial role in my conversion.
Logged
Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #73 on: November 21, 2010, 03:16:17 PM »

Make that three dozen plus 4.  I had a message from someone yesterday, saying that he and his family were chrismated into Orthodoxy last weekend and it was the time on CAF which initiated his faith journey into the Orthodoxy Church.
Well to be fair, CAF is not always a good example of what Catholic Christians should be. Just as I have been told not to judge Eastern Orthodoxy based on posts by certain anti-Catholics on this forum, neither should one judge all of Catholicism based on posts from CAF. In any forum you are going to have bad eggs, which is why in my earlier post I mentioned how silly it would be to base something as important as one's faith on what people on a forum say.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
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: 37,960



« Reply #74 on: November 21, 2010, 03:27:06 PM »

Make that three dozen plus 4.  I had a message from someone yesterday, saying that he and his family were chrismated into Orthodoxy last weekend and it was the time on CAF which initiated his faith journey into the Orthodoxy Church.
Well to be fair, CAF is not always a good example of what Catholic Christians should be. Just as I have been told not to judge Eastern Orthodoxy based on posts by certain anti-Catholics on this forum, neither should one judge all of Catholicism based on posts from CAF. In any forum you are going to have bad eggs, which is why in my earlier post I mentioned how silly it would be to base something as important as one's faith on what people on a forum say.
fish-eaters more your cup of tea?

After all, they don't exist in the ether. They do go to some parish of the Vatican somewhere in the world, and hence are a spectrum of those you would meet in "real life."
« Last Edit: November 21, 2010, 03:29:06 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
Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #75 on: November 21, 2010, 04:40:47 PM »

fish-eaters more your cup of tea?
No, I have posted a link to the RC forum I belong to but it was removed. If you want to know about it we can discuss it in PMs.

After all, they don't exist in the ether. They do go to some parish of the Vatican somewhere in the world, and hence are a spectrum of those you would meet in "real life."
Yes, but the thing with the internet is people tend to be a lot more bold because of the sense of anonymity. Even though these people do exist in real life, they are not likely to be as harsh and opinionated in person as they are on the internet. I doubt you get all up in people's face about the supposed evils of the RCC like you do on here.
Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #76 on: November 21, 2010, 06:54:32 PM »

75 posts into this topic and there has been a small discussion of original sin.  When are we going to get to the second part of the topic - ansestoral sin - which I suppose is the sin of our sisters....   laugh Grin
Logged
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 30,094


Goodbye for now, my friend


« Reply #77 on: November 21, 2010, 07:06:35 PM »

Yes, but the thing with the internet is people tend to be a lot more bold because of the sense of anonymity. Even though these people do exist in real life, they are not likely to be as harsh and opinionated in person as they are on the internet. I doubt you get all up in people's face about the supposed evils of the RCC like you do on here.

Such people are cowards, and I spit on them.
« Last Edit: November 21, 2010, 07:06:48 PM by Asteriktos » Logged

Paradosis ≠ Asteriktos ≠ Justin
Tags:
Pages: « 1 2  All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.147 seconds with 61 queries.