OrthodoxChristianity.net
October 23, 2014, 02:02:22 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: Catholic and Orthodox: Appeal to Teaching Authority  (Read 11021 times) Average Rating: 5
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Jetavan
Argumentum ad australopithecum
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Science to the Fourth Power
Jurisdiction: Ohayo Gozaimasu
Posts: 6,580


Barlaam and Josaphat


WWW
« Reply #180 on: August 15, 2010, 05:51:39 PM »

Not the point, is it?  What makes sense to me may not make sense to you - and neither of us may be right!  All we can do is pray "Lord have mercy on me a sinner" and trust that whatever happens is His will. 
I'm just curious.  Grin
Logged

If you will, you can become all flame.
Extra caritatem nulla salus.
In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness".
सर्वभूतहित
Ἄνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας
"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas Gandhi
Y dduw bo'r diolch.
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #181 on: August 15, 2010, 07:32:19 PM »

If it's OK for someone other than Ambrose and Mary to interject an opinion  Cheesy, here's mine:  

One of the reasons I'm more comfortable with Orthodoxy than Catholicism is my perception that Orthodoxy is, at least in theory, more comfortable with my uncertainty about the afterlife.

There may very well be something like Purgatory after we die.  But I haven't died yet, so I don't know.

There may very well be something like Toll Houses after we die.  But I haven't died yet, so I don't know.

There may be something completely different and unexpected after we die.

There may be NOTHING after we die.

But I haven't died yet!  So I don't know!!!

And I don't really see how anyone who hasn't died can know, for sure, to the point where they can authoritatively tell other people that they MUST believe what they believe, as a FACT, or else they will be shut out from any contact with God for eternity.

Sigh.  So what do you think?  Am I doomed? Grin

Are you suggesting that comfort is the arbiter of theological truth?

Also, logically and without immediate reference to your wide ranging doubts, has it occurred to you that among the substances of things unseen are such gems as....heaven....and howse'bout the resurrection of the body?...all those credal truths, and such.

If you are right about Orthodoxy not being certain about some of these fundamentals then I suppose that's where you belong.

I don't think that's true BTW...so maybe you still belong there but I'd re-think my reasons.

M.
« Last Edit: August 15, 2010, 07:38:17 PM by elijahmaria » Logged

theistgal
Byzantine (Ruthenian) Catholic gadfly
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Follower of Jesus Christ
Jurisdiction: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 2,082


don't even go there!


« Reply #182 on: August 15, 2010, 09:08:46 PM »

(Sigh)No, Mary, I'm not intending to suggest anything about any theological truth.

I'm just trying to get you (and with all due respect, Fr. Ambrose) to step back a little and see how these argume er, these long-winded discus, ahem! these talks you and he have  Grin, in threads like this one, might come off a bit disturbing to those of us whose faith isn't as strong and well-developed as yours.  Wink
« Last Edit: August 15, 2010, 09:09:17 PM by theistgal » Logged

"Sometimes, you just gotta say, 'OK, I still have nine live, two-headed animals' and move on.'' (owner of Coney Island freak show, upon learning he'd been outbid on a 5-legged puppy)
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #183 on: August 15, 2010, 11:05:41 PM »

(Sigh)No, Mary, I'm not intending to suggest anything about any theological truth.

I'm just trying to get you (and with all due respect, Fr. Ambrose) to step back a little and see how these argume er, these long-winded discus, ahem! these talks you and he have  Grin, in threads like this one, might come off a bit disturbing to those of us whose faith isn't as strong and well-developed as yours.  Wink

Until you break in there's no way for me or any of us to really know...So rather than getting frustrated...say something!!

M.
Logged

theistgal
Byzantine (Ruthenian) Catholic gadfly
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Follower of Jesus Christ
Jurisdiction: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 2,082


don't even go there!


« Reply #184 on: August 15, 2010, 11:25:05 PM »

Um ... I did.
Logged

"Sometimes, you just gotta say, 'OK, I still have nine live, two-headed animals' and move on.'' (owner of Coney Island freak show, upon learning he'd been outbid on a 5-legged puppy)
Shlomlokh
主哀れめよ!
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Bulgarian
Posts: 1,268



« Reply #185 on: August 15, 2010, 11:28:12 PM »

(Sigh)No, Mary, I'm not intending to suggest anything about any theological truth.

I'm just trying to get you (and with all due respect, Fr. Ambrose) to step back a little and see how these argume er, these long-winded discus, ahem! these talks you and he have  Grin, in threads like this one, might come off a bit disturbing to those of us whose faith isn't as strong and well-developed as yours.  Wink
Perhaps we need a whole subsection devoted to their debates.  Tongue I must agree, we all need to be more careful (I'll throw myself in there) to those seekers who are lurking and watching these discussions. At times, this board is not a good witness for Orthodoxy. Sad But we repent, ask forgiveness and move on. Smiley

In Christ,
Andrew
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 #186 on: August 15, 2010, 11:58:32 PM »

Um ... I did.

Um...ok
Logged

frjohnmorris
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 1,177


« Reply #187 on: December 06, 2013, 03:39:26 PM »

We say - yes.

I have another one wonderful question: What is the purpose of Ecumenical Councils if they don't precise the Church's doctrine?

A council becomes Ecumenical when it is accepted by the Church as an Ecumenical Council. The first part of the decrees of an Ecumenical Council lists those councils it recognizes as Ecumenical.
Despite the papal claims, before the Western Schism, every important decision concerning doctrine and administration meant to apply to the entire Church was made by an Ecumenical Council, not the Pope. Like all other Bishops the Bishop of Rome was subject to the authority of an Ecumenical Council. When Pope St. Leo rightfully objected to the Robber Council of Ephesus of 449 which exonerated Eutyches of heresy, he lacked the authority to do it himself. He had to appeal to the Emperor and the other Patriarchs to hold another council to overrule the Robber Council. This is the Council of Chalcedon of 451. Significantly,  the council did not accept the Tome of Leo just because it was written by the Pope. Instead, the council sent the document to a committee which studied it and pronounced it orthodox. Then after it was approved by the committee, the Council of Chalcedon approved it. When Pope Vigilius refused to accept the decrees of the 5th Ecumenical Council, Constantinople II in 553, the council threatened to excommunicate him if he did not accept the condemnation of the Three Chapters. Until he accepted the decrees of the council, his name was struck from the dipytchs, list of canonocal Bishops. Pope Vigilius finally agreed to the decisions of the council and was reinstated in office. The 6th Ecumenical Council, Constantinople III in 680 condemned Pope Honorius I by name as an heretic. There are those who argue that this has no bearing on the declaration of the Roman Catholic doctrine of papal infallibility by the 1st Vatican Council. However, that is not a valid argument because the concept of a Pope speaking "ex cathedra" did not exist at that time. The decrees of the 1st Vatican Council state that Rome has never been guilty of false teaching. When an Ecumenical Council condemns a Pope for teaching heresy, even in a letter to the Patriarch of Constantinople, Rome has been tainted by false teaching.

Fr. John W. Morris
Logged
theistgal
Byzantine (Ruthenian) Catholic gadfly
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Follower of Jesus Christ
Jurisdiction: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 2,082


don't even go there!


« Reply #188 on: December 06, 2013, 03:51:21 PM »

We say - yes.

I have another one wonderful question: What is the purpose of Ecumenical Councils if they don't precise the Church's doctrine?

A council becomes Ecumenical when it is accepted by the Church as an Ecumenical Council. The first part of the decrees of an Ecumenical Council lists those councils it recognizes as Ecumenical.
Despite the papal claims, before the Western Schism, every important decision concerning doctrine and administration meant to apply to the entire Church was made by an Ecumenical Council, not the Pope. Like all other Bishops the Bishop of Rome was subject to the authority of an Ecumenical Council. When Pope St. Leo rightfully objected to the Robber Council of Ephesus of 449 which exonerated Eutyches of heresy, he lacked the authority to do it himself. He had to appeal to the Emperor and the other Patriarchs to hold another council to overrule the Robber Council. This is the Council of Chalcedon of 451. Significantly,  the council did not accept the Tome of Leo just because it was written by the Pope. Instead, the council sent the document to a committee which studied it and pronounced it orthodox. Then after it was approved by the committee, the Council of Chalcedon approved it. When Pope Vigilius refused to accept the decrees of the 5th Ecumenical Council, Constantinople II in 553, the council threatened to excommunicate him if he did not accept the condemnation of the Three Chapters. Until he accepted the decrees of the council, his name was struck from the dipytchs, list of canonocal Bishops. Pope Vigilius finally agreed to the decisions of the council and was reinstated in office. The 6th Ecumenical Council, Constantinople III in 680 condemned Pope Honorius I by name as an heretic. There are those who argue that this has no bearing on the declaration of the Roman Catholic doctrine of papal infallibility by the 1st Vatican Council. However, that is not a valid argument because the concept of a Pope speaking "ex cathedra" did not exist at that time. The decrees of the 1st Vatican Council state that Rome has never been guilty of false teaching. When an Ecumenical Council condemns a Pope for teaching heresy, even in a letter to the Patriarch of Constantinople, Rome has been tainted by false teaching.

Fr. John W. Morris

Didn't we just have this discussion at another forum?  Wink
Logged

"Sometimes, you just gotta say, 'OK, I still have nine live, two-headed animals' and move on.'' (owner of Coney Island freak show, upon learning he'd been outbid on a 5-legged puppy)
frjohnmorris
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 1,177


« Reply #189 on: December 06, 2013, 04:04:18 PM »

We say - yes.

I have another one wonderful question: What is the purpose of Ecumenical Councils if they don't precise the Church's doctrine?

A council becomes Ecumenical when it is accepted by the Church as an Ecumenical Council. The first part of the decrees of an Ecumenical Council lists those councils it recognizes as Ecumenical.
Despite the papal claims, before the Western Schism, every important decision concerning doctrine and administration meant to apply to the entire Church was made by an Ecumenical Council, not the Pope. Like all other Bishops the Bishop of Rome was subject to the authority of an Ecumenical Council. When Pope St. Leo rightfully objected to the Robber Council of Ephesus of 449 which exonerated Eutyches of heresy, he lacked the authority to do it himself. He had to appeal to the Emperor and the other Patriarchs to hold another council to overrule the Robber Council. This is the Council of Chalcedon of 451. Significantly,  the council did not accept the Tome of Leo just because it was written by the Pope. Instead, the council sent the document to a committee which studied it and pronounced it orthodox. Then after it was approved by the committee, the Council of Chalcedon approved it. When Pope Vigilius refused to accept the decrees of the 5th Ecumenical Council, Constantinople II in 553, the council threatened to excommunicate him if he did not accept the condemnation of the Three Chapters. Until he accepted the decrees of the council, his name was struck from the dipytchs, list of canonocal Bishops. Pope Vigilius finally agreed to the decisions of the council and was reinstated in office. The 6th Ecumenical Council, Constantinople III in 680 condemned Pope Honorius I by name as an heretic. There are those who argue that this has no bearing on the declaration of the Roman Catholic doctrine of papal infallibility by the 1st Vatican Council. However, that is not a valid argument because the concept of a Pope speaking "ex cathedra" did not exist at that time. The decrees of the 1st Vatican Council state that Rome has never been guilty of false teaching. When an Ecumenical Council condemns a Pope for teaching heresy, even in a letter to the Patriarch of Constantinople, Rome has been tainted by false teaching.

Fr. John W. Morris

Didn't we just have this discussion at another forum?  Wink

We may have, but that does not change the historical fact that the ancient Church did not recognize papal infallibility and considered the Pope subject to an Ecumenical Council like any other Bishop of the Church

Fr. John W. Morris
Logged
theistgal
Byzantine (Ruthenian) Catholic gadfly
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Follower of Jesus Christ
Jurisdiction: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 2,082


don't even go there!


« Reply #190 on: December 06, 2013, 05:30:29 PM »

We may have, but that does not change the historical fact that the ancient Church did not recognize papal infallibility and considered the Pope subject to an Ecumenical Council like any other Bishop of the Church

Fr. John W. Morris

Or the fact that you're responding to a 3-(almost 4!)year old post. But glad I could help you boost your post count. Grin
« Last Edit: December 06, 2013, 05:31:27 PM by theistgal » Logged

"Sometimes, you just gotta say, 'OK, I still have nine live, two-headed animals' and move on.'' (owner of Coney Island freak show, upon learning he'd been outbid on a 5-legged puppy)
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: 37,963



« Reply #191 on: December 06, 2013, 05:46:55 PM »

We may have, but that does not change the historical fact that the ancient Church did not recognize papal infallibility and considered the Pope subject to an Ecumenical Council like any other Bishop of the Church

Fr. John W. Morris

Or the fact that you're responding to a 3-(almost 4!)year old post. But glad I could help you boost your post count. Grin
Is this the Fr. John Morris recently suspended from CAF while doing battle with Mardukm?
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
frjohnmorris
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 1,177


« Reply #192 on: December 06, 2013, 07:57:47 PM »

We may have, but that does not change the historical fact that the ancient Church did not recognize papal infallibility and considered the Pope subject to an Ecumenical Council like any other Bishop of the Church

Fr. John W. Morris

Or the fact that you're responding to a 3-(almost 4!)year old post. But glad I could help you boost your post count. Grin
Is this the Fr. John Morris recently suspended from CAF while doing battle with Mardukm?
Quote from: ialmisry
link=topic=29285.msg1040152#msg1040152 date=1386366415
We may have, but that does not change the historical fact that the ancient Church did not recognize papal infallibility and considered the Pope subject to an Ecumenical Council like any other Bishop of the Church

Fr. John W. Morris

Or the fact that you're responding to a 3-(almost 4!)year old post. But glad I could help you boost your post count. Grin
Is this the Fr. John Morris recently suspended from CAF while doing battle with Mardukm?

This is the Fr. John Morris, who made the mistake of thinking that those people were interested in actual honest dialogue, which is obviously not the case with that site which basically exists to spread papaist propaganda. This site is labeled OrthodoxChristianity.net. which should mean that an Orthodox Priest can express himself freely here and defend the Eastern Orthodox Faith. I support reunion with the West, but only on the basis of the Faith of the ancient undivided Church of the Holy Fathers and the 7 Ecumenical Councils and does not have a place for papal absolutism.
I did not realize that I was responding to a 4 year old post. I am not thinking too clearly right now, as I am suffering from a kidney stone.
I am interested in honest dialogue and discussions of church history. What is wrong with that?
Archpriest John W. Morris
« Last Edit: December 06, 2013, 08:00:34 PM by frjohnmorris » Logged
Alveus Lacuna
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 6,917



« Reply #193 on: December 06, 2013, 08:14:26 PM »

Did the ancient and undivided church let Emperors appoint bishops? What about Ottoman (Muslim) sultans selling the Ecumenical Patriarchate to the highest bidder?

And how the heck are bishops even selected today?
Logged
frjohnmorris
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 1,177


« Reply #194 on: December 06, 2013, 09:38:16 PM »

Did the ancient and undivided church let Emperors appoint bishops? What about Ottoman (Muslim) sultans selling the Ecumenical Patriarchate to the highest bidder?

And how the heck are bishops even selected today?

Although the Emperors had great influence over the selection, especially over the selection of the Patriarch of Constantinople, the canons provided that Bishops should be elected by the Holy Synod of the Patriarchate in which they would serve.

In the Antiochian Archdiocese of North America, the Archdiocesan convention nominates three candidates from the list of priests who meet the qualifications. The Local North American Synod elects one of them to be a local Bishop. In the case of the Metropolitan, the list of nominees is sent to the Holy Synod of Antioch which elects one of them to be the Metropolitan.

Fr. John W. Morris
« Last Edit: December 06, 2013, 09:41:40 PM by frjohnmorris » Logged
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #195 on: December 07, 2013, 08:20:33 AM »

the canons provided that Bishops should be elected by the Holy Synod of the Patriarchate in which they would serve.

What canons?
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
Tags: doctrine teaching authority Tradition Scripture 
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5  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 0.08 seconds with 43 queries.