OrthodoxChristianity.net
October 22, 2014, 01:10:38 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  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Father Lev Gillet and the Immaculate Conception  (Read 8656 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
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 #135 on: November 14, 2010, 06:23:34 PM »





No sneaks.  I take my texts from the Bishop Ware translations.  We've been around on that one several times on this board.

Could you tell us the publication with Bishop Kallistos' translation.

The Feast of the Conception by Saint Anne is actually only a minor feast in the Orthodox Church.  It has the lowest ranking of all, the same as any minor Saint, and I am not aware of any translation by Bishop Kallistos.  Its low ranking alone should tell you something.

The Feast of the Conception has the very low ranking symbol of an open circle with three dots in red.  Looks like this 
Yes, I had to go to Church to see the December Volume of the Menaion to find it.
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 #136 on: November 14, 2010, 10:35:26 PM »





No sneaks.  I take my texts from the Bishop Ware translations.  We've been around on that one several times on this board.

Could you tell us the publication with Bishop Kallistos' translation.

The Feast of the Conception by Saint Anne is actually only a minor feast in the Orthodox Church.  It has the lowest ranking of all, the same as any minor Saint, and I am not aware of any translation by Bishop Kallistos.  Its low ranking alone should tell you something.

The Feast of the Conception has the very low ranking symbol of an open circle with three dots in red.  Looks like this 
Yes, I had to go to Church to see the December Volume of the Menaion to find it.

Anything to side-track the fact that there is a great deal of text, liturgical and patristic, that indicates that the Mother of God was NOT just like we are.  She was and is and will be holy in a way that is not known among mankind only to be exceeded by her own Son.  She has been that way since she became a person.

That is the preponderance of evidence.

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: 37,963



« Reply #137 on: November 15, 2010, 01:50:54 AM »





No sneaks.  I take my texts from the Bishop Ware translations.  We've been around on that one several times on this board.

Could you tell us the publication with Bishop Kallistos' translation.

The Feast of the Conception by Saint Anne is actually only a minor feast in the Orthodox Church.  It has the lowest ranking of all, the same as any minor Saint, and I am not aware of any translation by Bishop Kallistos.  Its low ranking alone should tell you something.

The Feast of the Conception has the very low ranking symbol of an open circle with three dots in red.  Looks like this 
Yes, I had to go to Church to see the December Volume of the Menaion to find it.

Anything to side-track the fact that there is a great deal of text, liturgical and patristic, that indicates that the Mother of God was NOT just like we are.  She was and is and will be holy in a way that is not known among mankind only to be exceeded by her own Son.  She has been that way since she became a person.

That is the preponderance of evidence.
All your "evidence" goes down a black hole if the feast of the alleged event constitutes a lacuna.
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 #138 on: November 15, 2010, 12:55:53 PM »

Quote

Anything to side-track the fact that there is a great deal of text, liturgical and patristic, that indicates that the Mother of God was NOT just like we are.  She was and is and will be holy in a way that is not known among mankind only to be exceeded by her own Son.  She has been that way since she became a person.

That is the preponderance of evidence.



Pointing out the "facts" of our Liturgical heritage to us is disingenuous. We live our tradition. The Holy Orthodox Church alone understands how to interpret it.

Check out this quote:

Quote
"One of the main arguments of Eutyches was that, if Christ had a real human nature, He would also have inherited the stain of sin. Since at that date Mary's immaculate conception was unknown, Pope Leo could not argue from it, but had to make a distinction between the nature, which Christ did indeed assume from Mary, and the guilt which He did not assume, 'because His nativity is a miracle'... Any idea of Mary's own preservation from original sin, however, is ruled out not only in the Tome but also in Leo's sermons, for example: In 62,2 we read "Only the Son of the blessed Virgin is born without transgression; not indeed outside the human race, but a stranger to sin... so that of Adam's offspring, one might exist in whom the devil had no share."  -- Hilda Graef, Mary, A History of Doctrine and Devotion

In other words, in the fifth century the idea was unheard-of. It's an innovation. But it's not only wrong because it's new; it's a symptom of a shift in Western Christians' beliefs about sin, Christ, and humanity.

The immaculate conception dogma is a response to a situation created by the Roman Catholic dogma of original sin. Following Augustine, Rome teaches that man inherits from Adam a "stain" of original sin - primarily manifested in concupiscence , the tendency to sin. So Rome is left with a need to explain how Christ could be born of a human parent yet without sin. The immaculate conception dogma tries to break this chain by making Mary the exception, not Christ.

By contrast, the Orthodox understanding is conveyed concisely in St Athanasius' treatise On the Incarnation (318 AD). When man (in the persons of Adam and Eve from whom we all derive our human nature) first sinned, he became separated from God. This separation from God is what Orthodox understand to be original sin and it has two consequences: First, separated from the source of all good, man becomes morally corrupt, with an innate tendency to sin; secondly, separated from the source of all Being, man begins to return to his original state, the nothing from which God created him. Corruption and death come into the world.

In other words, original sin in the Orthodox understanding is not a "stain" but an absence. And there is no need to figure out how Christ failed to inherit it along with His human nature from His mother, because the Incarnation itself is the end of the separation. In Himself, from the moment of Incarnation, Christ was both God and Man and therefore His Human Nature never experienced the separation from God which all other humans suffer since the sin in the Garden and which is original sin.

Found it here http://web.archive.org/web/20070728015648/http://www.philthompson.net/pages/faq/12.html
« Last Edit: November 15, 2010, 01:03:09 PM by LakaYaRabb » Logged
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,255


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #139 on: November 15, 2010, 07:55:53 PM »



Pointing out the "facts" of our Liturgical heritage to us is disingenuous. We live our tradition. The Holy Orthodox Church alone understands how to interpret it.

Yes, Holy Orthodoxy does.... but Eastern Orthodoxy does not.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #140 on: November 15, 2010, 08:21:02 PM »


Pointing out the "facts" of our Liturgical heritage to us is disingenuous. We live our tradition. The Holy Orthodox Church alone understands how to interpret it.


Yes, Holy Orthodoxy does.... but Eastern Orthodoxy does not.

Pope Benedict disagrees with you and what he says points to the utter superfluity of both the Papacy and the Magisterium,  We have kept the faith intact without them.   

Pope Benedict himself has acknowledged this:

"While the West may point to the absence of the office of Peter in the East—it
must, nevertheless, admit that, in the Eastern Church, the form and content of
the Church of the Fathers is present in unbroken continuity"


~"Principles of Catholic Theology," Cardinal Ratzinger, Ignatius Press, 1987.

Unwittingly the Pope has proclaimed that the papacy is not necessary for the preservation of the true faith.

The Orthodox steadfast witness and adherence to the Apostolic faith since Rome parted company is startling proof that neither the Papacy nor the Magisterium (seen as so essential by Rome) are at all necessary for the preservation of the Faith.
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: 37,963



« Reply #141 on: November 15, 2010, 08:25:37 PM »


Pointing out the "facts" of our Liturgical heritage to us is disingenuous. We live our tradition. The Holy Orthodox Church alone understands how to interpret it.


Yes, Holy Orthodoxy does.... but Eastern Orthodoxy does not.

Pope Benedict disagrees with you and what he says points to the utter superfluity of both the Papacy and the Magisterium,  We have kept the faith intact without them.   

Pope Benedict himself has acknowledged this:

"While the West may point to the absence of the office of Peter in the East—it
must, nevertheless, admit that, in the Eastern Church, the form and content of
the Church of the Fathers is present in unbroken continuity"


~"Principles of Catholic Theology," Cardinal Ratzinger, Ignatius Press, 1987.

Unwittingly the Pope has proclaimed that the papacy is not necessary for the preservation of the true faith.

The Orthodox steadfast witness and adherence to the Apostolic faith since Rome parted company is startling proof that neither the Papacy nor the Magisterium (seen as so essential by Rome) are at all necessary for the preservation of the Faith.
yes, the magisterium of the Vatican resembles disturbingly the office of president-prophet of the Mormons.
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 #142 on: November 15, 2010, 08:31:11 PM »


Pointing out the "facts" of our Liturgical heritage to us is disingenuous. We live our tradition. The Holy Orthodox Church alone understands how to interpret it.


Yes, Holy Orthodoxy does.... but Eastern Orthodoxy does not.

Pope Benedict disagrees with you and what he says points to the utter superfluity of both the Papacy and the Magisterium,  We have kept the faith intact without them.   

Pope Benedict himself has acknowledged this:

"While the West may point to the absence of the office of Peter in the East—it
must, nevertheless, admit that, in the Eastern Church, the form and content of
the Church of the Fathers is present in unbroken continuity"


~"Principles of Catholic Theology," Cardinal Ratzinger, Ignatius Press, 1987.

Unwittingly the Pope has proclaimed that the papacy is not necessary for the preservation of the true faith.

The Orthodox steadfast witness and adherence to the Apostolic faith since Rome parted company is startling proof that neither the Papacy nor the Magisterium (seen as so essential by Rome) are at all necessary for the preservation of the Faith.

Yes.  Apostolic Succession and all the confusion of the Fathers alive and well in Orthodoxy.

He's a subtle one our Pope Benedict!!   laugh laugh laugh laugh
Logged

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

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #143 on: November 15, 2010, 09:31:47 PM »

The office of Peter which Pope Benedict talks about is part of Tradition itself, so while you may have preserved the faith in most instances, you have not preserved that. So no, you have not fully succeeded with the absence of the Magisterium.
« Last Edit: November 15, 2010, 09:31:57 PM by Wyatt » 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: 37,963



« Reply #144 on: November 15, 2010, 09:37:11 PM »

The office of Peter which Pope Benedict talks about is part of Tradition itself, so while you may have preserved the faith in most instances, you have not preserved that.
It was made up long after the Traditions which we received of the Apostles.  The earliest glimmer of it I've been able to find is St. Stephen I of Rome, c. 255, about two centuries too late.

Quote
So no, you have not fully succeeded with the absence of the Magisterium.
Innovations don't count.
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 #145 on: November 15, 2010, 10:00:24 PM »

It was made up long after the Traditions which we received of the Apostles.  The earliest glimmer of it I've been able to find is St. Stephen I of Rome, c. 255, about two centuries too late.
And the First Council of Nicea was held in 325 A.D., yet I doubt you consider it three centuries too late.

Innovations don't count.
Every traditionalist schismatic group thinks they are preserving the truth free of innovations, when in truth they are merely in schism. You aren't unique.
« Last Edit: November 15, 2010, 10:00:45 PM by Wyatt » 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: 37,963



« Reply #146 on: November 15, 2010, 10:29:29 PM »

It was made up long after the Traditions which we received of the Apostles.  The earliest glimmer of it I've been able to find is St. Stephen I of Rome, c. 255, about two centuries too late.
And the First Council of Nicea was held in 325 A.D., yet I doubt you consider it three centuries too late.
The Church didn't make any new claims at Nicea, or any of the other Ecumenical Councils for that matter.

Innovations don't count.
Every traditionalist schismatic group thinks they are preserving the truth free of innovations, when in truth they are merely in schism. You aren't unique.
We are One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, with sole claim and unique credentials to that title.
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
Ionnis
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ROCOR
Posts: 1,071



« Reply #147 on: November 15, 2010, 10:37:06 PM »

Wyatt, what do you get from coming onto an Orthodox forum informing Orthodox that they are in fact not Orthodox and that their Church is not the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church?  Is there a certain satisfaction in it?  Do you believe that your snarky remarks will somehow lead to a conversion of hearts?  Recently you made a post how you felt so unwelcome here as a Roman Catholic, and since that time, your posts have become more negative.  No doubt part of it is from a place of hurt, which is understandable, but it doesn't make it any more acceptable.  I am personally thankful for your presents here and I would hate to see your presence here turn into something negative simply because a select handful of people have been less than charitable towards you and other Roman Catholic members.  I want to hear you, but it has recently become more difficult for me to do so.  Remember, the majority of us have been charitable to you, please don't allow certain people to ruin this for you because your participation here is valuable.  Of course I can only speak on my own behalf here, but I'm sure I'm not the only one.   
« Last Edit: November 15, 2010, 10:40:31 PM by Ionnis » Logged

"If you cannot find Christ in the beggar at the church door, you will not find Him in the chalice.”  -The Divine John Chrysostom

“Till we can become divine, we must be content to be human, lest in our hurry for change we sink to something lower.” -Anthony Trollope
Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #148 on: November 15, 2010, 10:44:39 PM »

It was made up long after the Traditions which we received of the Apostles.  The earliest glimmer of it I've been able to find is St. Stephen I of Rome, c. 255, about two centuries too late.
And the First Council of Nicea was held in 325 A.D., yet I doubt you consider it three centuries too late.
The Church didn't make any new claims at Nicea, or any of the other Ecumenical Councils for that matter.
Not change...development of existing truth. Yet, since it is development, it does not look identical to the original since...well, it develops. It isn't the truth that changes, it is our understanding and practices surrounding the truth that changes. If the truth looked exactly the same from the time of the Apostles until 2010 A.D., there would not only be no need for the Pope or the Magisterium, but there would also not be a need for any Ecumenical Councils, even those seven you hold so dear. For that matter, there would also not be a need for Pentecost since no Spirit of Truth would be necessary to guide a Church which already had the fullest understanding of that truth.
« Last Edit: November 15, 2010, 11:02:10 PM by Wyatt » Logged
Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #149 on: November 15, 2010, 10:46:48 PM »

Wyatt, what do you get from coming onto an Orthodox forum informing Orthodox that they are in fact not Orthodox and that their Church is not the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church?  Is there a certain satisfaction in it?  Do you believe that your snarky remarks will somehow lead to a conversion of hearts?  Recently you made a post how you felt so unwelcome here as a Roman Catholic, and since that time, your posts have become more negative.  No doubt part of it is from a place of hurt, which is understandable, but it doesn't make it any more acceptable.  I am personally thankful for your presents here and I would hate to see your presence here turn into something negative simply because a select handful of people have been less than charitable towards you and other Roman Catholic members.  I want to hear you, but it has recently become more difficult for me to do so.  Remember, the majority of us have been charitable to you, please don't allow certain people to ruin this for you because your participation here is valuable.  Of course I can only speak on my own behalf here, but I'm sure I'm not the only one.   
If silence is charitable then okay. Let me ask you a question: what specifically did you enjoy about my presence here before I became unpalatable?
Logged
Ionnis
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ROCOR
Posts: 1,071



« Reply #150 on: November 15, 2010, 10:58:42 PM »

Wyatt, what do you get from coming onto an Orthodox forum informing Orthodox that they are in fact not Orthodox and that their Church is not the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church?  Is there a certain satisfaction in it?  Do you believe that your snarky remarks will somehow lead to a conversion of hearts?  Recently you made a post how you felt so unwelcome here as a Roman Catholic, and since that time, your posts have become more negative.  No doubt part of it is from a place of hurt, which is understandable, but it doesn't make it any more acceptable.  I am personally thankful for your presents here and I would hate to see your presence here turn into something negative simply because a select handful of people have been less than charitable towards you and other Roman Catholic members.  I want to hear you, but it has recently become more difficult for me to do so.  Remember, the majority of us have been charitable to you, please don't allow certain people to ruin this for you because your participation here is valuable.  Of course I can only speak on my own behalf here, but I'm sure I'm not the only one.   
If silence is charitable then okay. Let me ask you a question: what specifically did you enjoy about my presence here before I became unpalatable?

Forgive me for any offense I have caused you, Wyatt.  May God bless us both.
Logged

"If you cannot find Christ in the beggar at the church door, you will not find Him in the chalice.”  -The Divine John Chrysostom

“Till we can become divine, we must be content to be human, lest in our hurry for change we sink to something lower.” -Anthony Trollope
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 #151 on: November 15, 2010, 11:13:45 PM »

It was made up long after the Traditions which we received of the Apostles.  The earliest glimmer of it I've been able to find is St. Stephen I of Rome, c. 255, about two centuries too late.
And the First Council of Nicea was held in 325 A.D., yet I doubt you consider it three centuries too late.
The Church didn't make any new claims at Nicea, or any of the other Ecumenical Councils for that matter.
Not change...development of existing truth. Yet, since it is development, it does not look identical to the original since...well, it develops. It isn't the truth that changes, it is our understanding and practices surrounding the truth that changes. If the truth looked exactly the same from the time of the Apostles until 2010 A.D., there would not only be no need for the Pope or the Magisterium, but there would also not be a need for any Ecumenical Councils, even those seven you hold so dear. For that matter, there would also not be a need for Pentecost since no Spirit of Truth would be necessary to guide a Church which already had the fullest understanding of that truth.
How about preserving it, which we have.

No, consistent standard. We reject the Vatican's heretical doctrinal development of the Trinity, like we rejected the Arians'.
It seems you reacted to the West the same way that the Arians reacted to the Church when the doctrine of the Trinity was formally defined.

I'm sure you see it that way.

I think you mean sewn up. Look at my post above, about the antibodies.
Yeah, I thought it was sewn after I posted it but wasn't sure. Good thing this is a theological discussion and not grammar class.  Wink

Op cit. Viz supra. The inability of the Vatican to see clearly on the issue is a very large part of its problem.
If you mean that the Church is a stagnant organization that has no use for the Holy Spirit because everything has already been revealed and needs no further clarification, of course the Vatican isn't going to "see" that because that notion is false.
Didn't read my post above, did you?

Now I look like my baby picture, despite I'm taller, weight more, right now have a 5 o'clock (actually more) shadow. That's development.

I also have a cross tattoo on my wrist which you will search in vain for on my baby pictures.  You call that developement but its not quite that: no matter how old I got, that tattoo wasn't going to appear until I had them apply it with the needle.

My best friend has four kidnies, from two kidney transplants. Not quite development there either.  He looks like his baby picture, though, too.

I have my doubts about those who have a "sex change," that they resemble their baby picture in specific ways, but I concede that their faces are probably the same.  You would have to get plastic surgery to change that, like Michael Jackosn.

I remember when he married Miss Presley, someone said they would believe it when she had a baby that looked like he used to look. Not like this:


But that's the problem: ya'll at the Vatican can't make a distinction between growing and radical plastic surgery, because it's all change=development.  So you appropriate it as a license to attribute the most outlandish things to the "deposit of Faith."

Then do not confirm the heretic in his heresy.
I agree, which is why I'll stay in Full Communion with the Roman Pontiff, thanks. Cheesy


So was cardinal umberto.
You will have to elaborate because I am unfamiliar with him.
The envoy pope Leo IX sent to impose the filioque on the One, Holy,Catholic and Apostolic Church in the East.

No, but then it wasn't claiming to "develop" anything, and wasn't enunciating things never heard before.
What was the purpose of the Council then if everything was already fully developed and known beforehand?
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,20719.msg453992/topicseen.html#msg453992

Innovations don't count.
Every traditionalist schismatic group thinks they are preserving the truth free of innovations, when in truth they are merely in schism. You aren't unique.
We are One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, with sole claim and unique credentials to that title.
Keep repeating it. Maybe it will become true.
Do so every Compline, because it is True.
« Last Edit: November 15, 2010, 11:14:50 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
SolEX01
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of New Jersey
Posts: 11,468


WWW
« Reply #152 on: November 16, 2010, 12:14:10 AM »

It was made up long after the Traditions which we received of the Apostles.  The earliest glimmer of it I've been able to find is St. Stephen I of Rome, c. 255, about two centuries too late.
And the First Council of Nicea was held in 325 A.D., yet I doubt you consider it three centuries too late.
The Church didn't make any new claims at Nicea, or any of the other Ecumenical Councils for that matter.
Not change...development of existing truth. Yet, since it is development, it does not look identical to the original since...well, it develops. It isn't the truth that changes, it is our understanding and practices surrounding the truth that changes.

Is that what Roman Catholicism has become ... another Protestant sect?

If the truth looked exactly the same from the time of the Apostles until 2010 A.D., there would not only be no need for the Pope or the Magisterium, but there would also not be a need for any Ecumenical Councils, even those seven you hold so dear.

So you reject the 7 Ecumenical Councils like your Protestant co-religionists?

For that matter, there would also not be a need for Pentecost since no Spirit of Truth would be necessary to guide a Church which already had the fullest understanding of that truth.

Maybe the next Papal Encyclical will end the celebration of Pentecost; My Latin stinks and a proposed title is Plenus Intelligendo Verum.   Roll Eyes
Logged
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,255


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #153 on: November 16, 2010, 12:52:33 AM »



So you reject the 7 Ecumenical Councils like your Protestant co-religionists?


Should I get into all the reasons why this post is just plain stupid?
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
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 #154 on: November 16, 2010, 01:11:41 AM »



So you reject the 7 Ecumenical Councils like your Protestant co-religionists?


Should I get into all the reasons why this post is just plain stupid?
Let me do it:



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 #155 on: November 16, 2010, 10:13:54 AM »



So you reject the 7 Ecumenical Councils like your Protestant co-religionists?


Should I get into all the reasons why this post is just plain stupid?

 laugh laugh laugh  Some of these guys are more protestant than their own protestant families.  Maybe it is time to put a wrap on this one...and I don't mean a turban.

M.
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: 37,963



« Reply #156 on: November 16, 2010, 10:23:52 AM »



So you reject the 7 Ecumenical Councils like your Protestant co-religionists?


Should I get into all the reasons why this post is just plain stupid?

 laugh laugh laugh  Some of these guys are more protestant than their own protestant families.  Maybe it is time to put a wrap on this one...and I don't mean a turban.

M.
yes, having failed to pull the wool over our eyes, you might as well take your sour grapes and drink you whine.
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 #157 on: November 16, 2010, 10:35:14 AM »



So you reject the 7 Ecumenical Councils like your Protestant co-religionists?


Should I get into all the reasons why this post is just plain stupid?

 laugh laugh laugh  Some of these guys are more protestant than their own protestant families.  Maybe it is time to put a wrap on this one...and I don't mean a turban.

M.
yes, having failed to pull the wool over our eyes, you might as well take your sour grapes and drink you whine.

 laugh  You have run out of truly clever things to 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: 37,963



« Reply #158 on: November 16, 2010, 10:39:07 AM »



So you reject the 7 Ecumenical Councils like your Protestant co-religionists?


Should I get into all the reasons why this post is just plain stupid?

 laugh laugh laugh  Some of these guys are more protestant than their own protestant families.  Maybe it is time to put a wrap on this one...and I don't mean a turban.

M.
yes, having failed to pull the wool over our eyes, you might as well take your sour grapes and drink you whine.

 laugh  You have run out of truly clever things to say.
Better than never having anything clever to say.
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 #159 on: November 16, 2010, 10:47:46 AM »


 laugh  You have run out of truly clever things to say.
Better than never having anything clever to say.

The Truth has no need of artifice.
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: 37,963



« Reply #160 on: November 16, 2010, 11:04:04 AM »


 laugh  You have run out of truly clever things to say.
Better than never having anything clever to say.

The Truth has no need of artifice.
Indeed. So when Fr. Lev et alia can't produce texts from the Feast of the Conception of St. Anne in support of the IC, we can draw the proper conclusion.
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 #161 on: November 16, 2010, 11:04:44 AM »

Quote
It isn't the truth that changes, it is our understanding and practices surrounding the truth that changes.
Christ to the Apostles to the Church Fathers even to now (long after), we have preserved the Truth (and will continue to do so). There were no developments necessary. The explanation of the faith was as defense against heresies.
St. John Chrysostom or St. Augustine?
The Cappadocian Fathers or Thomas Aquinas?

See the witness of Faith: St. Maximus, St. John Damascene, St. Mark of Ephesus, St. Photios the Great, St. Gregory Palamas, St Symeon the New Theologian and so many more.

How can we even dare say that we understand or know better than the Church Fathers. They didn't dare change the Faith, neither should we. We should emulate these great Saints and preserve and pass on what was given. St. Paul says as much when he tells us to hold to the traditions.
Logged
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #162 on: November 16, 2010, 11:09:36 AM »

Quote
It isn't the truth that changes, it is our understanding and practices surrounding the truth that changes.
Christ to the Apostles to the Church Fathers even to now (long after), we have preserved the Truth (and will continue to do so). There were no developments necessary. The explanation of the faith was as defense against heresies.
St. John Chrysostom or St. Augustine?
The Cappadocian Fathers or Thomas Aquinas?

See the witness of Faith: St. Maximus, St. John Damascene, St. Mark of Ephesus, St. Photios the Great, St. Gregory Palamas, St Symeon the New Theologian and so many more.

How can we even dare say that we understand or know better than the Church Fathers. They didn't dare change the Faith, neither should we. We should emulate these great Saints and preserve and pass on what was given. St. Paul says as much when he tells us to hold to the traditions.

  Smiley  And when they disagree?  C'mon.  There is no monolithic truth without the mediation of the Church who does indeed expand her understanding of the truth over the centuries.
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: 37,963



« Reply #163 on: November 16, 2010, 11:12:29 AM »

Quote
It isn't the truth that changes, it is our understanding and practices surrounding the truth that changes.
Christ to the Apostles to the Church Fathers even to now (long after), we have preserved the Truth (and will continue to do so). There were no developments necessary. The explanation of the faith was as defense against heresies.
St. John Chrysostom or St. Augustine?
The Cappadocian Fathers or Thomas Aquinas?

See the witness of Faith: St. Maximus, St. John Damascene, St. Mark of Ephesus, St. Photios the Great, St. Gregory Palamas, St Symeon the New Theologian and so many more.

How can we even dare say that we understand or know better than the Church Fathers. They didn't dare change the Faith, neither should we. We should emulate these great Saints and preserve and pass on what was given. St. Paul says as much when he tells us to hold to the traditions.

  Smiley  And when they disagree?  C'mon.  There is no monolithic truth without the mediation of the Church who does indeed expand her understanding of the truth over the centuries.
but doesn't get a radical labotomy. Your magisterium problems with its internal disagreement isn't the problem of the Fathers of the Church.
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 #164 on: November 16, 2010, 11:15:55 AM »

Quote
It isn't the truth that changes, it is our understanding and practices surrounding the truth that changes.
Christ to the Apostles to the Church Fathers even to now (long after), we have preserved the Truth (and will continue to do so). There were no developments necessary. The explanation of the faith was as defense against heresies.
St. John Chrysostom or St. Augustine?
The Cappadocian Fathers or Thomas Aquinas?

See the witness of Faith: St. Maximus, St. John Damascene, St. Mark of Ephesus, St. Photios the Great, St. Gregory Palamas, St Symeon the New Theologian and so many more.

How can we even dare say that we understand or know better than the Church Fathers. They didn't dare change the Faith, neither should we. We should emulate these great Saints and preserve and pass on what was given. St. Paul says as much when he tells us to hold to the traditions.

  Smiley  And when they disagree?  C'mon.  There is no monolithic truth without the mediation of the Church who does indeed expand her understanding of the truth over the centuries.
but doesn't get a radical labotomy. Your magisterium problems with its internal disagreement isn't the problem of the Fathers of the Church.

 laugh laugh laugh

Oh yes.  Those univocal Fathers who agreed on everything!!
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: 37,963



« Reply #165 on: November 16, 2010, 11:18:48 AM »

Quote
It isn't the truth that changes, it is our understanding and practices surrounding the truth that changes.
Christ to the Apostles to the Church Fathers even to now (long after), we have preserved the Truth (and will continue to do so). There were no developments necessary. The explanation of the faith was as defense against heresies.
St. John Chrysostom or St. Augustine?
The Cappadocian Fathers or Thomas Aquinas?

See the witness of Faith: St. Maximus, St. John Damascene, St. Mark of Ephesus, St. Photios the Great, St. Gregory Palamas, St Symeon the New Theologian and so many more.

How can we even dare say that we understand or know better than the Church Fathers. They didn't dare change the Faith, neither should we. We should emulate these great Saints and preserve and pass on what was given. St. Paul says as much when he tells us to hold to the traditions.

  Smiley  And when they disagree?  C'mon.  There is no monolithic truth without the mediation of the Church who does indeed expand her understanding of the truth over the centuries.
but doesn't get a radical labotomy. Your magisterium problems with its internal disagreement isn't the problem of the Fathers of the Church.

 laugh laugh laugh

Oh yes.  Those univocal Fathers who agreed on everything!!
how protestant of you. Are your roots showing?
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 #166 on: November 16, 2010, 11:32:22 AM »

Quote
It isn't the truth that changes, it is our understanding and practices surrounding the truth that changes.
Christ to the Apostles to the Church Fathers even to now (long after), we have preserved the Truth (and will continue to do so). There were no developments necessary. The explanation of the faith was as defense against heresies.
St. John Chrysostom or St. Augustine?
The Cappadocian Fathers or Thomas Aquinas?

See the witness of Faith: St. Maximus, St. John Damascene, St. Mark of Ephesus, St. Photios the Great, St. Gregory Palamas, St Symeon the New Theologian and so many more.

How can we even dare say that we understand or know better than the Church Fathers. They didn't dare change the Faith, neither should we. We should emulate these great Saints and preserve and pass on what was given. St. Paul says as much when he tells us to hold to the traditions.

  Smiley  And when they disagree?  C'mon.  There is no monolithic truth without the mediation of the Church who does indeed expand her understanding of the truth over the centuries.
but doesn't get a radical labotomy. Your magisterium problems with its internal disagreement isn't the problem of the Fathers of the Church.

 laugh laugh laugh

Oh yes.  Those univocal Fathers who agreed on everything!!
how protestant of you. Are your roots showing?

Really?  What do you know of me, save for the fact that my mother's father was a German Lutheran?

I was baptized a Catholic and raised among French and Irish Catholics HOWEVER...I was raised so well in the Catholic faith that I was able to see how the Lutheran grandfather and my mother saw things in entirely different ways.  My mother still sees things as a Lutheran and not as a Catholic, but she was not responsible for teaching me the faith.  Her Irish Catholic mother taught me and my French-Irish Catholic father taught me...and from that foundation, I have continued to be fed and led.

So you are getting desperate here now that you've exposed yourself with the common Lutheran heresy of Traducianism.

And the fact that somebody is actually reading your cut and pastes and realizes that you, personally, don't have much to say at all that is indicative of your own grasp of what is Orthodox and what is not.

I feel sorry for you because your mind is so closed that you won't even allow your own to instruct you unless they happen to agree with your own self-imputed wisdom.

Mary
Logged

Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,481


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #167 on: November 16, 2010, 11:34:40 AM »



Now that we've got personal AGAIN, I'm locking this thread.  All that could be said about Lev Gillet and the IC has been said. 

So endeth the lesson.

-Schultz
Orthodox-Catholic Discussion moderator
Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
Tags: Lev Gillet Immaculate Conception 
Pages: « 1 2 3 4  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 0.157 seconds with 60 queries.