OrthodoxChristianity.net
November 28, 2014, 03:28:58 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 »  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Orthodox misunderstandings of Catholic teachings  (Read 3629 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,170



« on: March 16, 2012, 12:05:34 PM »

I recently got into a conversation with a fellow Catholic who says that Orthodox don't really reject Catholic teaching, but just don't understand them.

For example:

Quote from: Fone Bone 2001
Quote from: MariaGoretti88
Unless someone wants to explain to me why I (and all other Catholics here) would be refused the Sacraments if I refused to believe in the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin, but why our Orthodox brothers and sisters wouldn't be...

Because you're a Latin Catholic; if you deny it, we presume you know what you're talking about.

The Immaculate Conception was defined in an exclusively western way, so Christians of the Byzantine tradition often don't even understand it. I'm not saying it's only binding on the Latin Church - far from it! It is a universally binding dogma of the Catholic Church. But the terminology with which it was defined is meaningless in the East, which has a very different way of understanding original sin/ancestral sin.

As much as it infuriates some Orthodox... we simply don't believe them when they say they deny the Immaculate Conception. The sublime things they say about the Theotokos - even in their Divine Liturgy - simply belie that assertion.

Quote from: MariaGoretti88
Now do see the problem I'm having?

I do, and I agree with you in principle. It's just that you're mistaken about the Orthodox. The only error in their beliefs is the belief that we are heterodox (well, some of them have an inaccurate ecclesiology as well, but this is by no means universal throughout their church).

That, then, is or should be the only difference between an eastern Orthodox community and an eastern Catholic one: the latter realizes that the Latin Church is fully orthodox, and so they realize how insane it is not to be in communion with the bishop of Rome.

I know many of you here say that you know what you're talking about and do, in fact, disagree with Catholic teaching. But I'm not sure what to say to someone who thinks that you "just misunderstand". Any suggestions?
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,240


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #1 on: March 16, 2012, 12:25:51 PM »

I recently got into a conversation with a fellow Catholic who says that Orthodox don't really reject Catholic teaching, but just don't understand them.

For example:

Quote from: Fone Bone 2001
Quote from: MariaGoretti88
Unless someone wants to explain to me why I (and all other Catholics here) would be refused the Sacraments if I refused to believe in the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin, but why our Orthodox brothers and sisters wouldn't be...

Because you're a Latin Catholic; if you deny it, we presume you know what you're talking about.

The Immaculate Conception was defined in an exclusively western way, so Christians of the Byzantine tradition often don't even understand it. I'm not saying it's only binding on the Latin Church - far from it! It is a universally binding dogma of the Catholic Church. But the terminology with which it was defined is meaningless in the East, which has a very different way of understanding original sin/ancestral sin.

As much as it infuriates some Orthodox... we simply don't believe them when they say they deny the Immaculate Conception. The sublime things they say about the Theotokos - even in their Divine Liturgy - simply belie that assertion.

Quote from: MariaGoretti88
Now do see the problem I'm having?

I do, and I agree with you in principle. It's just that you're mistaken about the Orthodox. The only error in their beliefs is the belief that we are heterodox (well, some of them have an inaccurate ecclesiology as well, but this is by no means universal throughout their church).

That, then, is or should be the only difference between an eastern Orthodox community and an eastern Catholic one: the latter realizes that the Latin Church is fully orthodox, and so they realize how insane it is not to be in communion with the bishop of Rome.

I know many of you here say that you know what you're talking about and do, in fact, disagree with Catholic teaching. But I'm not sure what to say to someone who thinks that you "just misunderstand". Any suggestions?

Perhaps you could invite them onto this forum to discuss the issue, or at least to read some of the numerous threads about the Immaculate Conception and original/ancestral sin.  That would relieve you of the possible stress of being the middle man trying to represent what others think and believe.  I don't know if that helps, but....
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #2 on: March 16, 2012, 01:05:09 PM »

I used to believe that the Eastern Orthodox faith was essentially the same as ours. Participating on this forum has made me let go of that false notion.
Logged
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,240


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #3 on: March 16, 2012, 01:07:23 PM »

I used to believe that the Eastern Orthodox faith was essentially the same as ours. Participating on this forum has made me let go of that false notion.

Hmmm.....guess I'm a hopeless optimist, then.  I do have moments, though, when I tend to agree with you about that Sad.
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
Cavaradossi
法網恢恢,疏而不漏
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Chalcedonian Automaton Serial No. 5Aj4bx9
Jurisdiction: Chalcedonian Automaton Factory 5
Posts: 1,626



« Reply #4 on: March 16, 2012, 01:20:06 PM »

I used to believe that the Eastern Orthodox faith was essentially the same as ours. Participating on this forum has made me let go of that false notion.

Hmmm.....guess I'm a hopeless optimist, then.  I do have moments, though, when I tend to agree with you about that Sad.
I personally think it's a rather fascinating hermeneutical question, to be honest. What differences in understanding have caused us to diverge, even though we share the same (for the most part) scriptures and about eight hundred years of church fathers? It is an interesting question to think about.
Logged

Be comforted, and have faith, O Israel, for your God is infinitely simple and one, composed of no parts.
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,240


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #5 on: March 16, 2012, 01:30:24 PM »

I used to believe that the Eastern Orthodox faith was essentially the same as ours. Participating on this forum has made me let go of that false notion.

Hmmm.....guess I'm a hopeless optimist, then.  I do have moments, though, when I tend to agree with you about that Sad.
I personally think it's a rather fascinating hermeneutical question, to be honest. What differences in understanding have caused us to diverge, even though we share the same (for the most part) scriptures and about eight hundred years of church fathers? It is an interesting question to think about.

I agree that it is indeed worth thinking about.  It would make an interesting discussion, too, if we could avoid all the potential landmines and be civil with each other  Wink.
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
Cavaradossi
法網恢恢,疏而不漏
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Chalcedonian Automaton Serial No. 5Aj4bx9
Jurisdiction: Chalcedonian Automaton Factory 5
Posts: 1,626



« Reply #6 on: March 16, 2012, 01:32:50 PM »

I used to believe that the Eastern Orthodox faith was essentially the same as ours. Participating on this forum has made me let go of that false notion.

Hmmm.....guess I'm a hopeless optimist, then.  I do have moments, though, when I tend to agree with you about that Sad.
I personally think it's a rather fascinating hermeneutical question, to be honest. What differences in understanding have caused us to diverge, even though we share the same (for the most part) scriptures and about eight hundred years of church fathers? It is an interesting question to think about.

I agree that it is indeed worth thinking about.  It would make an interesting discussion, too, if we could avoid all the potential landmines and be civil with each other  Wink.

Civil?! Now that's just crazy talk. laugh
Logged

Be comforted, and have faith, O Israel, for your God is infinitely simple and one, composed of no parts.
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,240


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #7 on: March 16, 2012, 01:39:20 PM »

I used to believe that the Eastern Orthodox faith was essentially the same as ours. Participating on this forum has made me let go of that false notion.

Hmmm.....guess I'm a hopeless optimist, then.  I do have moments, though, when I tend to agree with you about that Sad.
I personally think it's a rather fascinating hermeneutical question, to be honest. What differences in understanding have caused us to diverge, even though we share the same (for the most part) scriptures and about eight hundred years of church fathers? It is an interesting question to think about.

I agree that it is indeed worth thinking about.  It would make an interesting discussion, too, if we could avoid all the potential landmines and be civil with each other  Wink.

Civil?! Now that's just crazy talk. laugh

Guess I need to add "crazy" to my description on the left  laugh laugh.
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
FormerReformer
Convertodox of the convertodox
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: I'll take (e) for "all of the above"
Posts: 2,441



WWW
« Reply #8 on: March 16, 2012, 02:01:46 PM »

I think the quotes either ignore or are ignorant of the fact that many of the types of Orthodox Christians (especially online) who participate in discussion of this nature are themselves converts from either Roman Catholicism or Protestantism, and thus steeped in Western theological thought- however much these have been rejected since conversion. Further, Orthodox theologians aren't ignorant of the Western doctrines of original sin, they just believe St Augustine was mistaken- which does not lead to us accepting, in some strange fashion, the dogma of the Immaculate Conception, but rather denying the whole framework upon which it is founded.

Quote
As much as it infuriates some Orthodox... we simply don't believe them when they say they deny the Immaculate Conception. The sublime things they say about the Theotokos - even in their Divine Liturgy - simply belie that assertion.

Ah, yes, one wonders what such a person would think of our view of the place of the Patriarch of Constantinople, given his rather impressive list of titles. The Eastern Church loves honorifics and flowery language, this does not mean we believe the Blessed Virgin was conceived in any way differently from the rest of humanity.
Logged

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

Oh, no: I've succumbed to Hyperdoxy!
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,240


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #9 on: March 16, 2012, 02:26:05 PM »

I used to believe that the Eastern Orthodox faith was essentially the same as ours. Participating on this forum has made me let go of that false notion.

I'm curious, Wyatt, if you care to share, why you think that we are two different faiths.  The way you said it sort of implies that there isn't even any hope of a reconciliation or reunion of the Catholic and Orthodox Churches. Is that how you feel?

Also, I've said it before but maybe it bears repeating again: the Orthodox on this board are no more representative of Orthodoxy as a whole than Catholic posters on say, CAF or FishEaters, are representative of Catholicism as whole.  What a shame, though totally understandable, that you (unwillingly, I'd imagine) let a few hard-core Netodox influence you so strongly in what I would call a negative direction.  You may not see it as a negative thing, and may God bless you for that--and.....like I said above, there are moments when I tend to agree with you.

I'm interested in your comments about this.
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
Ortho_cat
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: AOCA-DWMA
Posts: 5,392



« Reply #10 on: March 16, 2012, 02:41:14 PM »

I used to believe that the Eastern Orthodox faith was essentially the same as ours. Participating on this forum has made me let go of that false notion.

well we can say for certain that the EO do not accept papal supremacy/infallibility or filioque. We can have debates about immaculate conception, assumption dogma, purgatory, etc.
Logged
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,170



« Reply #11 on: March 16, 2012, 02:48:21 PM »

I used to believe that the Eastern Orthodox faith was essentially the same as ours. Participating on this forum has made me let go of that false notion.

I feel much the same way -- although I would add that I'm nevertheless a fan of the Zoghby Initiative.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,240


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #12 on: March 16, 2012, 03:01:00 PM »

I used to believe that the Eastern Orthodox faith was essentially the same as ours. Participating on this forum has made me let go of that false notion.

I feel much the same way -- although I would add that I'm nevertheless a fan of the Zoghby Initiative.

Just so I understand you correctly--you believe that Catholicism and Orthodoxy are 2 *different* faiths AND you are a fan (you support/are in favor) of an initiative that would allow intercommunion between those 2 different faiths--or at least one expression of each of those 2 different faiths.  Am I right?
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,170



« Reply #13 on: March 16, 2012, 03:18:17 PM »

Just so I understand you correctly--you believe that Catholicism and Orthodoxy are 2 *different* faiths AND you are a fan (you support/are in favor) of an initiative that would allow intercommunion between those 2 different faiths--or at least one expression of each of those 2 different faiths.  Am I right?

I don't really know that means, so I can't say if it's right or not.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,240


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #14 on: March 16, 2012, 03:45:49 PM »

Just so I understand you correctly--you believe that Catholicism and Orthodoxy are 2 *different* faiths AND you are a fan (you support/are in favor) of an initiative that would allow intercommunion between those 2 different faiths--or at least one expression of each of those 2 different faiths.  Am I right?

I don't really know that means, so I can't say if it's right or not.
 

And here I thought I was being clear--sigh.  Let me put it a little differently: You wrote, "I feel much the same way..." in reply to Wyatt's post about coming to the conclusion that Orthodoxy and Catholicism are 2 different faiths.  Does that mean you believe that they are?  If not, what did you mean?  You then wrote that you're a "fan" of the Zoghby Initiative, an attempt by a Greek Catholic Melkite bishop to discuss with the Antiochian Orthodox the possibility of intercommunion between the 2 churches.  Perhaps you could explain what you mean by being a "fan" of the initiative.  If it's what I (mistakenly??) think you mean then my question as asked above stands, and I'm not sure why it's unclear to you.  If you mean something different by "fan", and let us know what that is, then perhaps I can re-phrase my question so it makes better sense to you.  Wink
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,627



« Reply #15 on: March 16, 2012, 04:20:05 PM »

Hmmm.....guess I'm a hopeless optimist, then.

Paging Dr. Pangloss . . .
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,240


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #16 on: March 16, 2012, 04:21:52 PM »

Hmmm.....guess I'm a hopeless optimist, then.

Paging Dr. Pangloss . . .

Sorry, but he's on a code blue in the ER. (Hoping, of course, for a great outcome!)  Cheesy
« Last Edit: March 16, 2012, 04:22:26 PM by J Michael » Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,627



« Reply #17 on: March 16, 2012, 04:23:16 PM »

Hmmm.....guess I'm a hopeless optimist, then.

Paging Dr. Pangloss . . .

Sorry, but he's on a code blue in the ER. (Hoping, of course, for a great outcome!)  Cheesy

The outcome cannot be otherwise.

EDIT: You should hear his reports at the M&Ms . . .
« Last Edit: March 16, 2012, 04:24:38 PM by orthonorm » Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,240


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #18 on: March 16, 2012, 04:26:54 PM »

Hmmm.....guess I'm a hopeless optimist, then.

Paging Dr. Pangloss . . .

Sorry, but he's on a code blue in the ER. (Hoping, of course, for a great outcome!)  Cheesy

The outcome cannot be otherwise.

EDIT: You should hear his reports at the M&Ms . . .

 laugh laugh laugh

Now...I wonder if PeterJ is going to get back to us?  I certainly **hope** so  Grin!
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,170



« Reply #19 on: March 16, 2012, 04:40:04 PM »

Now...I wonder if PeterJ is going to get back to us?  I certainly **hope** so  Grin!

Yes master!

[picture of Peter MacNicol as Renfield in "Dracula: Dead and Loving It"]
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,240


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #20 on: March 16, 2012, 04:47:15 PM »

Now...I wonder if PeterJ is going to get back to us?  I certainly **hope** so  Grin!

Yes master!

[picture of Peter MacNicol as Renfield in "Dracula: Dead and Loving It"]

Finally!!!  Someone got it right!!!  (Now, about that blood dripping from my fangs...) Grin Grin
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,240


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #21 on: March 16, 2012, 04:52:31 PM »

Seriously, though, PeterJ....I'm just trying to understand clearly what you meant in your replies above, #13, etc.
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,365


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #22 on: March 16, 2012, 05:04:44 PM »

I would like to make three points. First, there are areas where we have genuine areas of dogmatic differences. For example, we don't agree on the nature of the papacy. We also genuinely disagree on the question as to whether the damned in hell can eventually saved.
On other issues, I believe that while we may have some disagreement, there is not as great a gulf as some would like us to think. For example, the Immaculate Conception is debated endlessly, but I think that its silly. Yes, we disagree as to whether or not the Virgin Mary was conceived by merit of a special grace. However, Catholic, and many Orthodox can agree that Mary was in some way in a "state of grace" from the moment of creation. In fact, St. Gregory Palamas even believed in some such thing. This is not mean to down-play our difference in faith on the matter, but I don't think that the difference is insurmountable. Another example is the issue of the filioque. The manner in which Catholic theologians understand the filioque, such that the "by the Son" is  secondary "by", really a "through", brings us much closer to one another than some would like to argue. We both agree that the Father is the monarch and source of the blessed Trinity. For Catholics God the Son participates in the spiration of the Holy Spirit but only in  secondary manner, such the the Father remains the Source. What is more, even many Orthodox will admit that the Holy Spirit, in some way, proceeds through the Son, as per the teachings of St. John of Damascus. We may disagree on the nature of this procession, but we both admit that the Father is the source of the Trinity. I'm not trying to downplay the difference here. They are real issues that need to be addressed, but I think we can go to the other extreme exagerating our differences.
Finally, there are some areas in which we simply do not disagree, even though many would like to pretend we do. Transubstantiation is one of those areas. The riduclous discussions on this matter which have occured right here on OC.net have, conversations in which I have participated, have conviced me of as much. We both believe that the Euchrist is really Jesus. We both believe that it really looks like and acts like bread. Catholics just have a word for it called transubstantiation. Another such issue is purgatory. We both believe in post death purifcation that is not fun. We both pray for the souls going through such purifcation. We Catholics just have a word for it: purgatory. Finally, the nature of santifiction. We both believe that we are really divinized by God's divine life/energies. We both believe that such is God himself working in us, and thus, this Grace is uncreated. However, Catholics make one final distinction, and point out that the state of participating in God's uncreated life/Grace is a created state, since there once was a time when we were not participating in his saving Grace. Debates on these issues should just be dropped.
Logged

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

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



« Reply #23 on: March 16, 2012, 05:35:07 PM »

I would like to make three points. First, there are areas where we have genuine areas of dogmatic differences. For example, we don't agree on the nature of the papacy.

I agree that this is definitely a matter of real dogamtic difference that can't be reconciled without, at best, considering tha papacy a matter of organization that was necessary for unity in the west in a specific historical cultural context, but not theological, much less universally dogmatic.

Quote
We also genuinely disagree on the question as to whether the damned in hell can eventually saved.

I just recently heard the opinion of a RC priest (who may or may not have been out of line with your church's teaching) who stated belief that the only reason those destined for damnation at the final judgement are capable of receiving God's forgiveness, but are hellbound only because they refuse to. There doesn't seem to be any major conflict with Orthodox belief that I'm aware of with this opinion.

Quote
On other issues, I believe that while we may have some disagreement, there is not as great a gulf as some would like us to think. For example, the Immaculate Conception is debated endlessly, but I think that its silly. Yes, we disagree as to whether or not the Virgin Mary was conceived by merit of a special grace. However, Catholic, and many Orthodox can agree that Mary was in some way in a "state of grace" from the moment of creation. In fact, St. Gregory Palamas even believed in some such thing. This is not mean to down-play our difference in faith on the matter, but I don't think that the difference is insurmountable.

If this were to be taught as theological opinion based in western terminology, and not universal dogma, I don't think this would be as big of a deal.

Quote
Another example is the issue of the filioque.

In think this would just disappear as a problem if it were not recited in the creed.

Quote
I'm not trying to downplay the difference here. They are real issues that need to be addressed, but I think we can go to the other extreme exagerating our differences.

I agree.

Quote
Finally, there are some areas in which we simply do not disagree, even though many would like to pretend we do. Transubstantiation is one of those areas. The riduclous discussions on this matter which have occured right here on OC.net have, conversations in which I have participated, have conviced me of as much. We both believe that the Euchrist is really Jesus. We both believe that it really looks like and acts like bread. Catholics just have a word for it called transubstantiation. Another such issue is purgatory. We both believe in post death purifcation that is not fun. We both pray for the souls going through such purifcation. We Catholics just have a word for it: purgatory. Finally, the nature of santifiction. We both believe that we are really divinized by God's divine life/energies. We both believe that such is God himself working in us, and thus, this Grace is uncreated. However, Catholics make one final distinction, and point out that the state of participating in God's uncreated life/Grace is a created state, since there once was a time when we were not participating in his saving Grace. Debates on these issues should just be dropped.

I think they would be if agreement was reached on the papacy and a common form of the creed concerning how the procession of the Holy Spirit. That, and if both churches would not dogmatically impose on each other the decrees of councils held in isolation of each other.

And any of the the councils that served as nothing more than failed attempts at reunion should really be disregarded as the political disasters that they were.

Just my opinion. I don't think I disagree with you too much on the nature of our disagreements.
Logged

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

Made Perfect in Weakness - Latest Post: The Son of God
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,170



« Reply #24 on: March 16, 2012, 06:48:45 PM »

I would like to make three points. First, there are areas where we have genuine areas of dogmatic differences. For example, we don't agree on the nature of the papacy.

I agree that this is definitely a matter of real dogamtic difference that can't be reconciled without, at best, considering tha papacy a matter of organization that was necessary for unity in the west in a specific historical cultural context, but not theological, much less universally dogmatic.

I'd like to ask, does everyone on this thread agree, at least, that it was unwise for Vatican I to dogmatically define Papal Infallibility?
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,594


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #25 on: March 16, 2012, 06:57:50 PM »

I would like to make three points. First, there are areas where we have genuine areas of dogmatic differences. For example, we don't agree on the nature of the papacy.

I agree that this is definitely a matter of real dogamtic difference that can't be reconciled without, at best, considering tha papacy a matter of organization that was necessary for unity in the west in a specific historical cultural context, but not theological, much less universally dogmatic.

I'd like to ask, does everyone on this thread agree, at least, that it was unwise for Vatican I to dogmatically define Papal Infallibility?
Absolutely. Whether I am Orthodox or not, RC or not, there are some things that do not need to be defined. Especially something like that as there are bishops who denied infallibility like Blaine.


I think one area that the Roman Catholics opened themselves up to, concerning infallibility, is that there is no list of infallible statements. Although I personally dont think that they have no list for a nefarious reason, some could think that, and have some legitimacy.

PP
« Last Edit: March 16, 2012, 06:58:27 PM by primuspilus » Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,594


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #26 on: March 16, 2012, 06:59:19 PM »

***cant edit***

To further, just like I think it could be unwise to define the tollhouses dogmatically.

PP
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,170



« Reply #27 on: March 16, 2012, 07:12:26 PM »

Just so I understand you correctly--you believe that Catholicism and Orthodoxy are 2 *different* faiths

I don't know what that means, but I believe that we do not have doctrinal agreement.

AND you are a fan (you support/are in favor) of an initiative that would allow intercommunion between those 2 different faiths--or at least one expression of each of those 2 different faiths.  Am I right?

Well, I'm a fan of the Zoghby Initiative. The way you characterized it is your business.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,170



« Reply #28 on: March 16, 2012, 07:14:09 PM »

Now...I wonder if PeterJ is going to get back to us?  I certainly **hope** so  Grin!

Yes master!

[picture of Peter MacNicol as Renfield in "Dracula: Dead and Loving It"]

Finally!!!  Someone got it right!!!

I did almost put "McNichols".

  (Now, about that blood dripping from my fangs...) Grin Grin

Don't think I can help you there, other than to suggest a paper towel.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
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 #29 on: March 16, 2012, 10:10:54 PM »

I recently got into a conversation with a fellow Catholic who says that Orthodox don't really reject Catholic teaching, but just don't understand them.

For example:

Quote from: Fone Bone 2001
Quote from: MariaGoretti88
Unless someone wants to explain to me why I (and all other Catholics here) would be refused the Sacraments if I refused to believe in the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin, but why our Orthodox brothers and sisters wouldn't be...

Because you're a Latin Catholic; if you deny it, we presume you know what you're talking about.

The Immaculate Conception was defined in an exclusively western way, so Christians of the Byzantine tradition often don't even understand it. I'm not saying it's only binding on the Latin Church - far from it! It is a universally binding dogma of the Catholic Church. But the terminology with which it was defined is meaningless in the East, which has a very different way of understanding original sin/ancestral sin.

As much as it infuriates some Orthodox... we simply don't believe them when they say they deny the Immaculate Conception. The sublime things they say about the Theotokos - even in their Divine Liturgy - simply belie that assertion.

Quote from: MariaGoretti88
Now do see the problem I'm having?

I do, and I agree with you in principle. It's just that you're mistaken about the Orthodox. The only error in their beliefs is the belief that we are heterodox (well, some of them have an inaccurate ecclesiology as well, but this is by no means universal throughout their church).

That, then, is or should be the only difference between an eastern Orthodox community and an eastern Catholic one: the latter realizes that the Latin Church is fully orthodox, and so they realize how insane it is not to be in communion with the bishop of Rome.

I know many of you here say that you know what you're talking about and do, in fact, disagree with Catholic teaching. But I'm not sure what to say to someone who thinks that you "just misunderstand". Any suggestions?
They/you define "Catholic" as being in communion with the bishop of Rome, whatever he says or does.  We say the bishop of Rome is Catholic only if he is in communion with the rest of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, and if he is not and not confessing the Faith of the Creed of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church it is insane (or rather, heretical, if you make the distinction) to be in communion with him.

We understand that quite well.

The IC, filioque etc. are not Latin defined dogmas, they are heretical dogmas.  The Latin Romanians have no problem defining Orthodoxy in Latin.  And they have no IC nor filioque.

They, and the rest of us Orthodox, reject them.  That does not obviate our understanding of them.  Indeed, we reject them because we understand them.
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 #30 on: March 16, 2012, 10:10:54 PM »

I think the quotes either ignore or are ignorant of the fact that many of the types of Orthodox Christians (especially online) who participate in discussion of this nature are themselves converts from either Roman Catholicism or Protestantism, and thus steeped in Western theological thought- however much these have been rejected since conversion. Further, Orthodox theologians aren't ignorant of the Western doctrines of original sin, they just believe St Augustine was mistaken- which does not lead to us accepting, in some strange fashion, the dogma of the Immaculate Conception, but rather denying the whole framework upon which it is founded.


I've been studying and arguing this very point for nearly 17 years:  In the first place "western" tradition is NOT always Catholic tradition.  In fact in most cases that it is discussed in these kinds of forums, it is not.   So yes, it is quite possible for a protestant AND a Catholic to be totally in the dark about the Church's teaching concerning original sin...its ancient teaching.  So you may embrace ALL of Augustine and still not get it...but Augustine does not define it for the Catholic Church.

So...as far as I am concerned on these particular points...I have found few, Catholic or Orthodox or Protestant who actually can teach what the Catholic Church teaches.

Your note here tells me that you personally do not get it.
Logged

Paisius
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Wherever the wind blows......
Posts: 1,203


Scheherazade


« Reply #31 on: March 16, 2012, 11:56:31 PM »

I used to believe that the Eastern Orthodox faith was essentially the same as ours. Participating on this forum has made me let go of that false notion.


We then, you're well on your way........
Logged
Ortho_cat
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: AOCA-DWMA
Posts: 5,392



« Reply #32 on: March 17, 2012, 12:18:44 AM »

I think the quotes either ignore or are ignorant of the fact that many of the types of Orthodox Christians (especially online) who participate in discussion of this nature are themselves converts from either Roman Catholicism or Protestantism, and thus steeped in Western theological thought- however much these have been rejected since conversion. Further, Orthodox theologians aren't ignorant of the Western doctrines of original sin, they just believe St Augustine was mistaken- which does not lead to us accepting, in some strange fashion, the dogma of the Immaculate Conception, but rather denying the whole framework upon which it is founded.


I've been studying and arguing this very point for nearly 17 years:  In the first place "western" tradition is NOT always Catholic tradition.  In fact in most cases that it is discussed in these kinds of forums, it is not.   So yes, it is quite possible for a protestant AND a Catholic to be totally in the dark about the Church's teaching concerning original sin...its ancient teaching.  So you may embrace ALL of Augustine and still not get it...but Augustine does not define it for the Catholic Church.

So...as far as I am concerned on these particular points...I have found few, Catholic or Orthodox or Protestant who actually can teach what the Catholic Church teaches.

Your note here tells me that you personally do not get it.

"No true scotsman"?
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 #33 on: March 17, 2012, 01:52:19 AM »

I think the quotes either ignore or are ignorant of the fact that many of the types of Orthodox Christians (especially online) who participate in discussion of this nature are themselves converts from either Roman Catholicism or Protestantism, and thus steeped in Western theological thought- however much these have been rejected since conversion. Further, Orthodox theologians aren't ignorant of the Western doctrines of original sin, they just believe St Augustine was mistaken- which does not lead to us accepting, in some strange fashion, the dogma of the Immaculate Conception, but rather denying the whole framework upon which it is founded.


I've been studying and arguing this very point for nearly 17 years:  In the first place "western" tradition is NOT always Catholic tradition.  In fact in most cases that it is discussed in these kinds of forums, it is not.   So yes, it is quite possible for a protestant AND a Catholic to be totally in the dark about the Church's teaching concerning original sin...its ancient teaching.  So you may embrace ALL of Augustine and still not get it...but Augustine does not define it for the Catholic Church.

So...as far as I am concerned on these particular points...I have found few, Catholic or Orthodox or Protestant who actually can teach what the Catholic Church teaches.

Your note here tells me that you personally do not get it.

"No true scotsman"?
Sic Maria dixit +march 16, 2012
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
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,170



« Reply #34 on: March 17, 2012, 08:42:49 AM »

They/you define "Catholic" as being in communion with the bishop of Rome, whatever he says or does.  

Speaking for myself, I definitely do not define "Catholic" as being in communion with the bishop of Rome.

Well, okay, I'll grant that I did for a long time. In particular, I didn't (until recently) consider the SSPX to be Catholic, because they weren't in full communion with Rome. But more recently I have come to see that "schism" as an internal Catholic matter.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
akimel
Fr Aidan
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

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



WWW
« Reply #35 on: March 17, 2012, 09:33:45 AM »

Which teachings of the Catholic Church do the Orthodox often misunderstand?  The following immediately come to mind:

1) Original Sin:  the Latin understanding of original sin is typically understood by the Orthodox as "original guilt," the idea being that God punishes us because of the sin of Adam.  But this is not the way original sin is presented in the Catholic Catechism.  Contemporary Latin theologians instead think of original sin as the privation of sanctifying grace, a condition into which all human beings are born. 

2)  Created grace:  the Latin understanding of grace is typically understood by the Orthodox as the bestowal of a created gift, i.e., created grace.  The Orthodox "misunderstanding" in fact reflects an imbalance in Latin reflection that in fact once existed.  For years Catholic theologians ignored the uncreated dimension of grace.  But this is no longer the case today, thanks to the important contributions of Henri de Lubac, Karl Rahner, and Piet Fransen. 

3)  Theosis:  because the Orthodox believe that Catholics believe the grace is solely a created phenomenon, they infer that Catholics cannot make room in their theology and spiritual life for supernatural participation in the divine life of the Trinity.  But this is most certainly not the case if one reads the the poetry and reflections of the great mystics of the Latin Church.  Latin theology is not restricted to the manuals.  It may be more difficult for Catholics to speak of theosis, given the absence within Latin theology of the essence/energies distinction; but the notion of divinization is certainly present.

4)  Purgatory:   in the past the purgatorial state was often presented by Catholics, especially at a popular level, as punishment imposed by the just God for the temporal consequences of sin.  But the juridical model of purgatory has been replaced by a therapeutic-purification model, thus bringing the Latin understanding of purgatory in line with the Eastern understanding of post-mortem purification.  See Pope Benedict's encyclical Spe salvi


   
Logged

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

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



WWW
« Reply #36 on: March 17, 2012, 11:10:08 AM »

4)  Purgatory:   in the past the purgatorial state was often presented by Catholics, especially at a popular level, as punishment imposed by the just God for the temporal consequences of sin.  But the juridical model of purgatory has been replaced by a therapeutic-purification model, thus bringing the Latin understanding of purgatory in line with the Eastern understanding of post-mortem purification.  See Pope Benedict's encyclical Spe salvi

Thread split for divergent question.

Indulgences in modern Purgatory
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,43637.new.html#new
Logged


I'm going to need this.
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,170



« Reply #37 on: March 17, 2012, 11:33:59 AM »

Thread split for divergent question.

Indulgences in modern Purgatory

Is it true that modern Purgatory has WI-FI?
« Last Edit: March 17, 2012, 11:34:27 AM by Peter J » Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Aindriú
Faster! Funnier!
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

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



WWW
« Reply #38 on: March 17, 2012, 12:02:41 PM »

Thread split for divergent question.

Indulgences in modern Purgatory

Is it true that modern Purgatory has WI-FI?

 Cheesy

Only to network the furnaces!
Logged


I'm going to need this.
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 #39 on: March 17, 2012, 01:53:20 PM »

Which teachings of the Catholic Church do the Orthodox often misunderstand?  The following immediately come to mind:

1) Original Sin:  the Latin understanding of original sin is typically understood by the Orthodox as "original guilt," the idea being that God punishes us because of the sin of Adam.  But this is not the way original sin is presented in the Catholic Catechism.  Contemporary Latin theologians instead think of original sin as the privation of sanctifying grace, a condition into which all human beings are born. 

2)  Created grace:  the Latin understanding of grace is typically understood by the Orthodox as the bestowal of a created gift, i.e., created grace.  The Orthodox "misunderstanding" in fact reflects an imbalance in Latin reflection that in fact once existed.  For years Catholic theologians ignored the uncreated dimension of grace.  But this is no longer the case today, thanks to the important contributions of Henri de Lubac, Karl Rahner, and Piet Fransen. 

3)  Theosis:  because the Orthodox believe that Catholics believe the grace is solely a created phenomenon, they infer that Catholics cannot make room in their theology and spiritual life for supernatural participation in the divine life of the Trinity.  But this is most certainly not the case if one reads the the poetry and reflections of the great mystics of the Latin Church.  Latin theology is not restricted to the manuals.  It may be more difficult for Catholics to speak of theosis, given the absence within Latin theology of the essence/energies distinction; but the notion of divinization is certainly present.

4)  Purgatory:   in the past the purgatorial state was often presented by Catholics, especially at a popular level, as punishment imposed by the just God for the temporal consequences of sin.  But the juridical model of purgatory has been replaced by a therapeutic-purification model, thus bringing the Latin understanding of purgatory in line with the Eastern understanding of post-mortem purification.  See Pope Benedict's encyclical Spe salvi


   
Misunderstood, Father, or the Vatican has changed its position?
Logged

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

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #40 on: March 20, 2012, 12:06:21 PM »

Which teachings of the Catholic Church do the Orthodox often misunderstand?  The following immediately come to mind:

1) Original Sin:  the Latin understanding of original sin is typically understood by the Orthodox as "original guilt," the idea being that God punishes us because of the sin of Adam.  But this is not the way original sin is presented in the Catholic Catechism.  Contemporary Latin theologians instead think of original sin as the privation of sanctifying grace, a condition into which all human beings are born. 

2)  Created grace:  the Latin understanding of grace is typically understood by the Orthodox as the bestowal of a created gift, i.e., created grace.  The Orthodox "misunderstanding" in fact reflects an imbalance in Latin reflection that in fact once existed.  For years Catholic theologians ignored the uncreated dimension of grace.  But this is no longer the case today, thanks to the important contributions of Henri de Lubac, Karl Rahner, and Piet Fransen. 

3)  Theosis:  because the Orthodox believe that Catholics believe the grace is solely a created phenomenon, they infer that Catholics cannot make room in their theology and spiritual life for supernatural participation in the divine life of the Trinity.  But this is most certainly not the case if one reads the the poetry and reflections of the great mystics of the Latin Church.  Latin theology is not restricted to the manuals.  It may be more difficult for Catholics to speak of theosis, given the absence within Latin theology of the essence/energies distinction; but the notion of divinization is certainly present.

4)  Purgatory:   in the past the purgatorial state was often presented by Catholics, especially at a popular level, as punishment imposed by the just God for the temporal consequences of sin.  But the juridical model of purgatory has been replaced by a therapeutic-purification model, thus bringing the Latin understanding of purgatory in line with the Eastern understanding of post-mortem purification.  See Pope Benedict's encyclical Spe salvi


   
Misunderstood, Father, or the Vatican has changed its position?

When one bothers to read the spiritual leaders of the Church, the saints and doctors, it is clear that what is taught today is the ancient teaching of the Catholic Church.  Most people, particularly Orthodox believers do not bother with much of anything post-schism.  So it is clear to me why you and others simply take this position and hold it.  It's wrong but you'll never admit to it.

M.
Logged

primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,594


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #41 on: March 20, 2012, 12:23:28 PM »

Quote
When one bothers to read the spiritual leaders of the Church, the saints and doctors, it is clear that what is taught today is the ancient teaching of the Catholic Church
Except of course when they change their teachings. I can think of a few examples.

PP
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #42 on: March 20, 2012, 12:27:54 PM »

Quote
When one bothers to read the spiritual leaders of the Church, the saints and doctors, it is clear that what is taught today is the ancient teaching of the Catholic Church
Except of course when they change their teachings. I can think of a few examples.

PP

And they are obvious examples to most scholars and fairly well known today even by simpletons such as myself, and obviously, I am not referring to that sort of occurrence.

M.
« Last Edit: March 20, 2012, 12:28:24 PM by elijahmaria » Logged

J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,240


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #43 on: March 20, 2012, 12:30:50 PM »

Quote
When one bothers to read the spiritual leaders of the Church, the saints and doctors, it is clear that what is taught today is the ancient teaching of the Catholic Church
Except of course when they change their teachings. I can think of a few examples.

PP

I'll bet you thought we'd never ask what those examples are, right  Grin Grin?
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,594


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #44 on: March 20, 2012, 12:56:09 PM »

Quote
When one bothers to read the spiritual leaders of the Church, the saints and doctors, it is clear that what is taught today is the ancient teaching of the Catholic Church
Except of course when they change their teachings. I can think of a few examples.

PP

I'll bet you thought we'd never ask what those examples are, right  Grin Grin?
Actually, the boss came around so I had to dip out Smiley

Filioque - That it should not be in the creed (Leo III) and that it should be (example really needed?)

Infallibility - bishops denied infallibility, also the first councils were affirmed as revered as the gospels because of universal consent, not because of the pope. This is no longer the case, obviously
Unam Sanctum - outside of her there is neither salvation nor the remission of sins. Now, Pope Pius states "Sincerely observing the natural law and its precepts inscribed by God on all hearts and ready to obey God, they live honest lives and are able to attain eternal life by the efficacious virtue of divine light and grace since God who clearly beholds, searches, and knows the minds, souls, thoughts, and habits of all men, because of His great goodness and mercy, will by no means suffer anyone to be punished with eternal torment who has not the guilt of deliberate sin". The catechism has also stepped back a tad bit from unam Sanctum as well.

PP
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
Tags:
Pages: 1 2 3 »  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 0.169 seconds with 72 queries.