OrthodoxChristianity.net
December 20, 2014, 10:32:40 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: The Pope, Ecumenism, and Orthodox Patriarch Bartholomew  (Read 3757 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
yeshuaisiam
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox, Anabaptist, Other Early Christianity kind of jumbled together
Posts: 4,505


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« on: April 15, 2013, 05:39:12 PM »

If you are easily offended, please click off this thread for now.  In respect for lent, our focus should be on Christ, his suffering for us, his death, and eventually his resurrection.   I'm posting this as this is brand new.
It shows the ecumenical dialog between the Pope, Muslims, and Eastern Orthodox.  Pope address that the Muslims worship "the one God", and is also trying to fix the G. Schism.

Source: http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/is-pope-francis-laying-the-groundwork-for-a-one-world-religion

QUOTE:
Quote
Does Pope Francis intend to help the global elite achieve their goal of uniting all of the religions of the world under a single banner?  Will he be instrumental in establishing a single global religion for the glorious “new age” that the global elite believe is coming?  After he was elected, the cover of Time Magazine declared Pope Francis to be the “New World Pope“, and since his election Pope Francis has made it abundantly clear that he is going to make ecumenical outreach a top priority.  He has spoken of his “determination to continue on the path of ecumenical dialogue“, and he has already held a number of very high profile ecumenical meetings.  Not only has he worked hard to reach out to leaders from various Christian traditions, he has also made it a point to try to acknowledge the mutual bonds that he feels with all other religions.  For example, in one recent address he made it a point to say that he believes that Muslims worship and pray to the “one God” that he also worships.  This “all roads lead to the same God” philosophy is a hallmark of the one world religion that the global elite have been slowly building toward for decades.  The global elite know that even with a one world economy and a one world government, humanity will never be truly united until there is a single global religion.  Unfortunately, this one world religion that they are seeking to establish is diametrically opposed to the Christianity that we find in the Bible.  By throwing out Biblical truth for the sake of “friendship between men and women of different religious traditions“, is Pope Francis fundamentally betraying the faith that he claims to represent?

If there is going to be a one world religion, there will have to be a bond formed between Roman Catholicism and Islam.  They are the two largest religious traditions on the planet, and so any truly “global religion” would definitely require the participation of both of them.

That is one reason why what Pope Francis has already had to say about Islam is so noteworthy.  The following comes from remarks that he made during his very first ecumenical meeting…

    I then greet and cordially thank you all, dear friends belonging to other religious traditions; first of all the Muslims, who worship the one God, living and merciful, and call upon Him in prayer, and all of you. I really appreciate your presence: in it I see a tangible sign of the will to grow in mutual esteem and cooperation for the common good of humanity.

    The Catholic Church is aware of the importance of promoting friendship and respect between men and women of different religious traditions – I wish to repeat this: promoting friendship and respect between men and women of different religious traditions – it also attests the valuable work that the Pontifical Council for interreligious dialogue performs.

But are “Allah” and the God of the Bible the same thing?

Of course not.  For example, Christians believe that Jesus Christ is God.  Muslims deny this vehemently.  For much more on why “Allah” and the God of the Bible are not the same, please see this article.

So either Pope Francis is denying the divinity of Jesus Christ, or he is exhibiting a frightening ignorance of basic Christian theology, or there is some other agenda at work here.

During that same ecumenical meeting, Pope Francis also made it a point to state that he feels “close” to those that belong “to any religious tradition”…

    In this, we feel close even to all those men and women who, whilst not recognizing themselves belonging to any religious tradition, feel themselves nevertheless to be in search of truth, goodness and beauty, this truth, goodness and beauty of God, and who are our precious allies in efforts to defend the dignity of man, in building a peaceful coexistence among peoples and in guarding Creation carefully.

It is one thing to love people and to seek to build friendships with them, but it is another thing entirely to throw out the most basic beliefs of the faith that you supposedly represent in order to promote a specific agenda.

And Pope Francis definitely appears to have an agenda.  On another occasion, Pope Francis declared that it was time “to intensify dialogue” with other religions, and that he was “thinking particularly of dialogue with Islam.”

But this affinity for Islam did not just begin recently.  The truth is that Pope Francis was working hard to build bridges with Islam even when he was the Archbishop of Buenos Aires…

    “His humility drew my attention,” Sheik Mohsen Ali, an important Islamic leader in Argentina, told the Buenos Aires Herald. He “always showed himself a friend of the Islamic community.”

And Pope Francis has a reputation for being a cleric that really “knows Islam“…

    Sumer Noufouri, secretary-general of the Islamic Center of the Republic of Argentina, told the Buenos Aires Herald that the new pope is a “respectful, pro-dialogue person who knows Islam.”

But of course Pope Francis is not just reaching out to the Islamic world.

He has also been working hard to “intensify dialogue” with other Christian traditions.

In particular, he seems quite interested in improving relations with the Orthodox churches of the east…

    Before his address, the pope had a private meeting with Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew from Istanbul, who attended Francis’s inaugural Mass on Tuesday.

    It was the first time the spiritual head of Orthodox Christians had attended a Roman pope’s inaugural Mass since the Great Schism between western and eastern Christianity in 1054.

    At Wednesday’s meeting, Francis called Bartholomew “my brother Andrew,” a reference to the apostle who was the brother of St. Peter and was the first bishop of the Church of Byzantium.

    Francis also held a private session with Metropolitan Hilarion, the foreign minister of the Russian Orthodox Church, the largest in the Orthodox world.

It won’t happen tomorrow, of course, but could Pope Francis be the Pope that brings the Roman Catholics and the Orthodox back together?

And of course a one world religion will not appear overnight either.  There are far too many differences to overcome right now.

But as the world becomes increasingly unstable, people are going to be looking for answers.  After the world is ravaged by economic collapse, food shortages, nightmarish pandemics, unprecedented natural disasters and horrifying wars, will it finally be ready for a one world religion that promises “peace and friendship” among all of the religions of the globe?

This is something to watch for in the years ahead.  The global elite desperately want a single global religion, and they will keep moving things in that direction.

For now, Pope Francis just seems to be laying the groundwork for the one world religion that is coming.  There is a 900-year-old prophecy that indicates that Pope Francis could be the last Pope.  If that prophecy is true, then it will be very important to watch the actions of this Pope very carefully.

***Note the Spiritual Head of the Orthodox Christians attended Mass.
Please, reference the Canons of the Holy Apostles

Canon XLV of the Holy Apostles
"Let any Bishop, or Presbyter, or deacon that merely joins in prayer with heretics be suspended, but if he had permitted them to perform any service as Clergymen, let him be deposed."

Canon LXV of the Holy Apostles:
"If any clergymen, or laymen, enter a synagogue of Jews, or of heretics, to pray, let him be both deposed and excommunicated."

Canon XXXIII of Laodicia
"One must not join in prayer with heretics or schismatics."

The Orthodox Patriarch Bartholomew, attends Mass, with a Bishop (the Pope), who has called the Muslim's God "The One God".

Discuss?
Logged

I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com
Melodist
Archon
********
Offline Offline

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



« Reply #1 on: April 15, 2013, 08:09:40 PM »

There is a difference between saying "Muslims worship but hold incorrect beliefs about the God who created all things and is the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob" and "we believe all the same things". Also promoting friendship and "cooperation for the common good of humanity" doesn't mean holding a common faith either.

My personal opinion would be that the author of the article is making the above quotes out to be more than what they are out of a personal bias against Rome.

Also my personal opinion, if Pope Francis can restore relations with our bishops by exercising the humility that belongs to a true "servant of the servants of God" (of course with the restoration of the creed, etc) - then glory to God.
Logged

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

Made Perfect in Weakness - Latest Post: The Son of God
yeshuaisiam
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox, Anabaptist, Other Early Christianity kind of jumbled together
Posts: 4,505


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #2 on: April 15, 2013, 08:52:07 PM »

There is a difference between saying "Muslims worship but hold incorrect beliefs about the God who created all things and is the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob" and "we believe all the same things". Also promoting friendship and "cooperation for the common good of humanity" doesn't mean holding a common faith either.

My personal opinion would be that the author of the article is making the above quotes out to be more than what they are out of a personal bias against Rome.

Also my personal opinion, if Pope Francis can restore relations with our bishops by exercising the humility that belongs to a true "servant of the servants of God" (of course with the restoration of the creed, etc) - then glory to God.

He said:
"first of all the Muslims, who worship the one God, living and merciful, and call upon Him in prayer, and all of you."

Who is the "one god to the Pope"?
Who is the "one god to the Pope, that is trying to mend the schism with EO".

If he can say "Muslims worship the one God", yet Muslims deny Christ....   

I'm in disagreement with you that the author is exaggerating exact quotes.  When he states "Muslims worship the one God", he means exactly that.   I don't understand how any EO could be a part of this, or even consider mending the schism with him.   
Logged

I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com
Father H
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian--God's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: UOCofUSA-Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 2,611



« Reply #3 on: April 15, 2013, 09:03:41 PM »

Look this is not an easy topic.  St. John of Damascus did not view the Saracens (Muslims) as worshipping a different god but as having a heretical view of the one God.  Even if you see it as a different god, can you see this as a legitimate position within the bounds of Christianity? 
Logged
sedevacantist
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 208


« Reply #4 on: April 15, 2013, 09:06:31 PM »

There is a difference between saying "Muslims worship but hold incorrect beliefs about the God who created all things and is the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob" and "we believe all the same things". Also promoting friendship and "cooperation for the common good of humanity" doesn't mean holding a common faith either.

My personal opinion would be that the author of the article is making the above quotes out to be more than what they are out of a personal bias against Rome.

Also my personal opinion, if Pope Francis can restore relations with our bishops by exercising the humility that belongs to a true "servant of the servants of God" (of course with the restoration of the creed, etc) - then glory to God.

He said:
"first of all the Muslims, who worship the one God, living and merciful, and call upon Him in prayer, and all of you."

Who is the "one god to the Pope"?
Who is the "one god to the Pope, that is trying to mend the schism with EO".

If he can say "Muslims worship the one God", yet Muslims deny Christ....  

I'm in disagreement with you that the author is exaggerating exact quotes.  When he states "Muslims worship the one God", he means exactly that.   I don't understand how any EO could be a part of this, or even consider mending the schism with him.  
because most people don't want the truth and are lost, just like vatican 2  catholics who can't accept that their pope is not catholic, that it's clear Rome has lost the faith, they accept this ecumenism nonsense, they would rather be lovey dovey and accepting of the schismatic eastern orthodox and protestants and believe they will be saved ...true catholics on the other hand understand that we are to try and convert the eastern orthodox and protestants to catholicism since there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church

You are put on warning status for 99 days because of two violations:

(a) you went beyond what is permitted to non-orthodox members. See "Forum Purpose & Place of the Non-Orthodox" in the Rules page.

(b) you blatantly violated the No Proselytism rule.

If you wish to protest this action, please PM me. Thanks, Carl Kraeff
« Last Edit: April 17, 2013, 10:15:45 AM by Carl Kraeff (Second Chance) » Logged
Father H
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian--God's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: UOCofUSA-Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 2,611



« Reply #5 on: April 15, 2013, 09:10:20 PM »

There is a difference between saying "Muslims worship but hold incorrect beliefs about the God who created all things and is the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob" and "we believe all the same things". Also promoting friendship and "cooperation for the common good of humanity" doesn't mean holding a common faith either.

My personal opinion would be that the author of the article is making the above quotes out to be more than what they are out of a personal bias against Rome.

Also my personal opinion, if Pope Francis can restore relations with our bishops by exercising the humility that belongs to a true "servant of the servants of God" (of course with the restoration of the creed, etc) - then glory to God.

He said:
"first of all the Muslims, who worship the one God, living and merciful, and call upon Him in prayer, and all of you."

Who is the "one god to the Pope"?
Who is the "one god to the Pope, that is trying to mend the schism with EO".

If he can say "Muslims worship the one God", yet Muslims deny Christ....   

I'm in disagreement with you that the author is exaggerating exact quotes.  When he states "Muslims worship the one God", he means exactly that.   I don't understand how any EO could be a part of this, or even consider mending the schism with him.   
because most people don't want the truth and are lost, just like vatican 2  catholics who can't accept that their pope is not catholic, that it's clear Rome has lost the faith, they accept this ecumenism nonsense, they would rather be lovey dovey and accepting of the schismatic eastern orthodox and protestants and believe they will be saved ...true catholics on the other hand understand that we are to try and convert the eastern orthodox and protestants to catholicism since there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church

Isa, I was going to respond, but I give this Lenten gift to you.
Logged
jah777
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Posts: 1,975


« Reply #6 on: April 15, 2013, 09:37:43 PM »

Look this is not an easy topic.  St. John of Damascus did not view the Saracens (Muslims) as worshipping a different god but as having a heretical view of the one God.  Even if you see it as a different god, can you see this as a legitimate position within the bounds of Christianity? 

Father, do you have a link or quote to share on this?  Does St. John of Damascus actually say that the Saracens worship the same God, just incorrectly?  You say that according to St. John the Muslims have a heretical view of the one God.  Yet, to worship one's heretical view is to worship a different God than the true God. 
Logged
Carl Kraeff (Second Chance)
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 7,006



« Reply #7 on: April 15, 2013, 10:11:02 PM »

Here is a very important analysis that was published on the Patriarchate's website: The Extraordinary Historical Significance of Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew's Presence at Pope Francis' Installation as Bishop of Rome, by George E. Demacopoulos, PhD, Archon Didaskalos tou Genous, Historian for the Order of St. Andrew, Orthodox Christian Studies Center, Fordham University.

The gist of the analysis is: "First and foremost it is a powerful symbolic gesture for the cause of Christian unity. It demonstrates in unprecedented fashion the extent to which the Ecumenical Patriarch considers the relationship with the Roman Catholic Church to be a priority."
http://www.patriarchate.org/news/releases/patriarch-present-at-pope-francis-installation

What is extraordinary also is that Patriarch Bartholomew undertook this extraordinary step without the public approval of his fellow primates. He did so, in his own words, "As the Ecumenical Patriarchate and the worldwide Orthodox Church of Christ.."
http://www.archons.org/news/detail.asp?id=620

In other words, the Patriarch of Constantinople appears to have doubled down on his Canon 28 argument. I wonder how this may affect the Regional Assemblies and what Moscow's reaction is going to be? Almost coincidentally, the two non-Moscow jurisdictions (UAOC and UOCKP)  in the Ukraine just joined forces. Will Moscow see the hand of Constantinople in this? I am asking because supposedly Patriarch Bartholomew has said that if the UAOC and UOCKP were united that would be overcoming one of the major obstacles to obtaining canonical recognition. See post by Cossack 316 on a separate thread. http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,50982.msg909045.html#msg909045
Logged

Michal: "SC, love you in this thread."
LBK
No Reporting Allowed
Warned
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 11,623


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #8 on: April 15, 2013, 11:02:44 PM »

There is a difference between saying "Muslims worship but hold incorrect beliefs about the God who created all things and is the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob" and "we believe all the same things". Also promoting friendship and "cooperation for the common good of humanity" doesn't mean holding a common faith either.

My personal opinion would be that the author of the article is making the above quotes out to be more than what they are out of a personal bias against Rome.

Also my personal opinion, if Pope Francis can restore relations with our bishops by exercising the humility that belongs to a true "servant of the servants of God" (of course with the restoration of the creed, etc) - then glory to God.

He said:
"first of all the Muslims, who worship the one God, living and merciful, and call upon Him in prayer, and all of you."

Who is the "one god to the Pope"?
Who is the "one god to the Pope, that is trying to mend the schism with EO".

If he can say "Muslims worship the one God", yet Muslims deny Christ....   

I'm in disagreement with you that the author is exaggerating exact quotes.  When he states "Muslims worship the one God", he means exactly that.   I don't understand how any EO could be a part of this, or even consider mending the schism with him.   
because most people don't want the truth and are lost, just like vatican 2  catholics who can't accept that their pope is not catholic, that it's clear Rome has lost the faith, they accept this ecumenism nonsense, they would rather be lovey dovey and accepting of the schismatic eastern orthodox and protestants and believe they will be saved ...true catholics on the other hand understand that we are to try and convert the eastern orthodox and protestants to catholicism since there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church

Isa, I was going to respond, but I give this Lenten gift to you.

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

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,272


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


« Reply #9 on: April 16, 2013, 12:41:35 PM »

There is a difference between saying "Muslims worship but hold incorrect beliefs about the God who created all things and is the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob" and "we believe all the same things". Also promoting friendship and "cooperation for the common good of humanity" doesn't mean holding a common faith either.

My personal opinion would be that the author of the article is making the above quotes out to be more than what they are out of a personal bias against Rome.

Also my personal opinion, if Pope Francis can restore relations with our bishops by exercising the humility that belongs to a true "servant of the servants of God" (of course with the restoration of the creed, etc) - then glory to God.

He said:
"first of all the Muslims, who worship the one God, living and merciful, and call upon Him in prayer, and all of you."

Who is the "one god to the Pope"?
Who is the "one god to the Pope, that is trying to mend the schism with EO".

If he can say "Muslims worship the one God", yet Muslims deny Christ....   

I'm in disagreement with you that the author is exaggerating exact quotes.  When he states "Muslims worship the one God", he means exactly that.   I don't understand how any EO could be a part of this, or even consider mending the schism with him.   
because most people don't want the truth and are lost, just like vatican 2  catholics who can't accept that their pope is not catholic, that it's clear Rome has lost the faith, they accept this ecumenism nonsense, they would rather be lovey dovey and accepting of the schismatic eastern orthodox and protestants and believe they will be saved ...true catholics on the other hand understand that we are to try and convert the eastern orthodox and protestants to catholicism since there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church

Isa, I was going to respond, but I give this Lenten gift to you.

I hear the rustling sound of maps being unrolled.  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 (?)
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

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



« Reply #10 on: April 16, 2013, 01:11:26 PM »

There is a difference between saying "Muslims worship but hold incorrect beliefs about the God who created all things and is the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob" and "we believe all the same things". Also promoting friendship and "cooperation for the common good of humanity" doesn't mean holding a common faith either.

My personal opinion would be that the author of the article is making the above quotes out to be more than what they are out of a personal bias against Rome.

Also my personal opinion, if Pope Francis can restore relations with our bishops by exercising the humility that belongs to a true "servant of the servants of God" (of course with the restoration of the creed, etc) - then glory to God.

He said:
"first of all the Muslims, who worship the one God, living and merciful, and call upon Him in prayer, and all of you."

Who is the "one god to the Pope"?
Who is the "one god to the Pope, that is trying to mend the schism with EO".

If he can say "Muslims worship the one God", yet Muslims deny Christ....   

I'm in disagreement with you that the author is exaggerating exact quotes.  When he states "Muslims worship the one God", he means exactly that.   I don't understand how any EO could be a part of this, or even consider mending the schism with him.   
because most people don't want the truth and are lost, just like vatican 2  catholics who can't accept that their pope is not catholic, that it's clear Rome has lost the faith, they accept this ecumenism nonsense, they would rather be lovey dovey and accepting of the schismatic eastern orthodox and protestants and believe they will be saved ...true catholics on the other hand understand that we are to try and convert the eastern orthodox and protestants to catholicism since there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church

Isa, I was going to respond, but I give this Lenten gift to you.

I hear the rustling sound of maps being unrolled.  Grin Grin
I've been a little groggy and fear that stooping to sede's level will place me at a disadvantage, where he can beat me with this vast experience with non-facts.  Sort of like his non-pope of his headless Ultramontanist confession that demands obedience from all to an empty chair which they cannot fill.
Logged

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

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



« Reply #11 on: April 16, 2013, 01:14:40 PM »

Here is a very important analysis that was published on the Patriarchate's website: The Extraordinary Historical Significance of Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew's Presence at Pope Francis' Installation as Bishop of Rome, by George E. Demacopoulos, PhD, Archon Didaskalos tou Genous, Historian for the Order of St. Andrew, Orthodox Christian Studies Center, Fordham University.

The gist of the analysis is: "First and foremost it is a powerful symbolic gesture for the cause of Christian unity. It demonstrates in unprecedented fashion the extent to which the Ecumenical Patriarch considers the relationship with the Roman Catholic Church to be a priority."
http://www.patriarchate.org/news/releases/patriarch-present-at-pope-francis-installation

What is extraordinary also is that Patriarch Bartholomew undertook this extraordinary step without the public approval of his fellow primates. He did so, in his own words, "As the Ecumenical Patriarchate and the worldwide Orthodox Church of Christ.."
http://www.archons.org/news/detail.asp?id=620

In other words, the Patriarch of Constantinople appears to have doubled down on his Canon 28 argument. I wonder how this may affect the Regional Assemblies and what Moscow's reaction is going to be? Almost coincidentally, the two non-Moscow jurisdictions (UAOC and UOCKP)  in the Ukraine just joined forces. Will Moscow see the hand of Constantinople in this? I am asking because supposedly Patriarch Bartholomew has said that if the UAOC and UOCKP were united that would be overcoming one of the major obstacles to obtaining canonical recognition. See post by Cossack 316 on a separate thread. http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,50982.msg909045.html#msg909045
The act itself wasn't really a problem, as most Orthodox Churches sent representatives.  The OCA had Met. Tikhon (many years!) and the Romanians sent the bishop of Rome.

The spin, of course, is a problem. I expect that bubble will burst (like Chambessy) once the PoM meets with the Pope of the Vatican.
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
podkarpatska
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,963


Pokrov


WWW
« Reply #12 on: April 16, 2013, 01:51:00 PM »



I hear the rustling sound of maps being unrolled.  Grin Grin
[/quote]
I've been a little groggy and fear that stooping to sede's level will place me at a disadvantage, where he can beat me with this vast experience with non-facts.  Sort of like his non-pope of his headless Ultramontanist confession that demands obedience from all to an empty chair which they cannot fill.
[/quote]

No sign of grogginess in that line!
Logged
JamesR
Virginal Chicano Blood
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox (but doubtful)
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church *of* America
Posts: 5,996


St. Augustine of Hippo pray for me!


« Reply #13 on: April 16, 2013, 03:57:53 PM »

Muslims don't worship the same God as Orthodox Christians and Roman Catholics. I don't care how much people here might try to make up excuses for the Ecumenical Patriarch or Pope. The Scriptures say it plain and simple that "He who denies the Son does NOT have the Father either." Muslims reject the divinity of Jesus, therefore, they do not have the Father. it's that simple. There really is no way around it. It's amazing how much people will try to twist the Scriptures or try to get around and brush over this fact in order to defend their ecumenist heirarchs or because they are afraid of looking impolite in front of Muslims.
« Last Edit: April 16, 2013, 03:58:04 PM by JamesR » Logged

Quote
You're really on to something here. Tattoo to keep you from masturbating, chew to keep you from fornicating... it's a whole new world where you outsource your crosses. You're like a Christian entrepreneur or something.
Quote
James, you have problemz.
Cyrillic
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,035


Cyrillico est imperare orbi universo


« Reply #14 on: April 16, 2013, 04:02:02 PM »

Muslims don't worship the same God as Orthodox Christians and Roman Catholics.

But Roman Catholics worship the filioque God  police
Logged

"Claret is the liquor for boys; port for men; but he who aspires to be a hero must drink brandy."
-Dr. Samuel Johnson
JamesR
Virginal Chicano Blood
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox (but doubtful)
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church *of* America
Posts: 5,996


St. Augustine of Hippo pray for me!


« Reply #15 on: April 16, 2013, 04:08:57 PM »

Muslims don't worship the same God as Orthodox Christians and Roman Catholics.

But Roman Catholics worship the filioque God  police

I never said that Roman Catholics and the Orthodox worship the same God  police Only that Muslims worship a different God than both of them.
Logged

Quote
You're really on to something here. Tattoo to keep you from masturbating, chew to keep you from fornicating... it's a whole new world where you outsource your crosses. You're like a Christian entrepreneur or something.
Quote
James, you have problemz.
sedevacantist
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 208


« Reply #16 on: April 16, 2013, 05:54:33 PM »

There is a difference between saying "Muslims worship but hold incorrect beliefs about the God who created all things and is the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob" and "we believe all the same things". Also promoting friendship and "cooperation for the common good of humanity" doesn't mean holding a common faith either.

My personal opinion would be that the author of the article is making the above quotes out to be more than what they are out of a personal bias against Rome.

Also my personal opinion, if Pope Francis can restore relations with our bishops by exercising the humility that belongs to a true "servant of the servants of God" (of course with the restoration of the creed, etc) - then glory to God.

He said:
"first of all the Muslims, who worship the one God, living and merciful, and call upon Him in prayer, and all of you."

Who is the "one god to the Pope"?
Who is the "one god to the Pope, that is trying to mend the schism with EO".

If he can say "Muslims worship the one God", yet Muslims deny Christ....   

I'm in disagreement with you that the author is exaggerating exact quotes.  When he states "Muslims worship the one God", he means exactly that.   I don't understand how any EO could be a part of this, or even consider mending the schism with him.   
because most people don't want the truth and are lost, just like vatican 2  catholics who can't accept that their pope is not catholic, that it's clear Rome has lost the faith, they accept this ecumenism nonsense, they would rather be lovey dovey and accepting of the schismatic eastern orthodox and protestants and believe they will be saved ...true catholics on the other hand understand that we are to try and convert the eastern orthodox and protestants to catholicism since there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church

Isa, I was going to respond, but I give this Lenten gift to you.

I hear the rustling sound of maps being unrolled.  Grin Grin
I've been a little groggy and fear that stooping to sede's level will place me at a disadvantage, where he can beat me with this vast experience with non-facts.  Sort of like his non-pope of his headless Ultramontanist confession that demands obedience from all to an empty chair which they cannot fill.
yes yes non facts like how the pope is a proven heretic but I guess I should still follow him according to you because by golly I won't know how to act without an active pope at the helm, you fail to understand that true catholics have the magisterium, the true teachings of  past popes who would have condemned he following :

That is why Benedict XVI joins Paul VI and John Paul II in praising the overturning of the excommunications against the “Orthodox” – and therefore in denying Vatican I

Benedict XVI, Ecumenical Message to Schismatic Patriarch of Constantinople, Nov. 26, 2005: “This year we commemorate the 40th Anniversary of 7 December 1965, that day on which Pope Paul VI and Patriarch Athenagoras, dissatisfied with what had occurred in 1054, decided together at Rome and Constantinople ‘to cancel from the Church’s memory the sentence of excommunication which had been pronounced.Orthodox] Church in Istanbul.38]

 

Benedict XVI encourages the non-Catholic, schismatic patriarch to resume his non-Catholic and schismatic ministry.  Further, on his trip to Turkey, Benedict XVI recalled John Paul II’s gesture of giving relics to the schismatics.  Benedict XVI said that such an action is a sign of communion.

 

Benedict XVI, Speech to schismatic patriarch Bartholomew, Nov. 29, 2006: “… St. Gregory of Nazianzus and St. John Chrysostom… Their relics rest in basilica of St. Peter in the Vatican, and a part of them were given to your Holiness as a sign of communion by the late Pope John Paul II for veneration in this very cathedral.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

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



« Reply #17 on: April 16, 2013, 08:37:23 PM »

I've been a little groggy and fear that stooping to sede's level will place me at a disadvantage, where he can beat me with this vast experience with non-facts.  Sort of like his non-pope of his headless Ultramontanist confession that demands obedience from all to an empty chair which they cannot fill.
yes yes non facts like how the pope is a proven heretic
No, he's Orthodox.


but I guess I should still follow him according to you because by golly I won't know how to act without an active pope at the helm, you fail to understand that true catholics have the magisterium, the true teachings of  past popes who would have condemned he following :
you mean the heretical pope who created your "magisterium" and the "Pastor Aeternus" who taught this?:
Quote
On the permanence of the primacy of blessed Peter in the Roman pontiffs
1. That which our lord Jesus Christ, the prince of shepherds and great shepherd of the sheep, established in the blessed apostle Peter, for the continual salvation and permanent benefit of the Church, must of necessity remain for ever, by Christ's authority, in the Church which, founded as it is upon a rock, will stand firm until the end of time.

2. For no one can be in doubt, indeed it was known in every age that the holy and most blessed Peter, prince and head of the apostles, the pillar of faith and the foundation of the Catholic Church, received the keys of the kingdom from our lord Jesus Christ, the savior and redeemer of the human race, and that to this day and for ever he lives and presides and exercises judgment in his successors the bishops of the Holy Roman See, which he founded and consecrated with his blood.

3. Therefore whoever succeeds to the chair of Peter obtains by the institution of Christ himself, the primacy of Peter over the whole Church. So what the truth has ordained stands firm, and blessed Peter perseveres in the rock-like strength he was granted, and does not abandon that guidance of the Church which he once received.

4. For this reason it has always been necessary for every Church--that is to say the faithful throughout the world--to be in agreement with the Roman Church because of its more effective leadership. In consequence of being joined, as members to head, with that see, from which the rights of sacred communion flow to all, they will grow together into the structure of a single body.

5. Therefore, if anyone says that it is not by the institution of Christ the lord himself (that is to say, by divine law) that blessed Peter should have perpetual successors in the primacy over the whole Church; or that the Roman Pontiff is not the successor of blessed Peter in this primacy: let him be anathema.
you stand condemned by him.

That is why Benedict XVI joins Paul VI and John Paul II in praising the overturning of the excommunications against the “Orthodox” – and therefore in denying Vatican I
you deny Vatican I by overturning the canonical election of your popes John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul I and II, Benedict XVI and Francis, which taught "Indeed, their apostolic teaching was embraced by all the venerable fathers and reverenced and followed by all the holy orthodox doctors, for they knew very well that this See of St. Peter always remains unblemished by any error...So then, should anyone, which God forbid, have the temerity to reject this definition of ours: let him be anathema."  Anathema: that means you.

That Vatican I was proven false isn't my problem.

Benedict XVI, Ecumenical Message to Schismatic Patriarch of Constantinople, Nov. 26, 2005: “This year we commemorate the 40th Anniversary of 7 December 1965, that day on which Pope Paul VI and Patriarch Athenagoras, dissatisfied with what had occurred in 1054, decided together at Rome and Constantinople ‘to cancel from the Church’s memory the sentence of excommunication which had been pronounced.’
Constantinople isn't in schism, nor is there been a schismatic/heretical patriarch of it since the Vatican abolished its Latin patriarch of Constantinople.

In the year 1054, the Patriarch of Constantinople, Michael Cerularius, broke communion with the Catholic Church and the pope of Rome.  Cerularius rejected the supreme authority of the pope and closed Roman Rite churches in Constantinople.  Cerularius was excommunicated by Pope St. Leo IX, and the Great Schism of the East was formalized.
Pope Leo IX insisted on backing his Ultramontanist claims with the Donation of Constantine, and EP Michael just laughed at that forgery and Pope Leo's false claims based on it.  Cardinal Humbert attempted to excommunicate the Catholic Church, but the Patriarch excommunicated him, Umbert's boss already having left Catholic communion with the Orthodox bishops of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.

Thus, what “occurred in 1054,” mentioned by Benedict XVI above, refers to the excommunications leveled by the Catholic Church against those who followed Michael Cerularius into schism and into a rejection of the Papacy.  Paul VI “lifted” these excommunications at the end of Vatican II, and John Paul II praised and commemorated the lifting of them many times.  Now we see that Benedict XVI follows John Paul II’s example and also commemorates the event.
they're your supreme pontiffs.  Deal with it.

The Catholic Church leveled excommunication against those who opposed EP Michael Cerularius, who upheld, like Pope Leo III and unlike Popes Benedict VIII and Leo IX, the unadulterated Creed of the Catholic Church.

All of this simply means that Paul VI, John Paul II and now Benedict XVI have attempted to overturn the Papacy as a dogma which must be believed under pain of heresy and excommunication.  But as we saw already, Vatican I declared many times and in many ways that those who reject the dogma of the Papacy are anathematized, cut off from the Faith.  Hence, to attempt to overturn the excommunications against those who still reject the Papacy is simply to boldly reject the teaching of Vatican I.  It’s formal heresy and schism signified in word and deed.
Alas for you, according to Vatican I, your supreme pontiff is judged by no one, so according to it you are anathematized and cut off from the Faith.

Benedict XVI prays ecumenical Vespers with schismatics and Protestants and says he loves the schismatic Orthodox Church

Benedict XVI praying ecumenical Vespers on Sept. 12, 2006.[32]  This is active participation in non-Catholic worship.  It is a manifestation of heresy by deed.

Benedict XVI, Address during ecumenical Vespers service, Sept. 12, 2006: “Dear Brothers and Sisters in Christ!  We are gathered, Orthodox Christians, Catholics and Protestants – and together with us there are also some Jewish friends – to sing together the evening praise of God… This is an hour of gratitude for the fact that we can pray together in this way and, by turning to the Lord, at the same time grow in unity among ourselves… Among those gathered for this evening’s Vespers, I would like first to greet warmly the representatives of the Orthodox Church.  I have always considered it a special gift of God’s Providence that, as a professor at Bonn, I was able to come to know and to love the Orthodox Church, personally as it were, through two young Archimandrites, Stylianos Harkianakis and Damaskinos Papandreou, both of whom later became Metropolitans… Our koinonia [communion] is above all communion with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ in the Holy Spirit; it is communion with the triune God, made possible by the Lord through his incarnation and the outpouring of the Spirit.  This communion with God creates in turn koinonia among people, as a participation in the faith of the Apostles…
what "Orthodox Church" you talking about?  The Church of the Orthodox diptychs of the Catholic Church, of EP Bartholomew, Pope Theodore II, Patriarch John X, Patriarch Theophilos III, Patriarch Kyril, Catholicos Ilya II, Patriarch Irinej, Patriarch Daniel, Metropolitan Cyril, Archbishop Hieronymos II, Archbishop Chrysostomos II, Archbishop Anastasios, Metropolitan Sawa, Metropolitan Simeon  and Metropolitan Tikhon is in communion with Our Head, Our Lord and God and Savior, Jesus Christ.

What can be more heretical than saying: “I love the schismatic Church”?  He then indicates that he, the schismatics, and the Protestants have a communion with God, communion with each other, and communion with the Faith of the Apostles.  This is all totally heretical.  Benedict XVI is a public heretic in communion with non-Catholics.
but according to Pastor Aeternus, he is your supreme pontiff (or was).

Benedict XVI’s worst heresy?  He prays with the leader of the world’s “Orthodox” schismatics and signs a Joint Declaration with him telling him he’s in the Church of Christ

 BBC News, Nov. 29, 2006 –“Benedict XVI has met Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I in Turkey, on the second day of a landmark visit to the largely Muslim country.  The Istanbul talks with the spiritual leader of the world's Orthodox Christians aimed to heal an old rift.  The two leaders began their meeting by holding a joint prayer service at the St George [Orthodox] Church in Istanbul.
It is his links to Pope Pius IX that kept him in heresy and schism, not his relationship with the EP.

During his 2006 trip to Turkey, Benedict XVI went into two schismatic cathedrals and met with three schismatic patriarchs, including the leader of the world’s schismatics: Eastern Orthodox Patriarch of Constantinople, Bartholomew I.  Benedict XVI not only committed a forbidden act of communication in sacred things with the schismatic, but he may have committed his worst heresy in his joint declaration with him.
EP Bartholomew isn't the leader of any schismatics.  An icon of the Head of the Orthodox Church is here behind EP Bartholomew's throne.

Benedict XVI, Joint Declaration with Schismatic Patriarch Bartholomew, Nov. 30, 2006: “This fraternal encounter which brings us together, Pope Benedict XVI of Rome and Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I, is God's work, and in a certain sense his gift.  We give thanks to the Author of all that is good, who allows us once again, in prayer and in dialogue, to express the joy we feel as brothers and to renew our commitment to move towards full communion. This commitment comes from the Lord's will and from our responsibility as Pastors in the Church of Christ… As far as relations between the Church of Rome and the Church of Constantinople are concerned, we cannot fail to recall the solemn ecclesial act effacing the memory of the ancient anathemas which for centuries had a negative effect on our Churches.

What can be more heretical? Declaring in an "Apostolic Constitution" that the pope is infallible and has jurisdiction over the Church.

Pastor Aeternus put Pope Benedict XVI in office as "schismatic leader of the world's schismatics," as you put it.

Benedict XVI made this formally heretical declaration in a schismatic cathedral as part of a joint declaration during a divine liturgy with a notorious schismatic!  Thus, it’s official: Benedict XVI has declared in a public joint declaration that one can reject the Papacy, Papal Infallibility, Vatican I, etc. and be in the Church of Christ.

That is how one enters the Church of Christ from your heretical and schismatic beliefs.

He is without any doubt a public heretic.  Anyone who denies this, in light of these facts, is also a heretic.  Even the most dishonest and hardened defender of Antipope Benedict XVI will find it impossible to explain this one away.

Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum (#15), June 29, 1896 – Bishops Separated from Peter and his Successors Lose All Jurisdiction: “From this it must be clearly understood that Bishops are deprived of the right and power of ruling, if they deliberately secede from Peter and his successors; because, by this secession, they are separated from the foundation on which the whole edifice must rest.  They are therefore outside the edifice itself; and for this very reason they are separated from the fold, whose leader is the Chief Pastor; they are exiled from that Kingdom, the keys of which were given by Christ to Peter alone… No one, therefore, unless in communion with Peter can share in his authority, since it is absurd to imagine that he who is outside can command in the Church.
and yet you rant on against your supreme pontiffs, put in place per Pastor Aeternus.

All of this heresy from Benedict XVI is also a total mockery of the saints and martyrs who suffered because they refused to become Eastern “Orthodox,” as was covered earlier in the section entitled: Catholics who were tortured and martyred because they refused to become Eastern Schismatics.
You mean like St. EP Photios or St. Peter the Aleut.

 
That is why Benedict XVI even encourages the Schismatic Patriarch to Resume His Ministry

Benedict XVI, Address, Nov. 12, 2005: “In this regard, I ask you, venerable

Brothers, to convey my cordial greeting to Patriarch Maxim, First Hierarch of the Orthodox Church of Bulgaria.  Please express to him my best wishes for his health and for the happy resumption of his ministry.
who are you to question your supreme pontiffs, put in place per Pastor Aeternus?

Benedict XVI, Speech to schismatic patriarch Bartholomew, Nov. 29, 2006: “… St. Gregory of Nazianzus and St. John Chrysostom… Their relics rest in basilica of St. Peter in the Vatican, and a part of them were given to your Holiness as a sign of communion by the late Pope John Paul II for veneration in this very cathedral.
dogmas of heretics like Pastor Aeternus rejects communion with the Church.

You took your odds with Pastor Aeternus, and so Popes John Paul II, Benedict XVI and Francis are the horses you bet on.
 
Benedict XVI’s incredible heresy on the schismatic “Archbishop” of Athens

Benedict XVI, Address, Oct. 30, 2006: “I am also pleased to address my thoughts and good wishes to His Beatitude Christodoulos, Archbishop of Athens and All Greece: I ask the Lord to sustain his farsightedness and prudence in carrying the demanding service that the Lord has entrusted to his care.  Through him I wish to greet with deep affection the holy synod of the Orthodox Church of Greece and the faithful whom it serves lovingly and with apostolic dedication.
The Church, professing her unity, commemorates the Archbishop of Athens and All Greece, as he teaches the Catholic dogmatic teachings.

And we don't depend on the Vatican newspaper ex cathedra telling us so.

I'm sure you do.

You might try original thought for a change.

the post-Vatican II sect is a huge manifestation of evil at the very least, a Counter Church of the Devil.  Well, the post-Vatican II sect loves Eastern Orthodoxy.  That should tell you something.  If E. Orthodoxy were true, the post-Vatican II antipopes would hate it.  The post-Vatican II antipopes, whose mission from the Devil is to embrace all the major breaches of God’s truth in history (the pagan religions, the Islamic religion, the heretical sects and the E. Orthodox schism) reaches out to and wants to unite with E. Orthodoxy (and Protestantism) because the Devil knows that E. Orthodoxy was one of those major movements of rejection of God’s truth by which he has ensnared millions of souls.

http://www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/refuting_eastern_orthodox.php
ah the hatred of the pre-Vatican II sect, truly a wonder to behold.  Ranting and raging because their built their hope on sand, demanding obedience to a pontiff who no longer exists and cannot be replaced.

Since Orthodoxy is true, and you say anti-popes would hate it then, and your claim that your popes before Pope John XXIII hated Orthodoxy, I guess that indicates you have been following anti-popes all along.

But then what does the hurling of the charge of schismatic by schismatics mean?  Not much.
« Last Edit: April 16, 2013, 08:43:39 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
sedevacantist
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 208


« Reply #18 on: April 16, 2013, 09:39:26 PM »

Muslims don't worship the same God as Orthodox Christians and Roman Catholics.

But Roman Catholics worship the filioque God  police


John 15:26

Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition (DRA)

26 But when the Paraclete cometh, whom I will send you from the Father, the Spirit of truth, who proceedeth from the Father, he shall give testimony of me.
so here we see Jesus is sending the holy Ghost from the Father , therefore The Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father AND Son
Logged
yeshuaisiam
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox, Anabaptist, Other Early Christianity kind of jumbled together
Posts: 4,505


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #19 on: April 16, 2013, 09:51:12 PM »

Muslims don't worship the same God as Orthodox Christians and Roman Catholics. I don't care how much people here might try to make up excuses for the Ecumenical Patriarch or Pope. The Scriptures say it plain and simple that "He who denies the Son does NOT have the Father either." Muslims reject the divinity of Jesus, therefore, they do not have the Father. it's that simple. There really is no way around it. It's amazing how much people will try to twist the Scriptures or try to get around and brush over this fact in order to defend their ecumenist heirarchs or because they are afraid of looking impolite in front of Muslims.

James, you absolutely knocked it out of the park on this one.   There is no defense.

Ecumenism is the catalyst that incepted my drive from the church.  I did not see how a "quick consecration" could be done in a tent that a pagan ceremony was just held... KNOWING, that a pagan/heretical ceremony would be held after.

There is no bend, twist, or distortion that can justify this.  

The bottom line is this, and it hurts to say it.  People are often willing to defend their bishops more so than defend Christ.   Pope states - "Muslims worship the same God" - The Orthodox Patriarch Bartholomew should have STOOD UP, shook the dust, and left.  

I honestly do believe most EO Christians do not like this stuff.  Most EO Christians want to be Orthodox Christians.  If you consider all the trouble ecumenism has caused the church....

It's strange...  

Even under the guise of "unity / fellowship", an Eastern Orthodox Patriarch would rather have "unity / fellowship" with a man that states "Muslims worship the one God", RATHER THAN their own Eastern Orthodox brothers & sisters, who had to schism because of ecumenism.   Rather than casting aside ecumenism in love for their Orthodox brothers and sisters for unity, he embraces it and pursues a relationship with the RC church that thinks "Muslims worship the one God".   I absolutely know the people on this forum are smart enough to see this.  

James is correct imho, there is no excuse for this.  
Logged

I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com
yeshuaisiam
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox, Anabaptist, Other Early Christianity kind of jumbled together
Posts: 4,505


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #20 on: April 16, 2013, 09:55:01 PM »

Muslims don't worship the same God as Orthodox Christians and Roman Catholics.

But Roman Catholics worship the filioque God  police


John 15:26

Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition (DRA)

26 But when the Paraclete cometh, whom I will send you from the Father, the Spirit of truth, who proceedeth from the Father, he shall give testimony of me.
so here we see Jesus is sending the holy Ghost from the Father , therefore The Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father AND Son

So in 1054, a simple phrase "and the son", helps divide the church.

But today, EO patriarch Bartholomew can hand chalices to Lutherans, and participate in ecumenism embracing the Pope as a "brother", while the Pope claims "MUSLIMS worship the one God".

Unbelievable.

I'm sorry guys, I'm not trying to rile anybody up.  I respect lent. Please forgive me if I have.  But seriously, you just can't make this stuff up.
Logged

I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com
sedevacantist
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 208


« Reply #21 on: April 16, 2013, 10:04:52 PM »

I've been a little groggy and fear that stooping to sede's level will place me at a disadvantage, where he can beat me with this vast experience with non-facts.  Sort of like his non-pope of his headless Ultramontanist confession that demands obedience from all to an empty chair which they cannot fill.
yes yes non facts like how the pope is a proven heretic
No, he's Orthodox.


but I guess I should still follow him according to you because by golly I won't know how to act without an active pope at the helm, you fail to understand that true catholics have the magisterium, the true teachings of  past popes who would have condemned he following :
you mean the heretical pope who created your "magisterium" and the "Pastor Aeternus" who taught this?:
Quote
On the permanence of the primacy of blessed Peter in the Roman pontiffs
1. That which our lord Jesus Christ, the prince of shepherds and great shepherd of the sheep, established in the blessed apostle Peter, for the continual salvation and permanent benefit of the Church, must of necessity remain for ever, by Christ's authority, in the Church which, founded as it is upon a rock, will stand firm until the end of time.

2. For no one can be in doubt, indeed it was known in every age that the holy and most blessed Peter, prince and head of the apostles, the pillar of faith and the foundation of the Catholic Church, received the keys of the kingdom from our lord Jesus Christ, the savior and redeemer of the human race, and that to this day and for ever he lives and presides and exercises judgment in his successors the bishops of the Holy Roman See, which he founded and consecrated with his blood.

3. Therefore whoever succeeds to the chair of Peter obtains by the institution of Christ himself, the primacy of Peter over the whole Church. So what the truth has ordained stands firm, and blessed Peter perseveres in the rock-like strength he was granted, and does not abandon that guidance of the Church which he once received.

4. For this reason it has always been necessary for every Church--that is to say the faithful throughout the world--to be in agreement with the Roman Church because of its more effective leadership. In consequence of being joined, as members to head, with that see, from which the rights of sacred communion flow to all, they will grow together into the structure of a single body.

5. Therefore, if anyone says that it is not by the institution of Christ the lord himself (that is to say, by divine law) that blessed Peter should have perpetual successors in the primacy over the whole Church; or that the Roman Pontiff is not the successor of blessed Peter in this primacy: let him be anathema.
you stand condemned by him.

That is why Benedict XVI joins Paul VI and John Paul II in praising the overturning of the excommunications against the “Orthodox” – and therefore in denying Vatican I
you deny Vatican I by overturning the canonical election of your popes John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul I and II, Benedict XVI and Francis, which taught "Indeed, their apostolic teaching was embraced by all the venerable fathers and reverenced and followed by all the holy orthodox doctors, for they knew very well that this See of St. Peter always remains unblemished by any error...So then, should anyone, which God forbid, have the temerity to reject this definition of ours: let him be anathema."  Anathema: that means you.

That Vatican I was proven false isn't my problem.

Benedict XVI, Ecumenical Message to Schismatic Patriarch of Constantinople, Nov. 26, 2005: “This year we commemorate the 40th Anniversary of 7 December 1965, that day on which Pope Paul VI and Patriarch Athenagoras, dissatisfied with what had occurred in 1054, decided together at Rome and Constantinople ‘to cancel from the Church’s memory the sentence of excommunication which had been pronounced.’
Constantinople isn't in schism, nor is there been a schismatic/heretical patriarch of it since the Vatican abolished its Latin patriarch of Constantinople.

In the year 1054, the Patriarch of Constantinople, Michael Cerularius, broke communion with the Catholic Church and the pope of Rome.  Cerularius rejected the supreme authority of the pope and closed Roman Rite churches in Constantinople.  Cerularius was excommunicated by Pope St. Leo IX, and the Great Schism of the East was formalized.
Pope Leo IX insisted on backing his Ultramontanist claims with the Donation of Constantine, and EP Michael just laughed at that forgery and Pope Leo's false claims based on it.  Cardinal Humbert attempted to excommunicate the Catholic Church, but the Patriarch excommunicated him, Umbert's boss already having left Catholic communion with the Orthodox bishops of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.

Thus, what “occurred in 1054,” mentioned by Benedict XVI above, refers to the excommunications leveled by the Catholic Church against those who followed Michael Cerularius into schism and into a rejection of the Papacy.  Paul VI “lifted” these excommunications at the end of Vatican II, and John Paul II praised and commemorated the lifting of them many times.  Now we see that Benedict XVI follows John Paul II’s example and also commemorates the event.
they're your supreme pontiffs.  Deal with it.

The Catholic Church leveled excommunication against those who opposed EP Michael Cerularius, who upheld, like Pope Leo III and unlike Popes Benedict VIII and Leo IX, the unadulterated Creed of the Catholic Church.

All of this simply means that Paul VI, John Paul II and now Benedict XVI have attempted to overturn the Papacy as a dogma which must be believed under pain of heresy and excommunication.  But as we saw already, Vatican I declared many times and in many ways that those who reject the dogma of the Papacy are anathematized, cut off from the Faith.  Hence, to attempt to overturn the excommunications against those who still reject the Papacy is simply to boldly reject the teaching of Vatican I.  It’s formal heresy and schism signified in word and deed.
Alas for you, according to Vatican I, your supreme pontiff is judged by no one, so according to it you are anathematized and cut off from the Faith.

Benedict XVI prays ecumenical Vespers with schismatics and Protestants and says he loves the schismatic Orthodox Church

Benedict XVI praying ecumenical Vespers on Sept. 12, 2006.[32]  This is active participation in non-Catholic worship.  It is a manifestation of heresy by deed.

Benedict XVI, Address during ecumenical Vespers service, Sept. 12, 2006: “Dear Brothers and Sisters in Christ!  We are gathered, Orthodox Christians, Catholics and Protestants – and together with us there are also some Jewish friends – to sing together the evening praise of God… This is an hour of gratitude for the fact that we can pray together in this way and, by turning to the Lord, at the same time grow in unity among ourselves… Among those gathered for this evening’s Vespers, I would like first to greet warmly the representatives of the Orthodox Church.  I have always considered it a special gift of God’s Providence that, as a professor at Bonn, I was able to come to know and to love the Orthodox Church, personally as it were, through two young Archimandrites, Stylianos Harkianakis and Damaskinos Papandreou, both of whom later became Metropolitans… Our koinonia [communion] is above all communion with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ in the Holy Spirit; it is communion with the triune God, made possible by the Lord through his incarnation and the outpouring of the Spirit.  This communion with God creates in turn koinonia among people, as a participation in the faith of the Apostles…
what "Orthodox Church" you talking about?  The Church of the Orthodox diptychs of the Catholic Church, of EP Bartholomew, Pope Theodore II, Patriarch John X, Patriarch Theophilos III, Patriarch Kyril, Catholicos Ilya II, Patriarch Irinej, Patriarch Daniel, Metropolitan Cyril, Archbishop Hieronymos II, Archbishop Chrysostomos II, Archbishop Anastasios, Metropolitan Sawa, Metropolitan Simeon  and Metropolitan Tikhon is in communion with Our Head, Our Lord and God and Savior, Jesus Christ.

What can be more heretical than saying: “I love the schismatic Church”?  He then indicates that he, the schismatics, and the Protestants have a communion with God, communion with each other, and communion with the Faith of the Apostles.  This is all totally heretical.  Benedict XVI is a public heretic in communion with non-Catholics.
but according to Pastor Aeternus, he is your supreme pontiff (or was).

Benedict XVI’s worst heresy?  He prays with the leader of the world’s “Orthodox” schismatics and signs a Joint Declaration with him telling him he’s in the Church of Christ

 BBC News, Nov. 29, 2006 –“Benedict XVI has met Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I in Turkey, on the second day of a landmark visit to the largely Muslim country.  The Istanbul talks with the spiritual leader of the world's Orthodox Christians aimed to heal an old rift.  The two leaders began their meeting by holding a joint prayer service at the St George [Orthodox] Church in Istanbul.
It is his links to Pope Pius IX that kept him in heresy and schism, not his relationship with the EP.

During his 2006 trip to Turkey, Benedict XVI went into two schismatic cathedrals and met with three schismatic patriarchs, including the leader of the world’s schismatics: Eastern Orthodox Patriarch of Constantinople, Bartholomew I.  Benedict XVI not only committed a forbidden act of communication in sacred things with the schismatic, but he may have committed his worst heresy in his joint declaration with him.
EP Bartholomew isn't the leader of any schismatics.  An icon of the Head of the Orthodox Church is here behind EP Bartholomew's throne.

Benedict XVI, Joint Declaration with Schismatic Patriarch Bartholomew, Nov. 30, 2006: “This fraternal encounter which brings us together, Pope Benedict XVI of Rome and Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I, is God's work, and in a certain sense his gift.  We give thanks to the Author of all that is good, who allows us once again, in prayer and in dialogue, to express the joy we feel as brothers and to renew our commitment to move towards full communion. This commitment comes from the Lord's will and from our responsibility as Pastors in the Church of Christ… As far as relations between the Church of Rome and the Church of Constantinople are concerned, we cannot fail to recall the solemn ecclesial act effacing the memory of the ancient anathemas which for centuries had a negative effect on our Churches.

What can be more heretical? Declaring in an "Apostolic Constitution" that the pope is infallible and has jurisdiction over the Church.

Pastor Aeternus put Pope Benedict XVI in office as "schismatic leader of the world's schismatics," as you put it.

Benedict XVI made this formally heretical declaration in a schismatic cathedral as part of a joint declaration during a divine liturgy with a notorious schismatic!  Thus, it’s official: Benedict XVI has declared in a public joint declaration that one can reject the Papacy, Papal Infallibility, Vatican I, etc. and be in the Church of Christ.

That is how one enters the Church of Christ from your heretical and schismatic beliefs.

He is without any doubt a public heretic.  Anyone who denies this, in light of these facts, is also a heretic.  Even the most dishonest and hardened defender of Antipope Benedict XVI will find it impossible to explain this one away.

Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum (#15), June 29, 1896 – Bishops Separated from Peter and his Successors Lose All Jurisdiction: “From this it must be clearly understood that Bishops are deprived of the right and power of ruling, if they deliberately secede from Peter and his successors; because, by this secession, they are separated from the foundation on which the whole edifice must rest.  They are therefore outside the edifice itself; and for this very reason they are separated from the fold, whose leader is the Chief Pastor; they are exiled from that Kingdom, the keys of which were given by Christ to Peter alone… No one, therefore, unless in communion with Peter can share in his authority, since it is absurd to imagine that he who is outside can command in the Church.
and yet you rant on against your supreme pontiffs, put in place per Pastor Aeternus.

All of this heresy from Benedict XVI is also a total mockery of the saints and martyrs who suffered because they refused to become Eastern “Orthodox,” as was covered earlier in the section entitled: Catholics who were tortured and martyred because they refused to become Eastern Schismatics.
You mean like St. EP Photios or St. Peter the Aleut.

 
That is why Benedict XVI even encourages the Schismatic Patriarch to Resume His Ministry

Benedict XVI, Address, Nov. 12, 2005: “In this regard, I ask you, venerable

Brothers, to convey my cordial greeting to Patriarch Maxim, First Hierarch of the Orthodox Church of Bulgaria.  Please express to him my best wishes for his health and for the happy resumption of his ministry.
who are you to question your supreme pontiffs, put in place per Pastor Aeternus?

Benedict XVI, Speech to schismatic patriarch Bartholomew, Nov. 29, 2006: “… St. Gregory of Nazianzus and St. John Chrysostom… Their relics rest in basilica of St. Peter in the Vatican, and a part of them were given to your Holiness as a sign of communion by the late Pope John Paul II for veneration in this very cathedral.
dogmas of heretics like Pastor Aeternus rejects communion with the Church.

You took your odds with Pastor Aeternus, and so Popes John Paul II, Benedict XVI and Francis are the horses you bet on.
 
Benedict XVI’s incredible heresy on the schismatic “Archbishop” of Athens

Benedict XVI, Address, Oct. 30, 2006: “I am also pleased to address my thoughts and good wishes to His Beatitude Christodoulos, Archbishop of Athens and All Greece: I ask the Lord to sustain his farsightedness and prudence in carrying the demanding service that the Lord has entrusted to his care.  Through him I wish to greet with deep affection the holy synod of the Orthodox Church of Greece and the faithful whom it serves lovingly and with apostolic dedication.
The Church, professing her unity, commemorates the Archbishop of Athens and All Greece, as he teaches the Catholic dogmatic teachings.

And we don't depend on the Vatican newspaper ex cathedra telling us so.

I'm sure you do.

You might try original thought for a change.

the post-Vatican II sect is a huge manifestation of evil at the very least, a Counter Church of the Devil.  Well, the post-Vatican II sect loves Eastern Orthodoxy.  That should tell you something.  If E. Orthodoxy were true, the post-Vatican II antipopes would hate it.  The post-Vatican II antipopes, whose mission from the Devil is to embrace all the major breaches of God’s truth in history (the pagan religions, the Islamic religion, the heretical sects and the E. Orthodox schism) reaches out to and wants to unite with E. Orthodoxy (and Protestantism) because the Devil knows that E. Orthodoxy was one of those major movements of rejection of God’s truth by which he has ensnared millions of souls.

http://www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/refuting_eastern_orthodox.php
ah the hatred of the pre-Vatican II sect, truly a wonder to behold.  Ranting and raging because their built their hope on sand, demanding obedience to a pontiff who no longer exists and cannot be replaced.

Since Orthodoxy is true, and you say anti-popes would hate it then, and your claim that your popes before Pope John XXIII hated Orthodoxy, I guess that indicates you have been following anti-popes all along.

But then what does the hurling of the charge of schismatic by schismatics mean?  Not much.

you wrote
"Since Orthodoxy is true, and you say anti-popes would hate it then, and your claim that your popes before Pope John XXIII hated Orthodoxy, I guess that indicates you have been following anti-popes all along."

no as usual you don't know what you are talking about , if Orthodoxy is true then that would add some validity to the post vatican 2 popes, but since the post vatican 2 popes are without a doubt heretics, teach against the truth then that just proves once again how your eastern orthodoxy is false...do you get it now?


here's original thought: you don't know anything about the Catholic Church , concentrate on saving your soul first,  since YOU are a schismatic you will be going  to hell unless you convert to the true faith

you wrote  "who are you to question your supreme pontiffs, put in place per Pastor Aeternus?"
this has been answered already but I love repeating the truth

A heretic cannot be the pope

That a heretic cannot be a pope is rooted in the dogma that heretics are not members of the Catholic Church
It should be noted that the teaching from the saints and doctors of the Church, which is quoted above – that a pope who became a heretic would automatically cease to be pope – is rooted in the infallible dogma that a heretic is not a member of the Catholic Church.
Pope Eugene IV,
Council of Florence
, “Cantate Domino,” 1441:
“The Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that all those who are outside the Catholic Church , not only pagans
but also Jews or heretics and schismatics, cannot share in eternal life and will go into the everlasting fire which was prepared for
the devil and his angels, unless they are join ed to the Church before the end of their lives...”
Pope Pius XII,
Mystici Corporis Christi (# 23), June 29, 1943:

For not every sin, however grave it may be, is such as of its own nature to sever a man from the Body of the Church, as does schism or heresy or apostasy.”
St. Robert Bellarmine, Cardinal and Doctor of the Church, De Romano Pontifice , II, 30: "
A pope who is a manifest heretic automatically (per se) ceases to be pope and head , just as he ceases automatically to be a Christian and a member of the Church. Wherefore, he can be judged and punished by the Church. This is the teaching of all the ancient Fathers
who teach that manifest heretics immediately lose all jurisdiction."

Answer: The authority a Catholic has to determine that heretics are not members of the Church is
Catholic dogma, which teaches us that those who depart from the Faith are considered alien to the
Church.
Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum (# 9), June 29, 1896:
“The practice of the Church has always been the same, as is shown by the unanimous
teaching of the Fathers, who were wont to hold as outside Catholic communion, AND
ALIEN TO THE CHURCH, WHOEVER WOULD RECEDE IN THE LEAST DEGREE
FROM ANY POINT OF DOCTRINE PROPOSED BY HER AUTHORITATIVE
MAGISTERIUM.” 7
Moreover, to assert that adhering to this Catholic dogma is to engage in private interpretation, as
this objection does, is to assert precisely what Pope St. Pius X condemned in his Syllabus of
Errors against the Modernists.
Pope St. Pius X, Lamentabile, The Errors of the Modernists, July 3, 1907, #22:
“The dogmas which the Church professes as revealed are not truths fallen from
heaven, but they are a kind of interpretation of religious facts, which the human mind
by a laborious effort prepared for itself.”- Condemned 8
Pope Pius X, Lamentabile, The Errors of the Modernists, July 3, 1907, #54:
“The dogmas, the sacraments, the hierarchy, as far as pertains both to the notion and to
the reality, are nothing but interpretations and the evolution of Christian intelligence,
which have increased and perfected the little germ latent in the Gospel.”- Condemned 9
Answers to Objections
300
Notice, the idea that dogmas are interpretations is condemned. But that’s exactly what this
objection is asserting, whether those who make it will admit it or not. They are saying that to
apply the truth of a dogma is “private interpretation.” Further refuting this objection is the fact
that, in its Decree on the Sacrament of Order, the Council of Trent solemnly declared that the
dogmatic canons are for the use of all the faithful.
Pope Pius IV, Council of Trent, Sess. 13, Chap. 4: “These are the matters which in general it
seemed well to the sacred Council to teach to the faithful of Christ regarding the
sacrament of order. It has, however, resolved to condemn the contrary in definite and
appropriate canons in the following manner, so that all, making use of the rule of
faith, with the assistance of Christ, may be able to recognize more easily the Catholic
truth in the midst of the darkness of so many errors.” 10
The word “canon” (in Greek: kanon) means a reed; a straight rod or bar; a measuring stick;
something serving to determine, rule, or measure. The Council of Trent is infallibly declaring
that its canons are measuring rods for “all” so that they, making use of these rules of Faith, may
be able to recognize and defend the truth in the midst of darkness! This very important
statement blows away the claim of those who say that using dogmas to prove points is “private
interpretation.” Catholic dogma is the authority of all who come to these correct conclusions.
Pope Gregory XVI, Mirari Vos (# 7), Aug. 15, 1832: “... nothing of the things appointed
ought to be diminished; nothing changed; nothing added; but they must be preserved
both as regards expression and meaning.” 11
http://www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/6_noheretic_pope.pdf
Logged
sedevacantist
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 208


« Reply #22 on: April 16, 2013, 10:12:18 PM »

Muslims don't worship the same God as Orthodox Christians and Roman Catholics.

But Roman Catholics worship the filioque God  police


John 15:26

Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition (DRA)

26 But when the Paraclete cometh, whom I will send you from the Father, the Spirit of truth, who proceedeth from the Father, he shall give testimony of me.
so here we see Jesus is sending the holy Ghost from the Father , therefore The Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father AND Son

So in 1054, a simple phrase "and the son", helps divide the church.

But today, EO patriarch Bartholomew can hand chalices to Lutherans, and participate in ecumenism embracing the Pope as a "brother", while the Pope claims "MUSLIMS worship the one God".

Unbelievable.

I'm sorry guys, I'm not trying to rile anybody up.  I respect lent. Please forgive me if I have.  But seriously, you just can't make this stuff up.

that's why the few are saved, most  don't care about the truth, the modern catholics and orthodox are in trouble...I have relatives who are orthodox, my family is novus order, I love them but if they don't change they will be lost....in charity I tell you this,

Matthew 7:13- “Enter ye in at the narrow gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way that leadeth to destruction, and many there are who go in thereat.  How narrow is the gate, and strait is the way that leadeth to life, and few there are that find it!”

 Luke 13:24- “Strive to enter by the narrow gate; for many, I say to you, shall seek to enter, and shall not be able.”

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

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



« Reply #23 on: April 16, 2013, 11:07:47 PM »

I've been a little groggy and fear that stooping to sede's level will place me at a disadvantage, where he can beat me with this vast experience with non-facts.  Sort of like his non-pope of his headless Ultramontanist confession that demands obedience from all to an empty chair which they cannot fill.
yes yes non facts like how the pope is a proven heretic
No, he's Orthodox.


but I guess I should still follow him according to you because by golly I won't know how to act without an active pope at the helm, you fail to understand that true catholics have the magisterium, the true teachings of  past popes who would have condemned he following :
you mean the heretical pope who created your "magisterium" and the "Pastor Aeternus" who taught this?:
Quote
On the permanence of the primacy of blessed Peter in the Roman pontiffs
1. That which our lord Jesus Christ, the prince of shepherds and great shepherd of the sheep, established in the blessed apostle Peter, for the continual salvation and permanent benefit of the Church, must of necessity remain for ever, by Christ's authority, in the Church which, founded as it is upon a rock, will stand firm until the end of time.

2. For no one can be in doubt, indeed it was known in every age that the holy and most blessed Peter, prince and head of the apostles, the pillar of faith and the foundation of the Catholic Church, received the keys of the kingdom from our lord Jesus Christ, the savior and redeemer of the human race, and that to this day and for ever he lives and presides and exercises judgment in his successors the bishops of the Holy Roman See, which he founded and consecrated with his blood.

3. Therefore whoever succeeds to the chair of Peter obtains by the institution of Christ himself, the primacy of Peter over the whole Church. So what the truth has ordained stands firm, and blessed Peter perseveres in the rock-like strength he was granted, and does not abandon that guidance of the Church which he once received.

4. For this reason it has always been necessary for every Church--that is to say the faithful throughout the world--to be in agreement with the Roman Church because of its more effective leadership. In consequence of being joined, as members to head, with that see, from which the rights of sacred communion flow to all, they will grow together into the structure of a single body.

5. Therefore, if anyone says that it is not by the institution of Christ the lord himself (that is to say, by divine law) that blessed Peter should have perpetual successors in the primacy over the whole Church; or that the Roman Pontiff is not the successor of blessed Peter in this primacy: let him be anathema.
you stand condemned by him.

That is why Benedict XVI joins Paul VI and John Paul II in praising the overturning of the excommunications against the “Orthodox” – and therefore in denying Vatican I
you deny Vatican I by overturning the canonical election of your popes John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul I and II, Benedict XVI and Francis, which taught "Indeed, their apostolic teaching was embraced by all the venerable fathers and reverenced and followed by all the holy orthodox doctors, for they knew very well that this See of St. Peter always remains unblemished by any error...So then, should anyone, which God forbid, have the temerity to reject this definition of ours: let him be anathema."  Anathema: that means you.

That Vatican I was proven false isn't my problem.

Benedict XVI, Ecumenical Message to Schismatic Patriarch of Constantinople, Nov. 26, 2005: “This year we commemorate the 40th Anniversary of 7 December 1965, that day on which Pope Paul VI and Patriarch Athenagoras, dissatisfied with what had occurred in 1054, decided together at Rome and Constantinople ‘to cancel from the Church’s memory the sentence of excommunication which had been pronounced.’
Constantinople isn't in schism, nor is there been a schismatic/heretical patriarch of it since the Vatican abolished its Latin patriarch of Constantinople.

In the year 1054, the Patriarch of Constantinople, Michael Cerularius, broke communion with the Catholic Church and the pope of Rome.  Cerularius rejected the supreme authority of the pope and closed Roman Rite churches in Constantinople.  Cerularius was excommunicated by Pope St. Leo IX, and the Great Schism of the East was formalized.
Pope Leo IX insisted on backing his Ultramontanist claims with the Donation of Constantine, and EP Michael just laughed at that forgery and Pope Leo's false claims based on it.  Cardinal Humbert attempted to excommunicate the Catholic Church, but the Patriarch excommunicated him, Umbert's boss already having left Catholic communion with the Orthodox bishops of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.

Thus, what “occurred in 1054,” mentioned by Benedict XVI above, refers to the excommunications leveled by the Catholic Church against those who followed Michael Cerularius into schism and into a rejection of the Papacy.  Paul VI “lifted” these excommunications at the end of Vatican II, and John Paul II praised and commemorated the lifting of them many times.  Now we see that Benedict XVI follows John Paul II’s example and also commemorates the event.
they're your supreme pontiffs.  Deal with it.

The Catholic Church leveled excommunication against those who opposed EP Michael Cerularius, who upheld, like Pope Leo III and unlike Popes Benedict VIII and Leo IX, the unadulterated Creed of the Catholic Church.

All of this simply means that Paul VI, John Paul II and now Benedict XVI have attempted to overturn the Papacy as a dogma which must be believed under pain of heresy and excommunication.  But as we saw already, Vatican I declared many times and in many ways that those who reject the dogma of the Papacy are anathematized, cut off from the Faith.  Hence, to attempt to overturn the excommunications against those who still reject the Papacy is simply to boldly reject the teaching of Vatican I.  It’s formal heresy and schism signified in word and deed.
Alas for you, according to Vatican I, your supreme pontiff is judged by no one, so according to it you are anathematized and cut off from the Faith.

Benedict XVI prays ecumenical Vespers with schismatics and Protestants and says he loves the schismatic Orthodox Church

Benedict XVI praying ecumenical Vespers on Sept. 12, 2006.[32]  This is active participation in non-Catholic worship.  It is a manifestation of heresy by deed.

Benedict XVI, Address during ecumenical Vespers service, Sept. 12, 2006: “Dear Brothers and Sisters in Christ!  We are gathered, Orthodox Christians, Catholics and Protestants – and together with us there are also some Jewish friends – to sing together the evening praise of God… This is an hour of gratitude for the fact that we can pray together in this way and, by turning to the Lord, at the same time grow in unity among ourselves… Among those gathered for this evening’s Vespers, I would like first to greet warmly the representatives of the Orthodox Church.  I have always considered it a special gift of God’s Providence that, as a professor at Bonn, I was able to come to know and to love the Orthodox Church, personally as it were, through two young Archimandrites, Stylianos Harkianakis and Damaskinos Papandreou, both of whom later became Metropolitans… Our koinonia [communion] is above all communion with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ in the Holy Spirit; it is communion with the triune God, made possible by the Lord through his incarnation and the outpouring of the Spirit.  This communion with God creates in turn koinonia among people, as a participation in the faith of the Apostles…
what "Orthodox Church" you talking about?  The Church of the Orthodox diptychs of the Catholic Church, of EP Bartholomew, Pope Theodore II, Patriarch John X, Patriarch Theophilos III, Patriarch Kyril, Catholicos Ilya II, Patriarch Irinej, Patriarch Daniel, Metropolitan Cyril, Archbishop Hieronymos II, Archbishop Chrysostomos II, Archbishop Anastasios, Metropolitan Sawa, Metropolitan Simeon  and Metropolitan Tikhon is in communion with Our Head, Our Lord and God and Savior, Jesus Christ.

What can be more heretical than saying: “I love the schismatic Church”?  He then indicates that he, the schismatics, and the Protestants have a communion with God, communion with each other, and communion with the Faith of the Apostles.  This is all totally heretical.  Benedict XVI is a public heretic in communion with non-Catholics.
but according to Pastor Aeternus, he is your supreme pontiff (or was).

Benedict XVI’s worst heresy?  He prays with the leader of the world’s “Orthodox” schismatics and signs a Joint Declaration with him telling him he’s in the Church of Christ

 BBC News, Nov. 29, 2006 –“Benedict XVI has met Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I in Turkey, on the second day of a landmark visit to the largely Muslim country.  The Istanbul talks with the spiritual leader of the world's Orthodox Christians aimed to heal an old rift.  The two leaders began their meeting by holding a joint prayer service at the St George [Orthodox] Church in Istanbul.
It is his links to Pope Pius IX that kept him in heresy and schism, not his relationship with the EP.

During his 2006 trip to Turkey, Benedict XVI went into two schismatic cathedrals and met with three schismatic patriarchs, including the leader of the world’s schismatics: Eastern Orthodox Patriarch of Constantinople, Bartholomew I.  Benedict XVI not only committed a forbidden act of communication in sacred things with the schismatic, but he may have committed his worst heresy in his joint declaration with him.
EP Bartholomew isn't the leader of any schismatics.  An icon of the Head of the Orthodox Church is here behind EP Bartholomew's throne.

Benedict XVI, Joint Declaration with Schismatic Patriarch Bartholomew, Nov. 30, 2006: “This fraternal encounter which brings us together, Pope Benedict XVI of Rome and Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I, is God's work, and in a certain sense his gift.  We give thanks to the Author of all that is good, who allows us once again, in prayer and in dialogue, to express the joy we feel as brothers and to renew our commitment to move towards full communion. This commitment comes from the Lord's will and from our responsibility as Pastors in the Church of Christ… As far as relations between the Church of Rome and the Church of Constantinople are concerned, we cannot fail to recall the solemn ecclesial act effacing the memory of the ancient anathemas which for centuries had a negative effect on our Churches.

What can be more heretical? Declaring in an "Apostolic Constitution" that the pope is infallible and has jurisdiction over the Church.

Pastor Aeternus put Pope Benedict XVI in office as "schismatic leader of the world's schismatics," as you put it.

Benedict XVI made this formally heretical declaration in a schismatic cathedral as part of a joint declaration during a divine liturgy with a notorious schismatic!  Thus, it’s official: Benedict XVI has declared in a public joint declaration that one can reject the Papacy, Papal Infallibility, Vatican I, etc. and be in the Church of Christ.

That is how one enters the Church of Christ from your heretical and schismatic beliefs.

He is without any doubt a public heretic.  Anyone who denies this, in light of these facts, is also a heretic.  Even the most dishonest and hardened defender of Antipope Benedict XVI will find it impossible to explain this one away.

Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum (#15), June 29, 1896 – Bishops Separated from Peter and his Successors Lose All Jurisdiction: “From this it must be clearly understood that Bishops are deprived of the right and power of ruling, if they deliberately secede from Peter and his successors; because, by this secession, they are separated from the foundation on which the whole edifice must rest.  They are therefore outside the edifice itself; and for this very reason they are separated from the fold, whose leader is the Chief Pastor; they are exiled from that Kingdom, the keys of which were given by Christ to Peter alone… No one, therefore, unless in communion with Peter can share in his authority, since it is absurd to imagine that he who is outside can command in the Church.
and yet you rant on against your supreme pontiffs, put in place per Pastor Aeternus.

All of this heresy from Benedict XVI is also a total mockery of the saints and martyrs who suffered because they refused to become Eastern “Orthodox,” as was covered earlier in the section entitled: Catholics who were tortured and martyred because they refused to become Eastern Schismatics.
You mean like St. EP Photios or St. Peter the Aleut.

 
That is why Benedict XVI even encourages the Schismatic Patriarch to Resume His Ministry

Benedict XVI, Address, Nov. 12, 2005: “In this regard, I ask you, venerable

Brothers, to convey my cordial greeting to Patriarch Maxim, First Hierarch of the Orthodox Church of Bulgaria.  Please express to him my best wishes for his health and for the happy resumption of his ministry.
who are you to question your supreme pontiffs, put in place per Pastor Aeternus?

Benedict XVI, Speech to schismatic patriarch Bartholomew, Nov. 29, 2006: “… St. Gregory of Nazianzus and St. John Chrysostom… Their relics rest in basilica of St. Peter in the Vatican, and a part of them were given to your Holiness as a sign of communion by the late Pope John Paul II for veneration in this very cathedral.
dogmas of heretics like Pastor Aeternus rejects communion with the Church.

You took your odds with Pastor Aeternus, and so Popes John Paul II, Benedict XVI and Francis are the horses you bet on.
 
Benedict XVI’s incredible heresy on the schismatic “Archbishop” of Athens

Benedict XVI, Address, Oct. 30, 2006: “I am also pleased to address my thoughts and good wishes to His Beatitude Christodoulos, Archbishop of Athens and All Greece: I ask the Lord to sustain his farsightedness and prudence in carrying the demanding service that the Lord has entrusted to his care.  Through him I wish to greet with deep affection the holy synod of the Orthodox Church of Greece and the faithful whom it serves lovingly and with apostolic dedication.
The Church, professing her unity, commemorates the Archbishop of Athens and All Greece, as he teaches the Catholic dogmatic teachings.

And we don't depend on the Vatican newspaper ex cathedra telling us so.

I'm sure you do.

You might try original thought for a change.

the post-Vatican II sect is a huge manifestation of evil at the very least, a Counter Church of the Devil.  Well, the post-Vatican II sect loves Eastern Orthodoxy.  That should tell you something.  If E. Orthodoxy were true, the post-Vatican II antipopes would hate it.  The post-Vatican II antipopes, whose mission from the Devil is to embrace all the major breaches of God’s truth in history (the pagan religions, the Islamic religion, the heretical sects and the E. Orthodox schism) reaches out to and wants to unite with E. Orthodoxy (and Protestantism) because the Devil knows that E. Orthodoxy was one of those major movements of rejection of God’s truth by which he has ensnared millions of souls.

http://www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/refuting_eastern_orthodox.php
ah the hatred of the pre-Vatican II sect, truly a wonder to behold.  Ranting and raging because their built their hope on sand, demanding obedience to a pontiff who no longer exists and cannot be replaced.

Since Orthodoxy is true, and you say anti-popes would hate it then, and your claim that your popes before Pope John XXIII hated Orthodoxy, I guess that indicates you have been following anti-popes all along.

But then what does the hurling of the charge of schismatic by schismatics mean?  Not much.

you wrote
yes, I wrote.  If I was interested in what the Dimond brothers wrote, I'd go to their website.  I don't need you to cut and paste it here.

"Since Orthodoxy is true, and you say anti-popes would hate it then, and your claim that your popes before Pope John XXIII hated Orthodoxy, I guess that indicates you have been following anti-popes all along."

no as usual you don't know what you are talking about , if Orthodoxy is true then that would add some validity to the post vatican 2 popes, but since the post vatican 2 popes are without a doubt heretics, teach against the truth then that just proves once again how your eastern orthodoxy is false...do you get it now?
I got it a long time ago: Orthodoxy stands true, while you are running around like a chicken with its head cut off.

Behold your headless church!

hard for the triumphalist rooster to crow that way. So much for St. Peter's rooster.

here's original thought: you don't know anything about the Catholic Church , concentrate on saving your soul first,  since YOU are a schismatic you will be going  to hell unless you convert to the true faith
even here all you do is vomit what you have swallowed.  Not quite original.

I'm in communion with the Catholic Church, and confess her True Faith.  You're in schism with your headless communion.

you don't know much if anything beyond the Dimond brothers.

you wrote  "who are you to question your supreme pontiffs, put in place per Pastor Aeternus?"
this has been answered already but I love repeating the truth
you hide it very well. when are you going to reveal it?

Or will it remain hidden, like your Roman pontiff?


A heretic cannot be the pope
You have had several, including the one who issued Pastor Aeternus, which denies you the ability to judge the pope.

That a heretic cannot be a pope is rooted in the dogma that heretics are not members of the Catholic Church
It should be noted that the teaching from the saints and doctors of the Church, which is quoted above – that a pope who became a heretic would automatically cease to be pope – is rooted in the infallible dogma that a heretic is not a member of the Catholic Church.
Pope Eugene IV,
Council of Florence
deposed by the council of Basel.  What did Pope Felix say?

« Last Edit: April 16, 2013, 11:32:03 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
sedevacantist
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 208


« Reply #24 on: April 17, 2013, 08:35:59 PM »

you wrote


"If I was interested in what the Dimond brothers wrote, I'd go to their website."

that's none of my concern

you wrote

"You have had several, including the one who issued Pastor Aeternus, which denies you the ability to judge the pope."

I corrected what you should have written

You have had several, including the one who issued Pastor Aeternus, which denies you the ability to judge a true pope.

just wondering the picture of your leader is he Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople?

  who wrote the following

Although the Orthodox Church believes the soul enters the body at conception and, generally speaking, respects human life and the continuation of the pregnancy,” Barthlomew said, the church also “respects the liberty and freedom of all human persons and all Christian couples . . . . We are not allowed to enter the bedrooms of the Christian couples,” he also said. “We cannot generalize. There are many reasons for a couple to go toward abortion.” (San Francisco Chronicle-7/20/90p.A22)

I must say the one thing you are talented at is posting useless pictures with your posts, besides that you don't know what you are talking about.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

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



« Reply #25 on: April 17, 2013, 10:05:18 PM »

you wrote


"If I was interested in what the Dimond brothers wrote, I'd go to their website."

that's none of my concern

you wrote

"You have had several, including the one who issued Pastor Aeternus, which denies you the ability to judge the pope."

I corrected what you should have written

You have had several, including the one who issued Pastor Aeternus, which denies you the ability to judge a true pope.
A true false pope is somewhat an oxymoron.

just wondering the picture of your leader is he Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople?
What picture?

You can say he's my leader, although he's not my leader in particular.

who wrote the following

Although the Orthodox Church believes the soul enters the body at conception and, generally speaking, respects human life and the continuation of the pregnancy,” Barthlomew said, the church also “respects the liberty and freedom of all human persons and all Christian couples . . . . We are not allowed to enter the bedrooms of the Christian couples,” he also said. “We cannot generalize. There are many reasons for a couple to go toward abortion.” (San Francisco Chronicle-7/20/90p.A22)

I must say the one thing you are talented at is posting useless pictures with your posts, besides that you don't know what you are talking about.
says the Headless Churchman.

Pastor Aeternus says the "true faith" requires communion with the supreme pontiff.  Where is he?

As for the quote, we have a number of threads on it, like here:
Btw, each Orthodox Church has official statements on this issue, statements on their official websites, etc.  Anyone find anything in support of abortion anywhere there?

And it makes me think that it would be good to have one uni-vocal and unequivocal statement signed on to by all Patriarchs and Metropolitans.   In that way there would be less room for confusion...and I single document through which one can answer the concerns of the faithful and also one that is clear when confronting the secular world and governments.


The Sixth Ecumenical Council
Canon XCI. Those who give drugs for procuring abortion, and those who receive poisons to kill the…


Those who give drugs for procuring abortion, and those who receive poisons to kill the foetus, are subjected to the penalty of murder.

Notes.

Ancient Epitome of Canon XCI.

Whoever gives or receives medicine to produce abortion is a homicide.

See Canon XXI. of Ancyra, and Canon II. of St. Basil; to wit, "She who purposely destroys the foetus, shall suffer the punishment of murder. And we pay no attention to the subtile distinction as to whether the foetus was formed or unformed. And by this not only is justice satisfied for the child that should have been born, but also for her who prepared for herself the snares, since the women very often die who make such experiments."

http://christianbookshelf.org/schaff/the_seven_ecumenical_councils/canon_xci_those_who_give.htm

The Amicus Curiae against Abortion Submitted to the Supreme Court of the United States
http://orthodoxinfo.com/praxis/abortion.aspx


There were many names.

Here are just the names of the bishops:

The American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Greek Catholic Diocese:
His Grace, Bishop Nicholas;

The Anthiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of North America:
His Eminence, Most Rev. Metropolitan Philip;
Rt. Rev. Antun, Auxiliary Bishop; V

The Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of North and South America:
Rt. Rev. Maximos, Bishop of Pittsburgh;
Archbishop Iakovos Professor of Orthodox Theology and Christian Ethics, Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology;

The Orthodox Church in America:
His Beatitude Theodosius, Archbishop of Washington, Metropolitan of All America and Canada;
Rt. Rev. Peter, Bishop of New York and New Jersey;
Rt. Rev. Dimitri, Bishop of Dallas and the South;
Rt. Rev. Herman, Bishop of Philadelphia and Eastern Pennsylvania;
Rt. Rev. Gregory, Bishop of Sitka and Alaska;
Rt. Rev. Nathaniel, Bishop of Detroit and the Romanian Episcopate;
Rt. Rev. Job, Bishop of Hartford and New England;
Rt. Rev. Tikhon, Bishop of San Francisco;
Rt. Rev. Mark, Acting Bishop of Chicago and the Midwest;

The Russian Orthodox Church in Exile:
His Eminence, Most Rev. Vitaly, Metropolitan of New York and Eastern America, First Hierarch of the Russian Orthodox Church in Exile;
Most Rev. Anthony, Archbishop of Los Angeles and Southern California;
Most Rev. Antony, Archbishop of San Francisco and Western America;
Most Rev. Laurus, Archbishop of Syracuse and Holy Trinity Monastery, Rector of Holy Trinity Orthodox Seminary, and Abbot of Holy Trinity Orthodox Monastery, Jordanville, New York;
Rt. Rev. Alypy, Bishop of Chicago, Detroit, and Midwest America;
Rt. Rev. Hilarion, Bishop of Manhattan;
Rt. Rev. Daniel, Bishop of Erie and Protector of the Old Rite;

The Serbian Orthodox Church in the United States and Canada:
His Grace, Bishop Christopher;

The Ukrainian Orthodox Church of America and Canada:
His Grace, Bishop Vsevolod.

I find it a bit hard to believe considering that the Patriarch signed a document on November 30 2006 that condemns abortion and upholds all life issues from conception to death.  

"Although the Orthodox Church believes the soul
enters the body at conception and, generally
speaking, respects human life and the continuation
of the pregnancy," Bartholomew said, the church
also "respects the liberty and freedom of all human
persons and all Christian couples. . . .We are not
allowed to enter the bedrooms of the Christian
couples," he also said. "We cannot generalize.
There are many reasons for a couple to go toward
abortion."


Amazing...if true, something I cannot agree with, but I'm from that other flock

Neither can any true Orthodox Catholic!

Orthodoc

Yes, I agree. I've even heard our priest mention where Jesus tells us that "there is no greater love than to give up one's life for another" in regards to complications during child birth.  

I
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,19903.msg413823.html#msg413823
If the Patriarch were wrongly reported it seems to me that he has a strong moral responsibility to correct the statement and publicly support the moral teaching of the Church.  Why has he not done so?
No, if anyone is wrongly reported, it is the responsibility of the reporter to correct the statement, not the one incorrectly quoted.

WRONG

His All Holiness goes trotting around the globe, claiming to speak for 300 million Orthodox.

Now two priests, one under the Phanar's omophorion, who represent many Orthodox on a central moral issue, ask for clarification on a quote and get silence. Qui tacit consentit.

So either His All Holiness can correct the record, or stop involving us when he is talking himself up to his pals.
« Last Edit: April 17, 2013, 10:06:42 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
sedevacantist
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 208


« Reply #26 on: April 18, 2013, 06:04:03 PM »

I would rather be in the true church with currently no leader than your schismatic church with a leader, I am saved, you are not, you reject John 21.
Logged
podkarpatska
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,963


Pokrov


WWW
« Reply #27 on: April 18, 2013, 08:23:49 PM »

I would rather be in the true church with currently no leader than your schismatic church with a leader, I am saved, you are not, you reject John 21.


I have been silently following your posts since you started posting. However, I have to comment as your self assured arrogance is amazing. How can you be saved if, by your own definitions, a valid episcopacy no longer exists within your church? You can have no priesthood, you can have no sacraments, you can have no confession and you can receive no absolution of your sins. You do have a lot of angry, empty words bereft of any humility, love or compassion. You have no Apostolic root as you affirm it has been severed since 1958.

You profess that your church has abandoned God but that can not be by the very Papal declarations you love to throw at us as if they were the very word of God Himself.

Like the priestess Old Believers of Old Russia you have nothing left but empty forms and memories of the past. Go back to the Dimonds for you have no hope of persuading anyone here to follow you.
Logged
sedevacantist
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 208


« Reply #28 on: April 19, 2013, 11:44:19 PM »

I would rather be in the true church with currently no leader than your schismatic church with a leader, I am saved, you are not, you reject John 21.


I have been silently following your posts since you started posting. However, I have to comment as your self assured arrogance is amazing. How can you be saved if, by your own definitions, a valid episcopacy no longer exists within your church? You can have no priesthood, you can have no sacraments, you can have no confession and you can receive no absolution of your sins. You do have a lot of angry, empty words bereft of any humility, love or compassion. You have no Apostolic root as you affirm it has been severed since 1958.

You profess that your church has abandoned God but that can not be by the very Papal declarations you love to throw at us as if they were the very word of God Himself.

Like the priestess Old Believers of Old Russia you have nothing left but empty forms and memories of the past. Go back to the Dimonds for you have no hope of persuading anyone here to follow you.
you don't know what you are talking about,  true catholics do have options for the sacraments, there are valid priests, although not many, my church hasn't abandoned God, I'm simply telling people what should be obvious to anyone of good will, which you aren't, that the "catholic" church of today is not catholic, you are outside the church so there is no hope, I am in the church so at least there's hope, I work out my salvation in fear and trembling, if I don't persuade anyone here so be it, I sleep well at night...go back to silently following as you add nothing of value
Logged
Father H
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian--God's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: UOCofUSA-Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 2,611



« Reply #29 on: April 20, 2013, 12:45:39 AM »

who wrote the following

Although the Orthodox Church believes the soul enters the body at conception and, generally speaking, respects human life and the continuation of the pregnancy,” Barthlomew said, the church also “respects the liberty and freedom of all human persons and all Christian couples . . . . We are not allowed to enter the bedrooms of the Christian couples,” he also said. “We cannot generalize. There are many reasons for a couple to go toward abortion.” (San Francisco Chronicle-7/20/90p.A22)

I must say the one thing you are talented at is posting useless pictures with your posts, besides that you don't know what you are talking about.

I am not sure if the Ecumenical Patriarch ever wrote for the San Francisco Chronicle with elipses, but I can give you a full quote from him:

"We are called to work together to promote respect for the rights of every human being, created in the image and likeness of God, and to foster economic, social and cultural development. Our theological and ethical traditions can offer a solid basis for a united approach in preaching and action. Above all, we wish to affirm that killing innocent people in God’s name is an offence against him and against human dignity. We must all commit ourselves to the renewed service of humanity and the defence of human life, every human life."  [Signed Bartholomew I, Archbishop of Constantinople, New Rome, and Ecumenical Patriarch]

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/speeches/2006/november/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20061130_dichiarazione-comune_en.html



Logged
Father H
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian--God's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: UOCofUSA-Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 2,611



« Reply #30 on: April 20, 2013, 12:56:20 AM »

I would rather be in the true church with currently no leader than your schismatic church with a leader, I am saved, you are not, you reject John 21.


I have been silently following your posts since you started posting. However, I have to comment as your self assured arrogance is amazing. How can you be saved if, by your own definitions, a valid episcopacy no longer exists within your church? You can have no priesthood, you can have no sacraments, you can have no confession and you can receive no absolution of your sins. You do have a lot of angry, empty words bereft of any humility, love or compassion. You have no Apostolic root as you affirm it has been severed since 1958.

You profess that your church has abandoned God but that can not be by the very Papal declarations you love to throw at us as if they were the very word of God Himself.

Like the priestess Old Believers of Old Russia you have nothing left but empty forms and memories of the past. Go back to the Dimonds for you have no hope of persuading anyone here to follow you.
you don't know what you are talking about,  true catholics do have options for the sacraments, there are valid priests, although not many, my church hasn't abandoned God, I'm simply telling people what should be obvious to anyone of good will, which you aren't, that the "catholic" church of today is not catholic, you are outside the church so there is no hope, I am in the church so at least there's hope, I work out my salvation in fear and trembling, if I don't persuade anyone here so be it, I sleep well at night...go back to silently following as you add nothing of value

You sure are a miserable sob ("sophistrator of belligerence").  The good news is that you can change.  The Lord can enter into your life, you can repent, and you can join the Church of Christ, God's Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Church.  You can pm me when you are ready to be catechized.  I will put you in contact with the right priest.      
« Last Edit: April 22, 2013, 04:17:53 PM by Carl Kraeff (Second Chance) » Logged
Cyrillic
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,035


Cyrillico est imperare orbi universo


« Reply #31 on: April 20, 2013, 06:19:12 AM »

I would rather be in the true church with currently no leader than your schismatic church with a leader, I am saved, you are not, you reject John 21.


Who do you think the leader of the Orthodox Church is?

Muslims don't worship the same God as Orthodox Christians and Roman Catholics.

But Roman Catholics worship the filioque God  police


John 15:26

Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition (DRA)

26 But when the Paraclete cometh, whom I will send you from the Father, the Spirit of truth, who proceedeth from the Father, he shall give testimony of me.
so here we see Jesus is sending the holy Ghost from the Father , therefore The Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father AND Son

Send =/= proceed.
« Last Edit: April 20, 2013, 06:19:51 AM by Cyrillic » Logged

"Claret is the liquor for boys; port for men; but he who aspires to be a hero must drink brandy."
-Dr. Samuel Johnson
sedevacantist
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 208


« Reply #32 on: April 20, 2013, 10:04:43 AM »

I would rather be in the true church with currently no leader than your schismatic church with a leader, I am saved, you are not, you reject John 21.


I have been silently following your posts since you started posting. However, I have to comment as your self assured arrogance is amazing. How can you be saved if, by your own definitions, a valid episcopacy no longer exists within your church? You can have no priesthood, you can have no sacraments, you can have no confession and you can receive no absolution of your sins. You do have a lot of angry, empty words bereft of any humility, love or compassion. You have no Apostolic root as you affirm it has been severed since 1958.

You profess that your church has abandoned God but that can not be by the very Papal declarations you love to throw at us as if they were the very word of God Himself.

Like the priestess Old Believers of Old Russia you have nothing left but empty forms and memories of the past. Go back to the Dimonds for you have no hope of persuading anyone here to follow you.
you don't know what you are talking about,  true catholics do have options for the sacraments, there are valid priests, although not many, my church hasn't abandoned God, I'm simply telling people what should be obvious to anyone of good will, which you aren't, that the "catholic" church of today is not catholic, you are outside the church so there is no hope, I am in the church so at least there's hope, I work out my salvation in fear and trembling, if I don't persuade anyone here so be it, I sleep well at night...go back to silently following as you add nothing of value

You sure are a miserable sob ("sophistrator of belligerence").  The good news is that you can change.  The Lord can enter into your life, you can repent, and you can join the Church of Christ, God's Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Church.  You can pm me when you are ready to be catechized.  I will put you in contact with the right priest.       
I follow the teachings of true popes like the following:
 Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, “Cantate Domino,” 1441, ex cathedra:
“The Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that all
those who are outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans but also Jews or
heretics and schismatics, cannot share in eternal life and will go into the
everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless they
are joined to the Church before the end of their lives; that the unity of this
ecclesiastical body is of such importance that only for those who abide in it do
the Church’s sacraments contribute to salvation and do fasts, almsgiving and
other works of piety and practices of the Christian militia produce eternal
rewards; and that nobody can be saved, no matter how much he has given
away in alms and even if he has shed blood in the name of Christ, unless he
has persevered in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.”

So since I believe this teaching to be true, I know obviously you don't but  can you not atleast recognize that I am forced to try and convert you to the true faith to save your soul, if I believe this teaching to be true wouldn't I be a hypocrite to say it's ok that you are not Catholic and that you will be saved?

Logged
sedevacantist
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 208


« Reply #33 on: April 20, 2013, 10:08:30 AM »

I would rather be in the true church with currently no leader than your schismatic church with a leader, I am saved, you are not, you reject John 21.


Who do you think the leader of the Orthodox Church is?

Muslims don't worship the same God as Orthodox Christians and Roman Catholics.

But Roman Catholics worship the filioque God  police


John 15:26

Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition (DRA)

26 But when the Paraclete cometh, whom I will send you from the Father, the Spirit of truth, who proceedeth from the Father, he shall give testimony of me.
so here we see Jesus is sending the holy Ghost from the Father , therefore The Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father AND Son

Send =/= proceed.


Contrary to claims by the Orthodox Churches the Catholic Church did not invent the idea that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son. The teaching is not only implied by Scripture but it was explicitly taught by the Early Fathers as well.

Tertullian

"I believe that the Spirit proceeds not otherwise than from the Father through the Son" (Against Praxeas 4:1 [A.D. 216]).

Origen

"We believe, however, that there are three persons: the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit; and we believe none to be unbegotten except the Father. We admit, as more pious and true, that all things were produced through the Word, and that the Holy Spirit is the most excellent and the first in order of all that was produced by the Father through Christ" (Commentaries on John 2:6 [A.D. 229]).

Maximus the Confessor

"By nature the Holy Spirit in his being takes substantially his origin from the Father through the Son who is begotten (Questions to Thalassium 63 [A.D. 254]).

Gregory the Wonderworker

"[There is] one Holy Spirit, having substance from God, and who is manifested through the Son; image of the Son, perfect of the perfect; life, the cause of living; holy fountain; sanctity, the dispenser of sanctification; in whom is manifested God the Father who is above all and in all, and God the Son who is through all. Perfect Trinity, in glory and eternity and sovereignty neither divided nor estranged" (Confession of Faith [A.D. 265]).

Hilary of Poitiers

"Concerning the Holy Spirit . . . it is not necessary to speak of him who must be acknowledged, who is from the Father and the Son, his sources" (The Trinity 2:29 [A.D. 357]).

Didymus the Blind

"As we have understood discussions . . . about the incorporeal natures, so too it is now to be recognized that the Holy Spirit receives from the Son that which he was of his own nature. . . . So too the Son is said to receive from the Father the very things by which he subsists. For neither has the Son anything else except those things given him by the Father, nor has the Holy Spirit any other substance than that given him by the Son" (The Holy Spirit 37 [A.D. 362]).

Epiphanius of Salamis

"The Father always existed and the Son always existed, and the Spirit breathes from the Father and the Son" (The Man Well-Anchored 75 [A.D. 374]).

Basil the Great

"[T]he goodness of [the divine] nature, the holiness of [that] nature, and the royal dignity reach from the Father through the only-begotten [Son] to the Holy Spirit. Since we confess the persons in this manner, there is no infringing upon the holy dogma of the monarchy" (The Holy Spirit 18:47 [A.D. 375]).

Ambrose of Milan

"The Holy Spirit, when he proceeds from the Father and the Son, does not separate himself from the Father and does not separate himself from the Son" (The Holy Spirit 1:2:120 [A.D. 381]).

Gregory of Nyssa

"[The] Father conveys the notion of unoriginate, unbegotten, and Father always; the only-begotten Son is understood along with the Father, coming from him but inseparably joined to him. Through the Son and with the Father, immediately and before any vague and unfounded concept interposes between them, the Holy Spirit is also perceived conjointly" (Against Eunomius 1 [A.D. 382]).

The Athanasian Creed

"[W]e venerate one God in the Trinity, and the Trinity in oneness. . . . The Father was not made nor created nor begotten by anyone. The Son is from the Father alone, not made nor created, but begotten. The Holy Spirit is from the Father and the Son, not made nor created nor begotten, but proceeding" (Athanasian Creed [A.D. 400]).

Augustine

"Why, then, should we not believe that the Holy Spirit proceeds also from the Son, when he is the Spirit also of the Son? For if the Holy Spirit did not proceed from him, when he showed himself to his disciples after his resurrection he would not have breathed upon them, saying, ‘Receive the Holy Spirit’ [John 20:22]. For what else did he signify by that breathing upon them except that the Holy Spirit proceeds also from him" (Homilies on John 99:8 [A.D. 416]).

Cyril of Alexandria

"Since the Holy Spirit when he is in us effects our being conformed to God, and he actually proceeds from the Father and Son, it is abundantly clear that he is of the divine essence, in it in essence and proceeding from it" (Treasury of the Holy Trinity, thesis 34 [A.D. 424]).

Council of Toledo

. . . The Spirit is also the Paraclete, who is himself neither the Father nor the Son, but proceeding from the Father and the Son. Therefore the Father is unbegotten, the Son is begotten, the Paraclete is not begotten but proceeding from the Father and the Son" (Council of Toledo [A.D. 447]).

Fulgence of Ruspe

"Hold most firmly and never doubt in the least that the same Holy Spirit who is Spirit of the Father and of the Son, proceeds from the Father and the Son" (The Rule of Faith 54 [A.D. 524]).

John Damascene

"And the Holy Spirit is the power of the Father revealing the hidden mysteries of his divinity, proceeding from the Father through the Son in a manner known to himself, but different from that of generation" (Exposition of the Orthodox Faith 12 [A.D. 712]).

"I say that God is always Father since he has always his Word [the Son] coming from himself and, through his Word, the Spirit issuing from him" (Dialogue Against the Manicheans 5 [A.D. 728]).

Council of Nicaea II

"We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and giver of life, proceeding from the Father through the Son" (Profession of Faith [A.D. 787]).
http://www.staycatholic.com/ecf_the_filioque_clause.htm
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

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



« Reply #34 on: April 20, 2013, 10:12:28 AM »

I would rather be in the true church with currently no leader than your schismatic church with a leader, I am saved, you are not, you reject John 21.


I have been silently following your posts since you started posting. However, I have to comment as your self assured arrogance is amazing. How can you be saved if, by your own definitions, a valid episcopacy no longer exists within your church? You can have no priesthood, you can have no sacraments, you can have no confession and you can receive no absolution of your sins. You do have a lot of angry, empty words bereft of any humility, love or compassion. You have no Apostolic root as you affirm it has been severed since 1958.

You profess that your church has abandoned God but that can not be by the very Papal declarations you love to throw at us as if they were the very word of God Himself.

Like the priestess Old Believers of Old Russia you have nothing left but empty forms and memories of the past. Go back to the Dimonds for you have no hope of persuading anyone here to follow you.
you don't know what you are talking about,  true catholics do have options for the sacraments, there are valid priests, although not many, my church hasn't abandoned God
according to your interpretation of Pastor Aeternus, it sure did: it elected a heretic pope.

No pope, no cardinals to make another one.  No more pope.

No pope, no pope to make licit the consecration of bishops.  No more bishops.

No bishops, no bishops to make more priests.  No more priests.

No more priests, no more sacraments except baptism and marriage (according to you).

Your last supreme pontiff died in 1958, your last cardinals died out without replacement in the 1970s, and I dare say your bishops of 1958 must have all died out by now (I don't have the time to waste to verify that last statement as I usually verify), your priests must be breathing their last.

I'm simply telling people what should be obvious to anyone of good will, which you aren't, that the "catholic" church of today is not catholic
Being Orthodox, we know that.

you are outside the church so there is no hope
Au contraire, we are inside, looking at you out in the cold.

I am in the church so at least there's hope

You  like mantras-are you sure you are not Hindu?

I work out my salvation in fear and trembling
Rather your perdition with ranting and raving.

if I don't persuade anyone here so be it, I sleep well at night...go back to silently following as you add nothing of value
On the contrary, as usual, Podkarpatska has posted the sanest post of the thread.
Logged

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

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



« Reply #35 on: April 20, 2013, 10:15:07 AM »

I would rather be in the true church with currently no leader than your schismatic church with a leader, I am saved, you are not, you reject John 21.


I have been silently following your posts since you started posting. However, I have to comment as your self assured arrogance is amazing. How can you be saved if, by your own definitions, a valid episcopacy no longer exists within your church? You can have no priesthood, you can have no sacraments, you can have no confession and you can receive no absolution of your sins. You do have a lot of angry, empty words bereft of any humility, love or compassion. You have no Apostolic root as you affirm it has been severed since 1958.

You profess that your church has abandoned God but that can not be by the very Papal declarations you love to throw at us as if they were the very word of God Himself.

Like the priestess Old Believers of Old Russia you have nothing left but empty forms and memories of the past. Go back to the Dimonds for you have no hope of persuading anyone here to follow you.
you don't know what you are talking about,  true catholics do have options for the sacraments, there are valid priests, although not many, my church hasn't abandoned God, I'm simply telling people what should be obvious to anyone of good will, which you aren't, that the "catholic" church of today is not catholic, you are outside the church so there is no hope, I am in the church so at least there's hope, I work out my salvation in fear and trembling, if I don't persuade anyone here so be it, I sleep well at night...go back to silently following as you add nothing of value

You sure are a miserable sob ("sophistrator of belligerence").  The good news is that you can change.  The Lord can enter into your life, you can repent, and you can join the Church of Christ, God's Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Church.  You can pm me when you are ready to be catechized.  I will put you in contact with the right priest.       
I follow the teachings of true popes like the following:
 Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, “Cantate Domino,” 1441, ex cathedra:
“The Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that all
those who are outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans but also Jews or
heretics and schismatics, cannot share in eternal life and will go into the
everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless they
are joined to the Church before the end of their lives; that the unity of this
ecclesiastical body is of such importance that only for those who abide in it do
the Church’s sacraments contribute to salvation and do fasts, almsgiving and
other works of piety and practices of the Christian militia produce eternal
rewards; and that nobody can be saved, no matter how much he has given
away in alms and even if he has shed blood in the name of Christ, unless he
has persevered in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.”

So since I believe this teaching to be true, I know obviously you don't but  can you not atleast recognize that I am forced to try and convert you to the true faith to save your soul, if I believe this teaching to be true wouldn't I be a hypocrite to say it's ok that you are not Catholic and that you will be saved?
Eugene was deposed by the council of Basel.  What did pope Felix V say?

You're not a hypocrite, just deluded:you have no font of unity that Eugene claims and Pastor Aeternus demands.
Logged

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

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



« Reply #36 on: April 20, 2013, 10:16:08 AM »

I would rather be in the true church with currently no leader than your schismatic church with a leader, I am saved, you are not, you reject John 21.


Who do you think the leader of the Orthodox Church is?

Muslims don't worship the same God as Orthodox Christians and Roman Catholics.

But Roman Catholics worship the filioque God  police


John 15:26

Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition (DRA)

26 But when the Paraclete cometh, whom I will send you from the Father, the Spirit of truth, who proceedeth from the Father, he shall give testimony of me.
so here we see Jesus is sending the holy Ghost from the Father , therefore The Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father AND Son

Send =/= proceed.


Contrary to claims by the Orthodox Churches the Catholic Church did not invent the idea that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son. The teaching is not only implied by Scripture but it was explicitly taught by the Early Fathers as well.

Tertullian

"I believe that the Spirit proceeds not otherwise than from the Father through the Son" (Against Praxeas 4:1 [A.D. 216]).

Origen

"We believe, however, that there are three persons: the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit; and we believe none to be unbegotten except the Father. We admit, as more pious and true, that all things were produced through the Word, and that the Holy Spirit is the most excellent and the first in order of all that was produced by the Father through Christ" (Commentaries on John 2:6 [A.D. 229]).

Maximus the Confessor

"By nature the Holy Spirit in his being takes substantially his origin from the Father through the Son who is begotten (Questions to Thalassium 63 [A.D. 254]).

Gregory the Wonderworker

"[There is] one Holy Spirit, having substance from God, and who is manifested through the Son; image of the Son, perfect of the perfect; life, the cause of living; holy fountain; sanctity, the dispenser of sanctification; in whom is manifested God the Father who is above all and in all, and God the Son who is through all. Perfect Trinity, in glory and eternity and sovereignty neither divided nor estranged" (Confession of Faith [A.D. 265]).

Hilary of Poitiers

"Concerning the Holy Spirit . . . it is not necessary to speak of him who must be acknowledged, who is from the Father and the Son, his sources" (The Trinity 2:29 [A.D. 357]).

Didymus the Blind

"As we have understood discussions . . . about the incorporeal natures, so too it is now to be recognized that the Holy Spirit receives from the Son that which he was of his own nature. . . . So too the Son is said to receive from the Father the very things by which he subsists. For neither has the Son anything else except those things given him by the Father, nor has the Holy Spirit any other substance than that given him by the Son" (The Holy Spirit 37 [A.D. 362]).

Epiphanius of Salamis

"The Father always existed and the Son always existed, and the Spirit breathes from the Father and the Son" (The Man Well-Anchored 75 [A.D. 374]).

Basil the Great

"[T]he goodness of [the divine] nature, the holiness of [that] nature, and the royal dignity reach from the Father through the only-begotten [Son] to the Holy Spirit. Since we confess the persons in this manner, there is no infringing upon the holy dogma of the monarchy" (The Holy Spirit 18:47 [A.D. 375]).

Ambrose of Milan

"The Holy Spirit, when he proceeds from the Father and the Son, does not separate himself from the Father and does not separate himself from the Son" (The Holy Spirit 1:2:120 [A.D. 381]).

Gregory of Nyssa

"[The] Father conveys the notion of unoriginate, unbegotten, and Father always; the only-begotten Son is understood along with the Father, coming from him but inseparably joined to him. Through the Son and with the Father, immediately and before any vague and unfounded concept interposes between them, the Holy Spirit is also perceived conjointly" (Against Eunomius 1 [A.D. 382]).

The Athanasian Creed

"[W]e venerate one God in the Trinity, and the Trinity in oneness. . . . The Father was not made nor created nor begotten by anyone. The Son is from the Father alone, not made nor created, but begotten. The Holy Spirit is from the Father and the Son, not made nor created nor begotten, but proceeding" (Athanasian Creed [A.D. 400]).

Augustine

"Why, then, should we not believe that the Holy Spirit proceeds also from the Son, when he is the Spirit also of the Son? For if the Holy Spirit did not proceed from him, when he showed himself to his disciples after his resurrection he would not have breathed upon them, saying, ‘Receive the Holy Spirit’ [John 20:22]. For what else did he signify by that breathing upon them except that the Holy Spirit proceeds also from him" (Homilies on John 99:8 [A.D. 416]).

Cyril of Alexandria

"Since the Holy Spirit when he is in us effects our being conformed to God, and he actually proceeds from the Father and Son, it is abundantly clear that he is of the divine essence, in it in essence and proceeding from it" (Treasury of the Holy Trinity, thesis 34 [A.D. 424]).

Council of Toledo

. . . The Spirit is also the Paraclete, who is himself neither the Father nor the Son, but proceeding from the Father and the Son. Therefore the Father is unbegotten, the Son is begotten, the Paraclete is not begotten but proceeding from the Father and the Son" (Council of Toledo [A.D. 447]).

Fulgence of Ruspe

"Hold most firmly and never doubt in the least that the same Holy Spirit who is Spirit of the Father and of the Son, proceeds from the Father and the Son" (The Rule of Faith 54 [A.D. 524]).

John Damascene

"And the Holy Spirit is the power of the Father revealing the hidden mysteries of his divinity, proceeding from the Father through the Son in a manner known to himself, but different from that of generation" (Exposition of the Orthodox Faith 12 [A.D. 712]).

"I say that God is always Father since he has always his Word [the Son] coming from himself and, through his Word, the Spirit issuing from him" (Dialogue Against the Manicheans 5 [A.D. 728]).

Council of Nicaea II

"We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and giver of life, proceeding from the Father through the Son" (Profession of Faith [A.D. 787]).
http://www.staycatholic.com/ecf_the_filioque_clause.htm
If you go to the heretical quote mine, all you can dig out is heresy.

We believe in the Holy Spirit....Who proceeds from the Father [period] Who with the Father and Son is worshiped and glorified...[the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, AD 33, 381 and forever].
« Last Edit: April 20, 2013, 10:19:35 AM by ialmisry » Logged

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

Posts: 10,035


Cyrillico est imperare orbi universo


« Reply #37 on: April 20, 2013, 10:18:42 AM »

Several on the quote list (Tertullian, Didymus, Origen etc.) were heretics or at least not consistently orthodox and many more quotes don't even mention the eternal procession but only the procession ad extram.
« Last Edit: April 20, 2013, 10:19:32 AM by Cyrillic » Logged

"Claret is the liquor for boys; port for men; but he who aspires to be a hero must drink brandy."
-Dr. Samuel Johnson
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

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



« Reply #38 on: April 20, 2013, 10:20:56 AM »

Several on the quote list (Tertullian, Didymus, Origen etc.) were heretics or at least not consistently orthodox and many more quotes don't even mention the eternal procession but only the procession ad extram.
Not only that, St. John of Damascus, in the same work third from the bottom, explicitly says that the Spirit does NOT proceed from the Son.
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
sedevacantist
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 208


« Reply #39 on: April 20, 2013, 10:21:23 AM »

I would rather be in the true church with currently no leader than your schismatic church with a leader, I am saved, you are not, you reject John 21.


I have been silently following your posts since you started posting. However, I have to comment as your self assured arrogance is amazing. How can you be saved if, by your own definitions, a valid episcopacy no longer exists within your church? You can have no priesthood, you can have no sacraments, you can have no confession and you can receive no absolution of your sins. You do have a lot of angry, empty words bereft of any humility, love or compassion. You have no Apostolic root as you affirm it has been severed since 1958.

You profess that your church has abandoned God but that can not be by the very Papal declarations you love to throw at us as if they were the very word of God Himself.

Like the priestess Old Believers of Old Russia you have nothing left but empty forms and memories of the past. Go back to the Dimonds for you have no hope of persuading anyone here to follow you.
you don't know what you are talking about,  true catholics do have options for the sacraments, there are valid priests, although not many, my church hasn't abandoned God
according to your interpretation of Pastor Aeternus, it sure did: it elected a heretic pope.

No pope, no cardinals to make another one.  No more pope.

No pope, no pope to make licit the consecration of bishops.  No more bishops.

No bishops, no bishops to make more priests.  No more priests.

No more priests, no more sacraments except baptism and marriage (according to you).

Your last supreme pontiff died in 1958, your last cardinals died out without replacement in the 1970s, and I dare say your bishops of 1958 must have all died out by now (I don't have the time to waste to verify that last statement as I usually verify), your priests must be breathing their last.

I'm simply telling people what should be obvious to anyone of good will, which you aren't, that the "catholic" church of today is not catholic
Being Orthodox, we know that.

you are outside the church so there is no hope
Au contraire, we are inside, looking at you out in the cold.

I am in the church so at least there's hope

You  like mantras-are you sure you are not Hindu?

I work out my salvation in fear and trembling
Rather your perdition with ranting and raving.

if I don't persuade anyone here so be it, I sleep well at night...go back to silently following as you add nothing of value
On the contrary, as usual, Podkarpatska has posted the sanest post of the thread.
on the contrary...you keep on writing about the catholic church's present situation as if you know what you are talking  about, ..you're not catholic and you don't know what you are talking about, to better understand the situation of whether we have options as catholics for priests today you must read this...but since you don't read anything from the Dimonds you will continue in your ignorance and remain outside the true church....there's no hope for you unless you wake up
http://www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/jurisdiction.pdf
Logged
Cyrillic
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,035


Cyrillico est imperare orbi universo


« Reply #40 on: April 20, 2013, 10:32:15 AM »

Several on the quote list (Tertullian, Didymus, Origen etc.) were heretics or at least not consistently orthodox and many more quotes don't even mention the eternal procession but only the procession ad extram.
Not only that, St. John of Damascus, in the same work third from the bottom, explicitly says that the Spirit does NOT proceed from the Son.

I didn't read through all of those quotes. Quote lists are tiresome to read. But indeed, St. John Damascene is not one you want to quote in a defense of the filioque.
« Last Edit: April 20, 2013, 10:32:47 AM by Cyrillic » Logged

"Claret is the liquor for boys; port for men; but he who aspires to be a hero must drink brandy."
-Dr. Samuel Johnson
sedevacantist
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 208


« Reply #41 on: April 20, 2013, 10:33:13 AM »

I would rather be in the true church with currently no leader than your schismatic church with a leader, I am saved, you are not, you reject John 21.


I have been silently following your posts since you started posting. However, I have to comment as your self assured arrogance is amazing. How can you be saved if, by your own definitions, a valid episcopacy no longer exists within your church? You can have no priesthood, you can have no sacraments, you can have no confession and you can receive no absolution of your sins. You do have a lot of angry, empty words bereft of any humility, love or compassion. You have no Apostolic root as you affirm it has been severed since 1958.

You profess that your church has abandoned God but that can not be by the very Papal declarations you love to throw at us as if they were the very word of God Himself.

Like the priestess Old Believers of Old Russia you have nothing left but empty forms and memories of the past. Go back to the Dimonds for you have no hope of persuading anyone here to follow you.
you don't know what you are talking about,  true catholics do have options for the sacraments, there are valid priests, although not many, my church hasn't abandoned God, I'm simply telling people what should be obvious to anyone of good will, which you aren't, that the "catholic" church of today is not catholic, you are outside the church so there is no hope, I am in the church so at least there's hope, I work out my salvation in fear and trembling, if I don't persuade anyone here so be it, I sleep well at night...go back to silently following as you add nothing of value

You sure are a miserable sob ("sophistrator of belligerence").  The good news is that you can change.  The Lord can enter into your life, you can repent, and you can join the Church of Christ, God's Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Church.  You can pm me when you are ready to be catechized.  I will put you in contact with the right priest.       
I follow the teachings of true popes like the following:
 Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, “Cantate Domino,” 1441, ex cathedra:
“The Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that all
those who are outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans but also Jews or
heretics and schismatics, cannot share in eternal life and will go into the
everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless they
are joined to the Church before the end of their lives; that the unity of this
ecclesiastical body is of such importance that only for those who abide in it do
the Church’s sacraments contribute to salvation and do fasts, almsgiving and
other works of piety and practices of the Christian militia produce eternal
rewards; and that nobody can be saved, no matter how much he has given
away in alms and even if he has shed blood in the name of Christ, unless he
has persevered in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.”

So since I believe this teaching to be true, I know obviously you don't but  can you not atleast recognize that I am forced to try and convert you to the true faith to save your soul, if I believe this teaching to be true wouldn't I be a hypocrite to say it's ok that you are not Catholic and that you will be saved?
Eugene was deposed by the council of Basel.  What did pope Felix V say?

You're not a hypocrite, just deluded:you have no font of unity that Eugene claims and Pastor Aeternus demands.
no you are lost,,why do you keep on bringing up what pope Felix, he said a lot of things...he was also an anti pope
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antipope_Felix_V
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

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



« Reply #42 on: April 20, 2013, 11:01:27 AM »

no you are lost,,why do you keep on bringing up what pope Felix, he said a lot of things...he was also an anti pope
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antipope_Felix_V
After 1054, they're all "anti-popes."
Logged

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

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



« Reply #43 on: April 20, 2013, 11:05:37 AM »

on the contrary...you keep on writing about the catholic church's present situation as if you know what you are talking  about, ..you're not catholic and you don't know what you are talking about
Since you don't have a head, you can't be talking out of your mouth, so it must be some other oriface.

to better understand the situation of whether we have options as catholics for priests today you must read this...but since you don't read anything from the Dimonds you will continue in your ignorance
I've read the Dimonds' ignorance.

and remain outside the true churchLa Petite Église
fixed that for you.

....there's no hope for you unless you wake up
http://www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/jurisdiction.pdf
I'm going to get my second cup of coffee right now.
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
yeshuaisiam
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox, Anabaptist, Other Early Christianity kind of jumbled together
Posts: 4,505


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #44 on: April 20, 2013, 11:15:17 PM »

I would rather be in the true church with currently no leader than your schismatic church with a leader, I am saved, you are not, you reject John 21.


Who do you think the leader of the Orthodox Church is?

Muslims don't worship the same God as Orthodox Christians and Roman Catholics.

But Roman Catholics worship the filioque God  police


John 15:26

Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition (DRA)

26 But when the Paraclete cometh, whom I will send you from the Father, the Spirit of truth, who proceedeth from the Father, he shall give testimony of me.
so here we see Jesus is sending the holy Ghost from the Father , therefore The Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father AND Son

Send =/= proceed.


Contrary to claims by the Orthodox Churches the Catholic Church did not invent the idea that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son. The teaching is not only implied by Scripture but it was explicitly taught by the Early Fathers as well.

Tertullian

"I believe that the Spirit proceeds not otherwise than from the Father through the Son" (Against Praxeas 4:1 [A.D. 216]).

Origen

"We believe, however, that there are three persons: the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit; and we believe none to be unbegotten except the Father. We admit, as more pious and true, that all things were produced through the Word, and that the Holy Spirit is the most excellent and the first in order of all that was produced by the Father through Christ" (Commentaries on John 2:6 [A.D. 229]).

Maximus the Confessor

"By nature the Holy Spirit in his being takes substantially his origin from the Father through the Son who is begotten (Questions to Thalassium 63 [A.D. 254]).

Gregory the Wonderworker

"[There is] one Holy Spirit, having substance from God, and who is manifested through the Son; image of the Son, perfect of the perfect; life, the cause of living; holy fountain; sanctity, the dispenser of sanctification; in whom is manifested God the Father who is above all and in all, and God the Son who is through all. Perfect Trinity, in glory and eternity and sovereignty neither divided nor estranged" (Confession of Faith [A.D. 265]).

Hilary of Poitiers

"Concerning the Holy Spirit . . . it is not necessary to speak of him who must be acknowledged, who is from the Father and the Son, his sources" (The Trinity 2:29 [A.D. 357]).

Didymus the Blind

"As we have understood discussions . . . about the incorporeal natures, so too it is now to be recognized that the Holy Spirit receives from the Son that which he was of his own nature. . . . So too the Son is said to receive from the Father the very things by which he subsists. For neither has the Son anything else except those things given him by the Father, nor has the Holy Spirit any other substance than that given him by the Son" (The Holy Spirit 37 [A.D. 362]).

Epiphanius of Salamis

"The Father always existed and the Son always existed, and the Spirit breathes from the Father and the Son" (The Man Well-Anchored 75 [A.D. 374]).

Basil the Great

"[T]he goodness of [the divine] nature, the holiness of [that] nature, and the royal dignity reach from the Father through the only-begotten [Son] to the Holy Spirit. Since we confess the persons in this manner, there is no infringing upon the holy dogma of the monarchy" (The Holy Spirit 18:47 [A.D. 375]).

Ambrose of Milan

"The Holy Spirit, when he proceeds from the Father and the Son, does not separate himself from the Father and does not separate himself from the Son" (The Holy Spirit 1:2:120 [A.D. 381]).

Gregory of Nyssa

"[The] Father conveys the notion of unoriginate, unbegotten, and Father always; the only-begotten Son is understood along with the Father, coming from him but inseparably joined to him. Through the Son and with the Father, immediately and before any vague and unfounded concept interposes between them, the Holy Spirit is also perceived conjointly" (Against Eunomius 1 [A.D. 382]).

The Athanasian Creed

"[W]e venerate one God in the Trinity, and the Trinity in oneness. . . . The Father was not made nor created nor begotten by anyone. The Son is from the Father alone, not made nor created, but begotten. The Holy Spirit is from the Father and the Son, not made nor created nor begotten, but proceeding" (Athanasian Creed [A.D. 400]).

Augustine

"Why, then, should we not believe that the Holy Spirit proceeds also from the Son, when he is the Spirit also of the Son? For if the Holy Spirit did not proceed from him, when he showed himself to his disciples after his resurrection he would not have breathed upon them, saying, ‘Receive the Holy Spirit’ [John 20:22]. For what else did he signify by that breathing upon them except that the Holy Spirit proceeds also from him" (Homilies on John 99:8 [A.D. 416]).

Cyril of Alexandria

"Since the Holy Spirit when he is in us effects our being conformed to God, and he actually proceeds from the Father and Son, it is abundantly clear that he is of the divine essence, in it in essence and proceeding from it" (Treasury of the Holy Trinity, thesis 34 [A.D. 424]).

Council of Toledo

. . . The Spirit is also the Paraclete, who is himself neither the Father nor the Son, but proceeding from the Father and the Son. Therefore the Father is unbegotten, the Son is begotten, the Paraclete is not begotten but proceeding from the Father and the Son" (Council of Toledo [A.D. 447]).

Fulgence of Ruspe

"Hold most firmly and never doubt in the least that the same Holy Spirit who is Spirit of the Father and of the Son, proceeds from the Father and the Son" (The Rule of Faith 54 [A.D. 524]).

John Damascene

"And the Holy Spirit is the power of the Father revealing the hidden mysteries of his divinity, proceeding from the Father through the Son in a manner known to himself, but different from that of generation" (Exposition of the Orthodox Faith 12 [A.D. 712]).

"I say that God is always Father since he has always his Word [the Son] coming from himself and, through his Word, the Spirit issuing from him" (Dialogue Against the Manicheans 5 [A.D. 728]).

Council of Nicaea II

"We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and giver of life, proceeding from the Father through the Son" (Profession of Faith [A.D. 787]).
http://www.staycatholic.com/ecf_the_filioque_clause.htm
If you go to the heretical quote mine, all you can dig out is heresy.

We believe in the Holy Spirit....Who proceeds from the Father [period] Who with the Father and Son is worshiped and glorified...[the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, AD 33, 381 and forever].

I don't have a dog in this fight... but seriously, as a complete non-practicing (or former) EO Christian, all I can say is that sedevacantist totally wins the filioque argument.

Wow, the quotes from some of the earliest Christians, verify the filioque issue, and sorry to say it leans on the RC side....

Some of the earliest Christians obviously said "and the son".  There are no arguments there.  End of story.... but...

However, as we all know, the filioque was not really the issue... was it?   That's the issue "they" tell us, but I promise it was a lot more about supremacy, jurisdiction, and money.... all about power.   Filioque, just makes it "sound good".

Logged

I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com
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 0.347 seconds with 73 queries.