Topic: Where should I go now? Eastern Orthodoxy or SSPX Latin Catholic

[WPM]

I think you have to take the time to understand the history of the Catholic Popes.

[sedevacantist]

The miracles of Fatima aren't even persuading the Portuguese and French, how could they persuade us? I've never understood this logic.

don't understand what you are babbling about, obviously there's a difference between 1917 people of Portugal (many were persuaded) to people of today (mostly modernists ) too busy looking at their I phone...have you done any research on this?

LOL So, we're supposed to be persuaded of a miracle that took place in 1917 as well? You don't think these things through very well.

you're making fun of  a miracle that happened in 1917, that's too far in the past for you ? you're not the brightest light on the Christmas tree are you

[sedevacantist]

St. Francis De Sales (17th century), Doctor of the Church, The Catholic Controversy, pp. 305-306:  "Now when he [the Pope] is explicitly a heretic, he falls ipso facto from his dignity and out of the Church

What a saint said, even one who was declared a Doctor or even is considered a Father of the Church, is not necessarily dogmatic, unless a pope says so.  Indeed, Pastor Eternus states that no one can judge the pope, including about whether he's a heretic or not.  This is the kind of circular reasoning that truly bothers me.


PS: changed "on the contrary" to "indeed".

Pope Innocent III, Eius exemplo, Dec. 18, 1208: “By the heart we believe and by the mouth we confess the one Church, not of heretics, but the Holy Roman, Catholic, and Apostolic Church outside of which we believe that no one is saved.”

 The declaratory sentence which follows an automatic excommunication is merely a legal recognition of something which already exists.  If this were not true, the automatic excommunication would be meaningless.   
Canon 2314, 1917 Code of Canon Law: “All apostates from the Christian faith and each and every heretic or schismatic: 1) Incur ipso facto [by that very fact] excommunication…”12 
The excommunicated person is already severed from the Church.  Most heretics are known to be heretics without a trial or declaratory sentence, and must be denounced as such. 
Pope Pius VI, Auctorem fidei, Aug. 28, 1794: “47.  Likewise, the proposition which teaches that it is necessary, according to the natural and divine laws, for either excommunication or for suspension, that a personal examination should precede, and that, therefore, sentences called ‘ipso facto’ have no other force than that of a serious threat without any actual effect” – false, rash, pernicious, injurious to the power of the Church, erroneous.13   
As we see here, the Catholic Church teaches that formal processes and judgments are not necessary for ipso facto (by that very fact) excommunications to take effect.  They are very

often, as in the case of the heretic Martin Luther, formal recognitions of the ipso facto excommunication that has already occurred.  This should be obvious to a Catholic;

[Anthony1986]

St. Francis De Sales (17th century), Doctor of the Church, The Catholic Controversy, pp. 305-306:  "Now when he [the Pope] is explicitly a heretic, he falls ipso facto from his dignity and out of the Church

What a saint said, even one who was declared a Doctor or even is considered a Father of the Church, is not necessarily dogmatic, unless a pope says so.  Indeed, Pastor Eternus states that no one can judge the pope, including about whether he's a heretic or not.  This is the kind of circular reasoning that truly bothers me.


PS: changed "on the contrary" to "indeed".

Wow, no one can judge the pope. So we even don't know which is pope heretic or not. What happen if Pope is preaching heresy? As long as pope is not speaking in ex cathedra, he can preach whatever he wants and people have to be silence.
No one can judge the pope, than SSPX priests and supporters are in serious trouble.

[Porter ODoran]

St. Francis De Sales (17th century), Doctor of the Church, The Catholic Controversy, pp. 305-306:  "Now when he [the Pope] is explicitly a heretic, he falls ipso facto from his dignity and out of the Church

What a saint said, even one who was declared a Doctor or even is considered a Father of the Church, is not necessarily dogmatic, unless a pope says so.  Indeed, Pastor Eternus states that no one can judge the pope, including about whether he's a heretic or not.  This is the kind of circular reasoning that truly bothers me.


PS: changed "on the contrary" to "indeed".

Wow, no one can judge the pope. So we even don't know which is pope heretic or not. What happen if Pope is preaching heresy? As long as pope is not speaking in ex cathedra, he can preach whatever he wants and people have to be silence.
No one can judge the pope, than SSPX priests and supporters are in serious trouble.

Yeah, it's a problem. Absolute monarchy is a terrible idea, moreso when it comes to spiritual matters.

[Sharbel]

Wow, no one can judge the pope. So we even don't know which is pope heretic or not. What happen if Pope is preaching heresy? As long as pope is not speaking in ex cathedra, he can preach whatever he wants and people have to be silence.

Many Roman Catholic apologists point out that VI actually limited the scope of papal infallibility, but, in my reckoning, all miss the point that VI was not only about this, but also proclaiming papal absolutism. In other words, according to Pastor Eternus, one can conclude that the pope can only exercise his infallibility in specific situations, but he is free to otherwise exercise heresy without questioning. 

[Anthony1986]

Pope Innocent III, Eius exemplo, Dec. 18, 1208: “By the heart we believe and by the mouth we confess the one Church, not of heretics, but the Holy Roman, Catholic, and Apostolic Church outside of which we believe that no one is saved.”

So many post-schism Orthodox Saints like Saint Seraphim of Sarov, St. Xenia, St. John the Wonderworker are in heaven. They prove Pope Innocent III's statement is wrong.
There are Orthodox Saints who are former Roman Catholic or Eastern Rite Catholic like, St. Alexis Toth, St. Maxim Sandovich, St. Procopius of Ustyug and St. Gorazd (Pavlik) of Prague .

 

[Porter ODoran]

Pope Innocent III, Eius exemplo, Dec. 18, 1208: “By the heart we believe and by the mouth we confess the one Church, not of heretics, but the Holy Roman, Catholic, and Apostolic Church outside of which we believe that no one is saved.”

So many post-schism Orthodox Saints like Saint Seraphim of Sarov, St. Xenia, St. John the Wonderworker are in heaven. They prove Pope Innocent III's statement is wrong.
There are Orthodox Saints who are former Roman Catholic or Eastern Rite Catholic like, St. Alexis Toth, St. Maxim Sandovich, St. Procopius of Ustyug and St. Gorazd (Pavlik) of Prague .

 

On the other hand, you have to interpret his statement a very particular way to get the meaning it is being used for here. Another meaning, which I find equally if not more likely to be accurate to the author's intent, would be to say that no heretic will be saved.

[Anthony1986]

Problem is so many RC apologists they make RC looked like a Court or Empire. RC apologists and people in Catholic Answers forum they like to judge people, sometime even the personal attack. They don't find any God's love from RC apologists and members of CAF.

[Sharbel]

Problem is so many RC apologists they make RC looked like a Court or Empire. RC apologists and people in Catholic Answers forum they like to judge people, sometime even the personal attack. They don't find any God's love from RC apologists and members of CAF.

It amazes me that many CA apologists, many convert from the fringes of Protestantism, are so adept at proof texting, from the Bible to Canon Law, from Tradition to Encyclicals.  They transform the argument of authority into dogma from a fallacy.

[Justin Kolodziej]

Wow, no one can judge the pope. So we even don't know which is pope heretic or not. What happen if Pope is preaching heresy? As long as pope is not speaking in ex cathedra, he can preach whatever he wants and people have to be silence.

Many Roman Catholic apologists point out that VI actually limited the scope of papal infallibility, but, in my reckoning, all miss the point that VI was not only about this, but also proclaiming papal absolutism. In other words, according to Pastor Eternus, one can conclude that the pope can only exercise his infallibility in specific situations, but he is free to otherwise exercise heresy without questioning. 

Not sure you're quite getting it. The position shared by sedevacantists and Orthodox alike is that if he openly preaches a previously condemned heresy (in sedevacantists' case Modernism, in EO case the Filioque, in OO case Nestorianism -- Mor's "451" date), he is now a pseudo-Pope and so it would be laudable to reject his authority, and separate communion from him in order to rescue the Church from schisms and heresies.

This principle goes back even before the Schism, to the Fifteenth Canon of the so-called "First-Second" Council of Constantinople in 861.

The rules laid down with reference to Presbyters and Bishops and Metropolitans are still more applicable to Patriarchs. So that in case any Presbyter or Bishop or Metropolitan dares to secede or apostatize from the communion of his own Patriarch, and fails to mention the latter's name in accordance with custom duly fixed and ordained, in the divine Mystagogy, but, before a conciliar verdict has been pronounced and has passed judgement against him, creates a schism, the holy Synod has decreed that this person shall be held an alien to every priestly function if only he be convicted of having committed this transgression of the law. Accordingly, these rules have been sealed and ordained as respecting persons who under the pretext of charges against their own presidents stand aloof, and create a schism, and disrupt the union of the Church. But as for those persons, on the other hand, who, on account of some heresy condemned by holy Synods, or Fathers, withdrawing themselves from communion with their president, who, that is to say, is preaching the heresy publicly, and teaching it bareheaded in church, such persons not only are not subject to any canonical penalty on account of their having walled themselves off from any and all communion with the one called a Bishop before any conciliar or synodical verdict has been rendered, but, on the contrary, they shall be deemed worthy to enjoy the honor which befits them among Orthodox Christians. For they have defied, not Bishops, but pseudo-bishops and pseudo-teachers; and they have not sundered the union of the Church with any schism, but, on the contrary, have been sedulous to rescue the Church from schisms and divisions.

Arguably Apostolic Canon XXXI also implies the same thing, and that is pre-Chalcedon I believe. 

If any Presbyter, condemning his own bishop, draw people aside and set up another altar, without finding anything wrong with the Bishop in point of piety and righteousness, let him be deposed, on the ground that he is an office-seeker. For he is a tyrant. Let the rest of clergymen be treated likewise, and all those who abet him. But let the laymen be excommunicated. Let these things be done after one, and a second, and a third request of the Bishop.

source: http://orthodoxinfo.com/ecumenism/ecum_canons.aspx

The (dozen or so) Old Calendarists are also using the same canon to justify themselves, but it is not clear anyone among our hierarchs is truly teaching any condemned heresy openly in church.

[Anthony1986]

It always amaze me is the CAF members and CA apologists are aggressive. I don't know why they are lack of love and have lot of anger....
Also, I met lot of RCs are very aggressive and fanatic. They have lot of intellectual and spiritual pride.   
God is love, but how come I don't find love in so many RCs.

[Porter ODoran]

Wow, no one can judge the pope. So we even don't know which is pope heretic or not. What happen if Pope is preaching heresy? As long as pope is not speaking in ex cathedra, he can preach whatever he wants and people have to be silence.

Many Roman Catholic apologists point out that VI actually limited the scope of papal infallibility, but, in my reckoning, all miss the point that VI was not only about this, but also proclaiming papal absolutism. In other words, according to Pastor Eternus, one can conclude that the pope can only exercise his infallibility in specific situations, but he is free to otherwise exercise heresy without questioning. 

Not sure you're quite getting it. The position shared by sedevacantists and Orthodox alike is that if he openly preaches a previously condemned heresy (in sedevacantists' case Modernism, in EO case the Filioque, in OO case Nestorianism -- Mor's "451" date), he is now a pseudo-Pope and so it would be laudable to reject his authority, and separate communion from him in order to rescue the Church from schisms and heresies.

This principle goes back even before the Schism, to the Fifteenth Canon of the so-called "First-Second" Council of Constantinople in 861.

The rules laid down with reference to Presbyters and Bishops and Metropolitans are still more applicable to Patriarchs. So that in case any Presbyter or Bishop or Metropolitan dares to secede or apostatize from the communion of his own Patriarch, and fails to mention the latter's name in accordance with custom duly fixed and ordained, in the divine Mystagogy, but, before a conciliar verdict has been pronounced and has passed judgement against him, creates a schism, the holy Synod has decreed that this person shall be held an alien to every priestly function if only he be convicted of having committed this transgression of the law. Accordingly, these rules have been sealed and ordained as respecting persons who under the pretext of charges against their own presidents stand aloof, and create a schism, and disrupt the union of the Church. But as for those persons, on the other hand, who, on account of some heresy condemned by holy Synods, or Fathers, withdrawing themselves from communion with their president, who, that is to say, is preaching the heresy publicly, and teaching it bareheaded in church, such persons not only are not subject to any canonical penalty on account of their having walled themselves off from any and all communion with the one called a Bishop before any conciliar or synodical verdict has been rendered, but, on the contrary, they shall be deemed worthy to enjoy the honor which befits them among Orthodox Christians. For they have defied, not Bishops, but pseudo-bishops and pseudo-teachers; and they have not sundered the union of the Church with any schism, but, on the contrary, have been sedulous to rescue the Church from schisms and divisions.

Arguably Apostolic Canon XXXI also implies the same thing, and that is pre-Chalcedon I believe. 

If any Presbyter, condemning his own bishop, draw people aside and set up another altar, without finding anything wrong with the Bishop in point of piety and righteousness, let him be deposed, on the ground that he is an office-seeker. For he is a tyrant. Let the rest of clergymen be treated likewise, and all those who abet him. But let the laymen be excommunicated. Let these things be done after one, and a second, and a third request of the Bishop.

source: http://orthodoxinfo.com/ecumenism/ecum_canons.aspx

The (dozen or so) Old Calendarists are also using the same canon to justify themselves, but it is not clear anyone among our hierarchs is truly teaching any condemned heresy openly in church.

Are you seriously arguing that the Roman Catholics and the Vatican consider your quotes from Constantinople and the Apostolic Canons to govern the Pope? How?

[Lepanto]

Pope Innocent III, Eius exemplo, Dec. 18, 1208: “By the heart we believe and by the mouth we confess the one Church, not of heretics, but the Holy Roman, Catholic, and Apostolic Church outside of which we believe that no one is saved.”

So many post-schism Orthodox Saints like Saint Seraphim of Sarov, St. Xenia, St. John the Wonderworker are in heaven. They prove Pope Innocent III's statement is wrong.
There are Orthodox Saints who are former Roman Catholic or Eastern Rite Catholic like, St. Alexis Toth, St. Maxim Sandovich, St. Procopius of Ustyug and St. Gorazd (Pavlik) of Prague .

 

Really, how do you arrive at that conclusion? The opposite is true. The Catholic church simply does not care much about post-schism Orthodox saints.
The Catholic church does not know whether they are in heaven or not and does not make statements about it.

[Dominika]

The Catholic church simply does not care much about post-schism Orthodox saints.
The Catholic church does not know whether they are in heaven or not and does not make statements about it.

Well, at least in Poland, among some RC circles some post-schism Orthodox saints are quite popular or "newly-discovered" (along with Akathists, O Heavenly King prayer, Jesus Prayer and prayer ropes, icons etc.). But it applies rather not to martyrs, for obvious reasons.

[Anthony1986]

Pope Innocent III, Eius exemplo, Dec. 18, 1208: “By the heart we believe and by the mouth we confess the one Church, not of heretics, but the Holy Roman, Catholic, and Apostolic Church outside of which we believe that no one is saved.”

So many post-schism Orthodox Saints like Saint Seraphim of Sarov, St. Xenia, St. John the Wonderworker are in heaven. They prove Pope Innocent III's statement is wrong.
There are Orthodox Saints who are former Roman Catholic or Eastern Rite Catholic like, St. Alexis Toth, St. Maxim Sandovich, St. Procopius of Ustyug and St. Gorazd (Pavlik) of Prague .

 

Really, how do you arrive at that conclusion? The opposite is true. The Catholic church simply does not care much about post-schism Orthodox saints.
The Catholic church does not know whether they are in heaven or not and does not make statements about it.

St. John Paul II referred St.  Seraphim of Sarov as Saint in him book  Threshold of Hope.
http://catholicsaints.info/saint-seraphim-of-sarov/

[Vanhyo]

Not sure you're quite getting it. The position shared by sedevacantists and Orthodox alike is that if he openly preaches a previously condemned heresy (in sedevacantists' case Modernism, in EO case the Filioque, in OO case Nestorianism -- Mor's "451" date), he is now a pseudo-Pope and so it would be laudable to reject his authority, and separate communion from him in order to rescue the Church from schisms and heresies.

Do sedevacantists have bishops ? Why I have the impression that they don't.

No bishop = no Church = no authority = self authority = anti authority = lawlessness = no sacraments = no salvation.

As for chalcedon it is simply unserious to claim chalcedonians were nestorian.

[Anthony1986]

Catholic Recognition of Orthodox Saints post-schism
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php?topic=10863.0

 list of post-schism Russian Orthodox saints who were approved by Pope Paul VI and included in the Roman calendar:


1. St. Sava of Serbia (January 14) [1174-1237]
2. St. Nicetas of Novgorod (January 31) [†1108]
3. St. John the Martyr of Vilnius (April 14) [†1342]
4. St. Anthony the Martyr of Vilnius (April 14) [†1342]
5. St. Eustace the Martyr of Vilnius (April 14) [†1342]
6. St. Stephen the Enlightener of Perm (April 26) [1340-1396]
7. St. Stephen Pechersky (April 27) [†1094]
8. St. Cyril of Turov (April 28) [1130-1182]
9. St. Ignatius of Rostov (April 28) [†1288]
10. St. Isaiah the Wonderworker of Rostov (May 15) [†1090]
11. St. Euphrosyne of Polotsk (May 23) [†1173]
12. St. Leontius of Rostov (May 23) [†1077]
13. St. Nicetas the Wonderworker of Pereaslavl (May 24) [†1186]
14. St. German of Valaam (June 28) [†?]
15. St. Sergius of Valaam (June 28) [†?]
16. St. Anthony of the Kiev Caves (July 10) [983-1073]
17. St. Theodosius of the Kiev Caves (July 10)
18. St. Theodore the Black of Yaroslavl (September 19) [†1299]
19. St. David of Yaroslavl (September 19) [†1299]
20. St. Constantine of Yaroslavl (September 19) [†1299]
21. St. Michael the Martyr, Wonderworker of Chernigov (September 21) [†1246]
22. St. Theodore the Martyr, Wonderworker of Chernigov (September 21) [†1246]
23. St. Sergius the Wonderworker of Radonezh (September 25) [1314-1392]
24. St. Abraham the Wonderworker of Rostov (October 29) [†1073]
25. St. Barlaam of Khutyn (November 6) [†1193]

http://thebananarepublican.blogspot.tw/2010/11/post-schism-russian-orthodox-saints-fr.html

[Anthony1986]

Not sure you're quite getting it. The position shared by sedevacantists and Orthodox alike is that if he openly preaches a previously condemned heresy (in sedevacantists' case Modernism, in EO case the Filioque, in OO case Nestorianism -- Mor's "451" date), he is now a pseudo-Pope and so it would be laudable to reject his authority, and separate communion from him in order to rescue the Church from schisms and heresies.

Do sedevacantists have bishops ? Why I have the impression that they don't.

No bishop = no Church = no authority = self authority = anti authority = lawlessness = no sacraments = no salvation.

As for chalcedon it is simply unserious to claim chalcedonians were nestorian.

Sedavacantists do have the bishops
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sedevacantism#Bishops_whose_lineages_derive_from_the_foregoing_bishops

"Bishops consecrated within the official Church who later took a sedevacantist position[edit]
To date, this category seems to consist of only two individuals, both now deceased: the Vietnamese Archbishop Thục (who, before his death in 1984, may have been reconciled to Pope John Paul II) and the Chicago-born Mgr. Alfredo F. Méndez,[22] the former Bishop of Arecibo, Puerto Rico."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sedevacantism#Bishops_consecrated_within_the_official_Church_who_later_took_a_sedevacantist_position

[Vanhyo]

To date, this category seems to consist of only two individuals, both now deceased

Lol, what a joke.

[Anthony1986]

Why Sedevacantism Must Be Rejected
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jn0f-tBz2CY&t=19s

[Mor Ephrem]

As for chalcedon it is simply unserious to claim chalcedonians were nestorian.

Not unserious at all.  Of course, this gets clarified over the course of history, so it may be a silly claim to make now, but certainly in the early period it was less clear.

[Lepanto]

Catholic Recognition of Orthodox Saints post-schism
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php?topic=10863.0

 list of post-schism Russian Orthodox saints who were approved by Pope Paul VI and included in the Roman calendar:


1. St. Sava of Serbia (January 14) [1174-1237]
2. St. Nicetas of Novgorod (January 31) [†1108]
3. St. John the Martyr of Vilnius (April 14) [†1342]
4. St. Anthony the Martyr of Vilnius (April 14) [†1342]
5. St. Eustace the Martyr of Vilnius (April 14) [†1342]
6. St. Stephen the Enlightener of Perm (April 26) [1340-1396]
7. St. Stephen Pechersky (April 27) [†1094]
8. St. Cyril of Turov (April 28) [1130-1182]
9. St. Ignatius of Rostov (April 28) [†1288]
10. St. Isaiah the Wonderworker of Rostov (May 15) [†1090]
11. St. Euphrosyne of Polotsk (May 23) [†1173]
12. St. Leontius of Rostov (May 23) [†1077]
13. St. Nicetas the Wonderworker of Pereaslavl (May 24) [†1186]
14. St. German of Valaam (June 28) [†?]
15. St. Sergius of Valaam (June 28) [†?]
16. St. Anthony of the Kiev Caves (July 10) [983-1073]
17. St. Theodosius of the Kiev Caves (July 10)
18. St. Theodore the Black of Yaroslavl (September 19) [†1299]
19. St. David of Yaroslavl (September 19) [†1299]
20. St. Constantine of Yaroslavl (September 19) [†1299]
21. St. Michael the Martyr, Wonderworker of Chernigov (September 21) [†1246]
22. St. Theodore the Martyr, Wonderworker of Chernigov (September 21) [†1246]
23. St. Sergius the Wonderworker of Radonezh (September 25) [1314-1392]
24. St. Abraham the Wonderworker of Rostov (October 29) [†1073]
25. St. Barlaam of Khutyn (November 6) [†1193]

http://thebananarepublican.blogspot.tw/2010/11/post-schism-russian-orthodox-saints-fr.html

Ok, thanks for the list. But that's not what I meant. Those saints were recognized by the church.
That's of course fine and not a contradiction to your papal quote. Saints outside the church does not make any sense.

[Porter ODoran]

Catholic Recognition of Orthodox Saints post-schism
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php?topic=10863.0

 list of post-schism Russian Orthodox saints who were approved by Pope Paul VI and included in the Roman calendar:


1. St. Sava of Serbia (January 14) [1174-1237]
2. St. Nicetas of Novgorod (January 31) [†1108]
3. St. John the Martyr of Vilnius (April 14) [†1342]
4. St. Anthony the Martyr of Vilnius (April 14) [†1342]
5. St. Eustace the Martyr of Vilnius (April 14) [†1342]
6. St. Stephen the Enlightener of Perm (April 26) [1340-1396]
7. St. Stephen Pechersky (April 27) [†1094]
8. St. Cyril of Turov (April 28) [1130-1182]
9. St. Ignatius of Rostov (April 28) [†1288]
10. St. Isaiah the Wonderworker of Rostov (May 15) [†1090]
11. St. Euphrosyne of Polotsk (May 23) [†1173]
12. St. Leontius of Rostov (May 23) [†1077]
13. St. Nicetas the Wonderworker of Pereaslavl (May 24) [†1186]
14. St. German of Valaam (June 28) [†?]
15. St. Sergius of Valaam (June 28) [†?]
16. St. Anthony of the Kiev Caves (July 10) [983-1073]
17. St. Theodosius of the Kiev Caves (July 10)
18. St. Theodore the Black of Yaroslavl (September 19) [†1299]
19. St. David of Yaroslavl (September 19) [†1299]
20. St. Constantine of Yaroslavl (September 19) [†1299]
21. St. Michael the Martyr, Wonderworker of Chernigov (September 21) [†1246]
22. St. Theodore the Martyr, Wonderworker of Chernigov (September 21) [†1246]
23. St. Sergius the Wonderworker of Radonezh (September 25) [1314-1392]
24. St. Abraham the Wonderworker of Rostov (October 29) [†1073]
25. St. Barlaam of Khutyn (November 6) [†1193]

http://thebananarepublican.blogspot.tw/2010/11/post-schism-russian-orthodox-saints-fr.html

Ok, thanks for the list. But that's not what I meant. Those saints were recognized by the church.
That's of course fine and not a contradiction to your papal quote. Saints outside the church does not make any sense.

Stop. You're going to sprain something.

[Lepanto]

Yes, I know, Catholics must do a lot of mental gymnastics, it is unbelievably self-contradictory, blablabla. Ever been a Catholic? I guess you don't have a clue. But this is not about you and me, but about Anthony who is confused. If he's going back to Taiwan, he should consider which church he can reach each Sunday.

[Lepanto]

And Porter: Why do you have to reply to every post from me with biting irony? Are you afraid of something?

[Porter ODoran]

And Porter: Why do you have to reply to every post from me with biting irony? Are you afraid of something?

Not afraid at all. I know the Vatican is not a contagious disease, just, apparently, genetic.

[Porter ODoran]

Yes, I know, Catholics must do a lot of mental gymnastics, it is unbelievably self-contradictory, blablabla. Ever been a Catholic? I guess you don't have a clue. But this is not about you and me, but about Anthony who is confused. If he's going back to Taiwan, he should consider which church he can reach each Sunday.

Anthony is Orthodox, so please back off.

[Lepanto]

Yes, I know, Catholics must do a lot of mental gymnastics, it is unbelievably self-contradictory, blablabla. Ever been a Catholic? I guess you don't have a clue. But this is not about you and me, but about Anthony who is confused. If he's going back to Taiwan, he should consider which church he can reach each Sunday.

Anthony is Orthodox, so please back off.

Faith: Confused Christian
Jurisdiction: Searching
I didn't write "If you leave the Catholic church, you will go to hell", or similar. I just mentioned a practical aspect to consider. I think he's likely well aware of it, but is this really something unfair, untrue or otherwise inappropriate to say?

[Lepanto]

And Porter: Why do you have to reply to every post from me with biting irony? Are you afraid of something?

Not afraid at all. I know the Vatican is not a contagious disease, just, apparently, genetic.

Sounds like hatred or anger. What did Catholics do to you?

[Porter ODoran]

And Porter: Why do you have to reply to every post from me with biting irony? Are you afraid of something?

Not afraid at all. I know the Vatican is not a contagious disease, just, apparently, genetic.

Sounds like hatred or anger. What did Catholics do to you?

Catholic Recognition of Orthodox Saints post-schism
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php?topic=10863.0

 list of post-schism Russian Orthodox saints who were approved by Pope Paul VI and included in the Roman calendar:


1. St. Sava of Serbia (January 14) [1174-1237]
2. St. Nicetas of Novgorod (January 31) [†1108]
3. St. John the Martyr of Vilnius (April 14) [†1342]
4. St. Anthony the Martyr of Vilnius (April 14) [†1342]
5. St. Eustace the Martyr of Vilnius (April 14) [†1342]
6. St. Stephen the Enlightener of Perm (April 26) [1340-1396]
7. St. Stephen Pechersky (April 27) [†1094]
8. St. Cyril of Turov (April 28) [1130-1182]
9. St. Ignatius of Rostov (April 28) [†1288]
10. St. Isaiah the Wonderworker of Rostov (May 15) [†1090]
11. St. Euphrosyne of Polotsk (May 23) [†1173]
12. St. Leontius of Rostov (May 23) [†1077]
13. St. Nicetas the Wonderworker of Pereaslavl (May 24) [†1186]
14. St. German of Valaam (June 28) [†?]
15. St. Sergius of Valaam (June 28) [†?]
16. St. Anthony of the Kiev Caves (July 10) [983-1073]
17. St. Theodosius of the Kiev Caves (July 10)
18. St. Theodore the Black of Yaroslavl (September 19) [†1299]
19. St. David of Yaroslavl (September 19) [†1299]
20. St. Constantine of Yaroslavl (September 19) [†1299]
21. St. Michael the Martyr, Wonderworker of Chernigov (September 21) [†1246]
22. St. Theodore the Martyr, Wonderworker of Chernigov (September 21) [†1246]
23. St. Sergius the Wonderworker of Radonezh (September 25) [1314-1392]
24. St. Abraham the Wonderworker of Rostov (October 29) [†1073]
25. St. Barlaam of Khutyn (November 6) [†1193]

http://thebananarepublican.blogspot.tw/2010/11/post-schism-russian-orthodox-saints-fr.html

Ok, thanks for the list. But that's not what I meant. Those saints were recognized by the church.
That's of course fine and not a contradiction to your papal quote. Saints outside the church does not make any sense.

[Lepanto]

So you are angry we "stole" your saints.

[sedevacantist]

Yes, I know, Catholics must do a lot of mental gymnastics, it is unbelievably self-contradictory, blablabla. Ever been a Catholic? I guess you don't have a clue. But this is not about you and me, but about Anthony who is confused. If he's going back to Taiwan, he should consider which church he can reach each Sunday.

Anthony is Orthodox, so please back off.

Faith: Confused Christian
Jurisdiction: Searching
I didn't write "If you leave the Catholic church, you will go to hell", or similar. I just mentioned a practical aspect to consider. I think he's likely well aware of it, but is this really something unfair, untrue or otherwise inappropriate to say?

If you leave the Catholic faith you go to hell, if you care about these orthodox you should be trying to convince them.
as for saints recognized by Paul VI,there shouldn't be much weight put on them..Paul VI was an antiChrist

[servulus]

Yes, I know, Catholics must do a lot of mental gymnastics, it is unbelievably self-contradictory, blablabla. Ever been a Catholic? I guess you don't have a clue. But this is not about you and me, but about Anthony who is confused. If he's going back to Taiwan, he should consider which church he can reach each Sunday.

Anthony is Orthodox, so please back off.

Faith: Confused Christian
Jurisdiction: Searching
I didn't write "If you leave the Catholic church, you will go to hell", or similar. I just mentioned a practical aspect to consider. I think he's likely well aware of it, but is this really something unfair, untrue or otherwise inappropriate to say?

If you leave the Catholic faith you go to hell, if you care about these orthodox you should be trying to convince them.
as for saints recognized by Paul VI,there shouldn't be much weight put on them..Paul VI was an antiChrist

Convince us of your invisible church. Where would we go for the sacraments?

[Vanhyo]

but about Anthony who is confused.

@Lepanto
You are the one who is confused, Anthony is beginning to see through the empty threats and fear mongering of the heterodox.

Saints outside the church does not make any sense.

@Lepanto
The saints are inside the Church, maybe you are in the wrong place ?

Maybe you should get quick reminder of what St Spyridon did to the deluded cardinal who was harassing the Orthodox.

Why Sedevacantism Must Be Rejected
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jn0f-tBz2CY&t=19s

I am glad you are getting spiritually healthier, just so you know, roman-catoliks, sedes, sspx are not the only people who use abusive  fear tactics, many protestant sects do it quite often as well.

So many post-schism Orthodox Saints like Saint Seraphim of Sarov, St. Xenia, St. John the Wonderworker are in heaven. They prove Pope Innocent III's statement is wrong.

Exactly! Once people get to know our saints there is absolutely no doubt that we have the truth, and that they are in heaven.

Go to google and type "a smile from eternity" then go to images and have a good look, did these orthodox saints look to you like they ended up in a bad place ?

Another proof is that after their repose, our saints do countless of miracles and are always helping people, few names that instantly come to my mind - St Seraphim of Sofia, St Luke the Surgeon, St Nektarios. I found a webpage made by thankful people who were healed by the help of St Nektarios interestingly enough St Nektarios have a written materials against the latins.

[ConfusedRC]

Yes, I know, Catholics must do a lot of mental gymnastics, it is unbelievably self-contradictory, blablabla. Ever been a Catholic? I guess you don't have a clue. But this is not about you and me, but about Anthony who is confused. If he's going back to Taiwan, he should consider which church he can reach each Sunday.

Anthony is Orthodox, so please back off.

Faith: Confused Christian
Jurisdiction: Searching
I didn't write "If you leave the Catholic church, you will go to hell", or similar. I just mentioned a practical aspect to consider. I think he's likely well aware of it, but is this really something unfair, untrue or otherwise inappropriate to say?

If you leave the Catholic faith you go to hell, if you care about these orthodox you should be trying to convince them.
as for saints recognized by Paul VI,there shouldn't be much weight put on them..Paul VI was an antiChrist

Anthony, I hope you see how ridiculous this is. This person is saying that you must return to a church that had an anti-Christ as its pope.

[Anthony1986]

Yes, I know, Catholics must do a lot of mental gymnastics, it is unbelievably self-contradictory, blablabla. Ever been a Catholic? I guess you don't have a clue. But this is not about you and me, but about Anthony who is confused. If he's going back to Taiwan, he should consider which church he can reach each Sunday.

Well, as I mention before before if based on transportation or geographical reasons Roman Catholicism will be the better choice for me. I am in Taiwan this summer. The RC parish just 10 minutes drive for me. If I want to go to Orthodox Church it is 2 hours by train.
Also, in during the regular academic year when I am in Madrid, the RC parish is just downstairs of my residence. The Orthodox church require 10 minutes metro.
However, I am not picking faith my convenience reason. I am looking for true apostolic church established by Christ.   

[Anthony1986]

Yes, I know, Catholics must do a lot of mental gymnastics, it is unbelievably self-contradictory, blablabla. Ever been a Catholic? I guess you don't have a clue. But this is not about you and me, but about Anthony who is confused. If he's going back to Taiwan, he should consider which church he can reach each Sunday.

Anthony is Orthodox, so please back off.

Faith: Confused Christian
Jurisdiction: Searching
I didn't write "If you leave the Catholic church, you will go to hell", or similar. I just mentioned a practical aspect to consider. I think he's likely well aware of it, but is this really something unfair, untrue or otherwise inappropriate to say?

If you leave the Catholic faith you go to hell, if you care about these orthodox you should be trying to convince them.
as for saints recognized by Paul VI,there shouldn't be much weight put on them..Paul VI was an antiChrist

Anthony, I hope you see how ridiculous this is. This person is saying that you must return to a church that had an anti-Christ as its pope.

sedevacantists are the most ridiculous group I have ever met. They don't have any reasonable proper logic at all.
Sedevacantists want us to believe papal supremacy and infallibility, but they believe there is no valid Pope since 1958.
It is so ridiculous.

[Anthony1986]

Yes, I know, Catholics must do a lot of mental gymnastics, it is unbelievably self-contradictory, blablabla. Ever been a Catholic? I guess you don't have a clue. But this is not about you and me, but about Anthony who is confused. If he's going back to Taiwan, he should consider which church he can reach each Sunday.

Anthony is Orthodox, so please back off.

Faith: Confused Christian
Jurisdiction: Searching
I didn't write "If you leave the Catholic church, you will go to hell", or similar. I just mentioned a practical aspect to consider. I think he's likely well aware of it, but is this really something unfair, untrue or otherwise inappropriate to say?

If you leave the Catholic faith you go to hell, if you care about these orthodox you should be trying to convince them.
as for saints recognized by Paul VI,there shouldn't be much weight put on them..Paul VI was an antiChrist

According to your sedevacantists position people like me who received confirmation in post-Vatican II RC are not true Catholic. You guys believe all the post-Vatican II RCs are all going to hell anyway.
Funny thing is most of post-Vatican II RCs believe most of Sedevacantists are in schism so you guys are in the state of mortal sin. According to post-Vatican II RCs Sedevacantists might end up in hell.

[Anthony1986]

Yes, I know, Catholics must do a lot of mental gymnastics, it is unbelievably self-contradictory, blablabla. Ever been a Catholic? I guess you don't have a clue. But this is not about you and me, but about Anthony who is confused. If he's going back to Taiwan, he should consider which church he can reach each Sunday.

Well, as I mentioned before if based on transportation or geographical reasons, Roman Catholicism will be the better choice for me. I am in Taiwan this summer. The RC parish just 10 minutes drive for me. If I want to go to Orthodox Church it is 2 hours by train.
Also,during the regular academic year when I am in Madrid, the RC parish is just downstairs of my residence. The Orthodox church require 10 minutes metro.
However, I am not picking faith my convenience reason. I am looking for true apostolic church established by Christ.

[xOrthodox4Christx]

Yes, I know, Catholics must do a lot of mental gymnastics, it is unbelievably self-contradictory, blablabla. Ever been a Catholic? I guess you don't have a clue. But this is not about you and me, but about Anthony who is confused. If he's going back to Taiwan, he should consider which church he can reach each Sunday.

Anthony is Orthodox, so please back off.

Faith: Confused Christian
Jurisdiction: Searching
I didn't write "If you leave the Catholic church, you will go to hell", or similar. I just mentioned a practical aspect to consider. I think he's likely well aware of it, but is this really something unfair, untrue or otherwise inappropriate to say?

If you leave the Catholic faith you go to hell, if you care about these orthodox you should be trying to convince them.
as for saints recognized by Paul VI,there shouldn't be much weight put on them..Paul VI was an antiChrist

Anthony, I hope you see how ridiculous this is. This person is saying that you must return to a church that had an anti-Christ as its pope.

sedevacantists are the most ridiculous group I have ever met. They don't have any reasonable proper logic at all.
Sedevacantists want us to believe papal supremacy and infallibility, but they believe there is no valid Pope since 1958.
It is so ridiculous.

I disagree. Sedevacantism is the only reasonable position you can hold, minus cognitive dissonance which I guess isn't rational anyway, if you believe Rome is the Church, has the faith, cannot contradict itself, cannot endorse a perversion of the order of Mass and is infallible.

[xOrthodox4Christx]

And Porter: Why do you have to reply to every post from me with biting irony? Are you afraid of something?

Not afraid at all. I know the Vatican is not a contagious disease, just, apparently, genetic.

Sounds like hatred or anger. What did Catholics do to you?

There's a huge list of things one could easily accuse the Vatican of doing, successfully. Nevertheless, the most obvious one, and probably the most important to those in this forum, seems to be: lying about and debasing Christianity, Christian culture and civilization.

[Sharbel]

Ok, thanks for the list. But that's not what I meant. Those saints were recognized by the church.
That's of course fine and not a contradiction to your papal quote. Saints outside the church does not make any sense.

Yet, these who saints were never part of the Roman Church and did not hold the same beliefs, were recognized by PP PVI.  The only reasonable course of action is to concede, like the good pope did, that there are saints outside the Roman Church, even without investigating their cause.  It's not the Roman Church that makes saints, she merely recognizes the fact that people are saints in Heaven.

As a matter of fact, in Dominus Jesus, then Card. Ratzinger admitted that the Church does subsist in the Orthodox Churches. 

[Porter ODoran]

Yes, I know, Catholics must do a lot of mental gymnastics, it is unbelievably self-contradictory, blablabla. Ever been a Catholic? I guess you don't have a clue. But this is not about you and me, but about Anthony who is confused. If he's going back to Taiwan, he should consider which church he can reach each Sunday.

Anthony is Orthodox, so please back off.

Faith: Confused Christian
Jurisdiction: Searching
I didn't write "If you leave the Catholic church, you will go to hell", or similar. I just mentioned a practical aspect to consider. I think he's likely well aware of it, but is this really something unfair, untrue or otherwise inappropriate to say?

If you leave the Catholic faith you go to hell, if you care about these orthodox you should be trying to convince them.
as for saints recognized by Paul VI,there shouldn't be much weight put on them..Paul VI was an antiChrist

Anthony, I hope you see how ridiculous this is. This person is saying that you must return to a church that had an anti-Christ as its pope.

sedevacantists are the most ridiculous group I have ever met. They don't have any reasonable proper logic at all.
Sedevacantists want us to believe papal supremacy and infallibility, but they believe there is no valid Pope since 1958.
It is so ridiculous.

I disagree. Sedevacantism is the only reasonable position you can hold, minus cognitive dissonance which I guess isn't rational anyway, if you believe Rome is the Church, has the faith, cannot contradict itself, cannot endorse a perversion of the order of Mass and is infallible.

Two fallacies don't make a fact.

[Justin Kolodziej]

Yes, I know, Catholics must do a lot of mental gymnastics, it is unbelievably self-contradictory, blablabla. Ever been a Catholic? I guess you don't have a clue. But this is not about you and me, but about Anthony who is confused. If he's going back to Taiwan, he should consider which church he can reach each Sunday.

Well, as I mentioned before if based on transportation or geographical reasons, Roman Catholicism will be the better choice for me. I am in Taiwan this summer. The RC parish just 10 minutes drive for me. If I want to go to Orthodox Church it is 2 hours by train.
Also,during the regular academic year when I am in Madrid, the RC parish is just downstairs of my residence. The Orthodox church require 10 minutes metro.
However, I am not picking faith my convenience reason. I am looking for true apostolic church established by Christ.

I'm sorry we aren't helping, but going over the entire history of all the polemics of the East-West Schism on your thread. Me included. Forgive me