The Byzantine Forum
Newest Members
TheoWalsh01, Nydia, Eliza, Arda, GoldenSilence
6,107 Registered Users
Who's Online Now
1 members (theophan), 264 guests, and 57 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Photos
St. Sharbel Maronite Mission El Paso
St. Sharbel Maronite Mission El Paso
by orthodoxsinner2, September 30
Holy Saturday from Kirkland Lake
Holy Saturday from Kirkland Lake
by Veronica.H, April 24
Byzantine Catholic Outreach of Iowa
Exterior of Holy Angels Byzantine Catholic Parish
Church of St Cyril of Turau & All Patron Saints of Belarus
Forum Statistics
Forums26
Topics35,469
Posts417,242
Members6,107
Most Online3,380
Dec 29th, 2019
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 2 of 15 1 2 3 4 14 15
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,555
Member
Member
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,555
Originally Posted by JSMelkiteOrthodoxy
Mary,

Is not the acceptance of the Petrine ministry as entailing the universal jurisdiction and (under certain conditions) the infallibility of the Pope a change in what Orthodoxy currently teaches? If the universal jurisdiction of the papacy and papal infallibility are dogmas of the Catholic Church, then we Orthodox are in formal schism. Indeed, we deny a fundamental Dogmatic truth of the Catholic faith. I don't see how this can be interpreted any other way.

Joe

Our current pope, writing under the name of Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger in Principles of Catholic Theology, thinks differently.

He says flat out that we cannot ask more of Orthodoxy than she was willing to profess in the first thousand years.

It seems to me that the bi-lateral discussions are there to determine what we can agree on in terms of the first thousand years.

And there has always been the stated claim of the Catholic Church from the time of John Paul II to the present that we are in material and not formal schism, that there is full grace in Orthodox sacraments and that there is full Apostolic succession in Orthodoxy.

So it is still Orthodoxy who is increasing the distance, not the Catholic Church.

Mary

Last edited by Elijahmaria; 07/10/07 11:36 AM.
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 706
I
Member
Member
I Offline
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 706
Basically he's just saying The only Christian Church is the Catholic Church, end of story. And this is as necessary, productive, and helpful a statement as that statement about muslims that caused the death of at least one person. I'm Catholic, but these types of statements really make me wonder.

Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,214
Member
Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,214
It just infuriates me when journalists write about books before reading them, or write about documents before understanding them.

I did not like when they reported that the Vatican was going to unveil their "Jesus Code" which is sympathetic to "Marxism" a little before Jesus of Nazareth was published. (A few articles used that language, not most.)

Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,390
W
Member
Member
W Offline
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,390
First, the Pope didn't write this, the Congregation for the Defense of the Faith did. Second, the word defective was not used to describe the Orthodox. Third, your statement that the Catholic Church is not of Christ but is of the world is highly offensive.

Indigo, I would say that clearly defining what one believes and what one will not budge on is a necessary part of the ecumenical dialog. We know that some will always die for the Truth as Jesus himself did. We cannot be afraid to proclaim our faith because of that. The letter is intended for internal affairs predominantly because of the waywardness of many Catholics who believe the spirit of Vat II is that all Christian churches re the same because of a faith in Christ. We know that isn't true and that Christ established a particular Church with a particular faith, and we cannot allow the relativistic unity in faith to be taught from our pulpits. We must know what we believe before we can teach it to others. That the media distorts it then blows it out of proportion is not a reason to stop us from knowing or proclaiming our faith.

Last edited by Wondering; 07/10/07 11:41 AM.
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,268
A
Member
Member
A Offline
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,268
Originally Posted by indigo
Basically he's just saying The only Christian Church is the Catholic Church, end of story. And this is as necessary, productive, and helpful a statement as that statement about muslims that caused the death of at least one person. I'm Catholic, but these types of statements really make me wonder.

No, that is NOT what the document says!

Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,133
Member
Member
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,133
"Third, your statement that the Catholic Church is not of Christ but is of the world is highly offensive."


The Vatican is a country, as such it is of this world. The Pope is as much its spiritual leader as He is its secular leader. If my opinion of this being an inaproriate position for a Heirarch of the Church of Christ is offensive, I am sorry, but I still stand by my statement.

Nowhere did I say that the Catholic Church itself was of this world.



Last edited by Subdeacon Borislav; 07/10/07 11:45 AM.
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 302
W
Member
Member
W Offline
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 302
As for "Apostolic Succession", didn't St. Paul say that in God we live, move, and have our being.
The Holy Spirit is everywhere and cannot be hindered by "Apostolic Succession." I was raised Protestant and know for certain that Grace is present in the so-called "ecclesial communities." When I am home, I visit my grandmother's church and partake of the Lord's Supper and know for certain that Grace is present.
I don't really care for what the Catholic church teaches anylonger.

Joined: May 2004
Posts: 706
I
Member
Member
I Offline
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 706
Amadeus, you're right I erred. He's saying that the only Christian church that saves is the Catholic Church. The only perfect christian church is the Catholic Church.
I know Protestants that would qualify for sainthood if they were Catholic.
Like I said before, it makes me wonder.

Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,133
Member
Member
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,133
Wolfgang,

what does partaking of the Lord's Supper mean to you?


Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 302
W
Member
Member
W Offline
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 302
It is a Disciples of Christ church and they observe the Lord's Supper every Sunday - they have communion every Sunday.

Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,133
Member
Member
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,133
That is not the question my friend, I am trying to understand what Communion means to this particular community of Christians.

Is it a symbol done in memory of Christ, or do they actually believe they partake of the Body and Blood of the Lord at His table in the Kingdom of Heaven?


Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,214
Member
Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,214
The whole question of the controversy might be pinned down to communion, and that the Catholic Church does not consider itself to be in communion with other churches.

That controversy is over-stated. The Holy Spirit does not function through the means of a democracy.

Last edited by Terry Bohannon; 07/10/07 12:01 PM.
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 212
A
Member
Member
A Offline
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 212
I would like to point out this part of today document, in the aswer about the Orthodox Churches:

the communion with the Catholic Church, the visible head of which is the Bishop of Rome and the Successor of Peter, is not some external complement to a particular Church but rather one of its internal constitutive principles,

What is missing to the Orthodox Churches?
simply the communion with the Catholic Church.
Nothing more.

To to be governed by the pope, not to have bishops appointed by Rome, not undersign the IC dogma....

Yes, the Communion with the Catholic Church is an internal constitutive principle, but it is not something in opposition to the other internal constitutive principles of the churches.

Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,411
A
AMM Offline
Member
Member
A Offline
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,411
Quote
I appreciate this honesty on behalf of the Roman Catholic Church. If there is to be any worthwhile discussion, then all equivocation must be stopped and the conversants in the theological dialogue need to speak clearly.

I agree, so I actually laud this being released, because hopefully it will clear away false notions.

To me it simply reinforces my belief that restoration of formal relations between the churches would involve one side or the other fatally compromising something about itself. To me, this is the Vatican essentially saying it isn't going to be them that will do such a thing. That sort of does put the onus on our hierarchs. Hopefully they will issue a statement saying it is our belief that the fullness of faith and grace is found in the Orthodox Church.

Everyone can draw their own conclusions about who is hindering relations or creating distance based on all of this. I personally believe it's irrelevant to speculate on that, but I don't believe it is our church that is the issue.

Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,411
A
AMM Offline
Member
Member
A Offline
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,411
There is nothing missing or incomplete in the Orthodox Church.

Page 2 of 15 1 2 3 4 14 15

Moderated by  Irish Melkite 

Link Copied to Clipboard
The Byzantine Forum provides message boards for discussions focusing on Eastern Christianity (though discussions of other topics are welcome). The views expressed herein are those of the participants and may or may not reflect the teachings of the Byzantine Catholic or any other Church. The Byzantine Forum and the www.byzcath.org site exist to help build up the Church but are unofficial, have no connection with any Church entity, and should not be looked to as a source for official information for any Church. All posts become property of byzcath.org. Contents copyright - 1996-2024 (Forum 1998-2024). All rights reserved.
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 8.0.0