The Byzantine Forum
Newest Members
EasternChristian19, James OConnor, biblicalhope, Ishmael, bluecollardpink
6,161 Registered Users
Who's Online Now
4 members (EasternChristian19, James OConnor, Michael_Thoma, 1 invisible), 1,263 guests, and 104 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
Topics35,510
Posts417,516
Members6,161
Most Online3,380
Dec 29th, 2019
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 3 of 11 1 2 3 4 5 10 11
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 714
Likes: 5
J
jjp Offline
Member
Member
J Offline
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 714
Likes: 5
The question I have been facing is, regardless of how this "should" be, how do Eastern Catholics reconcile themselves to what *is*?

I realize this is now totally off topic to the OP, but it is something I have been struggling a lot with.

Since the IC has been infallibly dogmatized at pain of anathema for the entire Catholic Church, how does an Eastern Catholic reconcile themself to this? Pretend the elephant is not in the room?

Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 209
B
Member
Member
B Offline
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 209
Interesting question. I don't pretend to have an answer to how to reconcile it for everyone. Heck, I don't even know how to reconcile Vatican II and the Council of Florence on the question of extra ecclessi nulla salsu, and those are both 'western,' councils!

Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 288
Member
Member
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 288
Originally Posted by ByzBob
Interesting question. I don't pretend to have an answer to how to reconcile it for everyone. Heck, I don't even know how to reconcile Vatican II and the Council of Florence on the question of extra ecclessi nulla salsu, and those are both 'western,' councils!

ByzBob,

Glory to Jesus Christ!

I have no idea, what is the issue with
Quote
Vatican II and the Council of Florence on the question of extra ecclessi nulla salsu
?

Kyrie eleison,

Manuel

Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 209
B
Member
Member
B Offline
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 209
Dear Manuel,

I meant Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus, not ecclessi. Sorry for not spell checking.

Yrs,

Bob

Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 288
Member
Member
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 288
Dear ByzBob,

I'm still confused. I do not know all the issues of the Church and I do not know Latin. I have technically always been Catholic since I was baptized as a baby in the Church, but I was not raised and have only been Catholic, as far as I'm concerned, for a year and a half.

So could you please break down the issue between these two western councils?

Thank you and Kyrie eleison,

Manuel

Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 209
B
Member
Member
B Offline
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 209
Wikipedia has a good history of the dogma in the Roman Catholic, under Roman Catholic statements of this teaching.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extra_Ecclesiam_nulla_salus

This is one example of a Roman dogma that has undergone serious developement, to the point that Vatican II calls Protestant ecclesia communities 'a means of salvation.' That seems to be at serious odd with the Council of Florence saying:

Quote
It 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 catholic church before the end of their lives; that the unity of the 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 his blood in the name of Christ, unless he has persevered in the bosom and the unity of the catholic church.

What does all this mean? It means that the concept of dogma in the RC appears to be more fluid than some would like to admit. Even the definition of Papal Infallibility/Universal Jurisdiction is not being discussed with the Orthodox Church, and may possibly be undergoing a development of sorts.

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/p...i_doc_20071013_documento-ravenna_en.html

Quote
45. It remains for the question of the role of the bishop of Rome in the communion of all the Churches to be studied in greater depth. What is the specific function of the bishop of the “first see” in an ecclesiology of koinonia and in view of what we have said on conciliarity and authority in the present text? How should the teaching of the first and second Vatican councils on the universal primacy be understood and lived in the light of the ecclesial practice of the first millennium? These are crucial questions for our dialogue and for our hopes of restoring full communion between us.

I'm not sure what the outcome of these talks will be, but if Rome consider Vatican 1 to be settled doctrine, then why invest the time in discussing it?


Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 776
Likes: 24
U
Member
Member
U Offline
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 776
Likes: 24
Without opening the whole issue of the IC once more, ad nauseam, I think you reconcile by simply acknowledging that the IC is the Latin church's way of articulating the sinlessness of the Theotokos that both east and west accept as the long-standing Tradition of the Church.

To be more back on topic, I do believe that it serves no one if, in our effort to be more Orthodox we become less Catholic.

Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,855
Likes: 8
A
Member
Member
A Offline
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,855
Likes: 8
Originally Posted by ByzBob
I'm not sure what the outcome of these talks will be, but if Rome consider Vatican 1 to be settled doctrine, then why invest the time in discussing it?
I agree with Melkite Archbishop Zoghby who said: ". . . Vatican I has the same designation as the Council of Lyons, a 'general' synod of the West. With this designation it is neither ecumenical nor infallible and could produce only theological opinions that can not be imposed on anyone" [Archbishop Elias Zoghby, "Ecumenical Reflections"].

Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,855
Likes: 8
A
Member
Member
A Offline
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,855
Likes: 8
Originally Posted by Utroque
To be more back on topic, I do believe that it serves no one if, in our effort to be more Orthodox we become less Catholic.
I agree, but of course I believe that the Eastern Orthodox are Catholic, just as Catholic as the Latin West.

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 10,930
Member
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 10,930
Originally Posted by Apotheoun
Originally Posted by ByzBob
I'm not sure what the outcome of these talks will be, but if Rome consider Vatican 1 to be settled doctrine, then why invest the time in discussing it?
I agree with Melkite Archbishop Zoghby who said: ". . . Vatican I has the same designation as the Council of Lyons, a 'general' synod of the West. With this designation it is neither ecumenical nor infallible and could produce only theological opinions that can not be imposed on anyone" [Archbishop Elias Zoghby, "Ecumenical Reflections"].

Zogby's book 'We are all Schismatics' is a really good book.

Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 776
Likes: 24
U
Member
Member
U Offline
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 776
Likes: 24
Greased lightening!

Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 714
Likes: 5
J
jjp Offline
Member
Member
J Offline
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 714
Likes: 5
Originally Posted by Utroque
I think you reconcile by simply acknowledging that the IC is the Latin church's way of articulating the sinlessness of the Theotokos that both east and west accept as the long-standing Tradition of the Church.

That's a great way of phrasing it, thanks smile

Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,392
Likes: 32
ajk Offline
Member
Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,392
Likes: 32
Originally Posted by Apotheoun
I agree with Melkite Archbishop Zoghby who said: ". . . Vatican I has the same designation as the Council of Lyons, a 'general' synod of the West. With this designation it is neither ecumenical nor infallible and could produce only theological opinions that can not be imposed on anyone" [Archbishop Elias Zoghby, "Ecumenical Reflections"].
I'm confident that Bishop Elias was a good man, but even good men can make bad pronouncements that can even lead others astray.

Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,855
Likes: 8
A
Member
Member
A Offline
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,855
Likes: 8
Originally Posted by ajk
Originally Posted by Apotheoun
I agree with Melkite Archbishop Zoghby who said: ". . . Vatican I has the same designation as the Council of Lyons, a 'general' synod of the West. With this designation it is neither ecumenical nor infallible and could produce only theological opinions that can not be imposed on anyone" [Archbishop Elias Zoghby, "Ecumenical Reflections"].
I'm confident that Bishop Elias was a good man, but even good men can make bad pronouncements that can even lead others astray.
Yes, even good Popes can lead people astray.

Be that as it may, on the issue of Vatican I as a particular synod of the West I agree with Zoghby.

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309
Likes: 3
S
Member
Member
S Offline
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,309
Likes: 3
Quote
I'm confident that Bishop Elias was a good man, but even good men can make bad pronouncements that can even lead others astray.

I am sure you have some objective criteria for thinking His Grace was in error. And "the Pope said so" doesn't qualify. In any case, were that true, the Holy Father has all sorts of remedies, pastoral and canonical, at his disposal. The Melkite Initiative--for it is now the official policy of the Melkite synod--continues apace.

Page 3 of 11 1 2 3 4 5 10 11

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