www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Mary as co-redemptrix

Dear Dr. John,

No problem, happens to the best of us. Happens to me all the time!

But doesn't Scripture AND Tradition come together as the two aspects of the one deposit of faith entrusted to the Church etc.?

Alex

Alex,
Thank you so much for that link.Sadly though, the Common Prayer on that site is North American rather than English and is 1928 not the old 1662. The Parish in England was I will admit very traditional and very "high" - nothing wrong with that . The Ursulines [ with whom I was at School] had a greater influence on me than they ever knew ! I will keep looking for the 1662 version just to stop my little grey cells from dying off from too much use. By the way I have found another prayer [ the Prayer of Humble Accession to be used before Reception of the Eucharist] I was struggling to remember with all tonight's efforts so it was really worth it. The Scriptural Rosary will be downloaded when I get a chance. Thanks again.

May Our Lady keep you in her tender care.

Angela

Eric,
I believe you must continue in your journey to find the True Church. You introductory statement is quite troubling. There is no need at this time to hold an Ecumenical Council. We, the Orthodox, are content with the first Seven Ecumenical Councils. There is no need to create more dogmas and more confussion (i.e. Virgin Mary as Co-Redemptrix). For your information, the so-called 8-21 Ecumenical Councils of Rome are not truly Ecumenical. They are general councils that apply to Rome alone.
As for central unity within the Orthodox Church it is in Christ Jesus through the Holy Spirit. The Unity of the Faith lies nowhere else other than in Orthodoxy. There are various Orthodox jurisdictions but we are not divided in the Unity of the Faith. Each Orthodox jurisdiction has a Patriarch or Archbishop and speaks for Orthodoxy. We do not need a Papal Monarch to speak for Orthodoxy. Each of the independent Orthodox jurisdictions speak for themselves under the authority of their own Patriarch. I will say that there is a gulf of differences between Catholicism and Orthodoxy. It begins in truly understanding the Unity of the Faith. This is what is to keeps us in communion.

Robert,

You said: "You introductory statement is quite troubling. There is no need at this time to hold an Ecumenical Council. We, the Orthodox, are content with the first Seven Ecumenical Councils."

Respectfully, this is the answer I consistently get from Orthodox who don't want to answer my question head-on but want to side-step it. As nobody can know that another heresy will not arise needing an Ecumenical Council then what if such a heresy comes up later?
1. How would such a council be called to deal with it? Who would be authorized to call the council? Who would be invited (ROCOR? old kalendarists? HOCNA?, etc.) as legitimate Orthodox to attend?

2. If in Acts 15 the church was confronted with a problem, they held a council, and they declared the truth and did not have to wait for decades/hundreds of years for it to be "generally received" before its decisions were binding. Why do the Orthodox now think that an ecumenical council must be "generally received" by the whole church before it's binding? It appears that this whole idea of "generally received" was drafted as an explanation for the failed reunion council of Florence in the 1400's; where do the Fathes teach this notion of "generally received" before that?

You said: There is no need to create more dogmas and more confussion (i.e. Virgin Mary as Co-Redemptrix).

Ref. these specific doctrines I happen to be in complete agreement with you. BTW, the Orthodox are second to none when it comes to veneration of the Virgin!

You said: The Unity of the Faith lies nowhere else other than in Orthodoxy.

One of the issues facing my wife & I should we decide to become Orthodox is that the mainline (i.e., supposedly "canonical") Orthodox churches would allow us to contracept with the approval of our priest, not done for selfish reasons, and if not done with abortifacient methods. However, it is an historical fact that the whole, entire, universal, 100% of the jurisdictions, taught that contraception was a *SIN* until the 1960's - and some still do.
Since nobody speaks for Orthodoxy then how do I know if this is a sin or not? Since the "unity of faith" seems very unified on this issue...

Dear Angela,

You are more than welcome!

Actually, if you scroll down that page, there is a site on the BCP which has the version you refer to.

I knew a High Church Anglican Canon who used to say the Rosary before his Liturgy and loved holding Marian processions.

He also commemorated the Pope before commemorating the Archbishop of Canterbury.

I asked him if his bishop liked what he was doing. He said he didn't

God bless,

Alex

Dear Eric,

I admire your devotion to the Most Holy Mother of God and thank you for your tribute to our tradition's veneration of Her!

I think you should join us in the Byzantine Catholic Church.

That way, you have the best of all worlds!

May God and His Mother bless you and keep you always.

Alex

Eric,
I don't believe I evaded your question. Do you truly believe that our teachings about Christ is in danger and would require an Eighth Ecumenical Council? Or the first Seven Ecumenical Councils are insufficient? What is it that you see that would require an Eighth Ecumenical Council? A council that would debate the papal encyclical,"Humanae Vitae" and turn it into another Ecumenical Council? Why wasn't "Humanae Vitae" dogma declared ex cathedra by Pope VI? Majority of American Catholics practice birth control like their Protestant counterparts.
Historically, heresies come and go. They are the equivalent of Hindu reincarnation- they come to us in various guises. Wherever is truth expect its competitor heresy to be there.
In regards to Orthodox Churches calling councils they already do that in their own jurisdictions.

I don't believe I evaded your question. Do you truly believe that our teachings about Christ is in danger and would require an Eighth Ecumenical Council? Or the first Seven Ecumenical Councils are insufficient? What is it that you see that would require an Eighth Ecumenical Council?

My opinion on that matter is of no bearing on whether or not another issue could arise which would require a council. After each of the first 6 councils someone like yourself might have said the same thing "What else could come up? What aren't the first 3 (or 5 or whatever) sufficient?" - yet they were not. I don't think you can show me anything in scripture or tradition which guarantees the first 7 will all that will *ever* need to be called. Which leads me to again ask the same 2 questions to which I'd like answers:

1. How would such a council be called to deal with it? Who would be authorized to call the council? Who would be invited (ROCOR? old kalendarists? HOCNA?, etc.) as legitimate Orthodox to attend?

2. If in Acts 15 the church was confronted with a problem, they held a council, and they declared the truth and did not have to wait for decades/hundreds of years for it to be "generally received" before its decisions were binding. Why do the Orthodox now think that an ecumenical council must be "generally received" by the whole church before it's binding? It appears that this whole idea of "generally received" was drafted as an explanation for the failed reunion council of Florence in the 1400's; where do the Fathes teach this notion of "generally received" before that?


Majority of American Catholics practice birth control like their Protestant counterparts.

What the majority of American catholics do is of no bearing on what the truth is regarding contraception. The majority of Americans get divorced yet that doesn't change the fact that divorce is a sin. The majority of "christians" were Arians at one time yet that did not make Arianism true.

So, I again ask: ...it is an historical fact that the whole, entire, universal, 100% of the jurisdictions, taught that contraception was a *SIN* until the 1960's - and some still do.
Since nobody speaks for Orthodoxy then how do I know if this is a sin or not? Since the "unity of faith" seems very unified on this issue...


In regards to Orthodox Churches calling councils they already do that in their own jurisdictions.

Yes, that's always been the case for LOCAL issues. But for universal problems ecumenical councils were called.

[This message has been edited by Eric, the Inquirer (edited 07-05-2001).]

Alex

What can I say -- you are WONDERFUL - thank you
That will each me to jump to conclusions.

May Our Lady, Mother of us, all keep you safely in her care

Angela

Dear Angela,

Thank you for your kindness - it is YOU who are wonderful!

You practice the devotion of St Louis de Montfort, the Holy Slavery?

I have always read and cherished his works.

God bless,

Alex

My approach to religion is sadly much less intellectual than many of the posters here. I converted to Catholicism without even knowing what a co-redemptrix is. Never heard of it.

The question is, do I suffer in order to redeem others? (I believe this is the question.)

Well, sadly once again, I have no answers. But I would say that if in the eyes of the Church, people suffered to redeem others, it would be inconsistent with the practice of granting indulgences. Indulgences, as I hope we all know, can be used on someone in purgatory, or on the person perfoming the indulgenced act. But not on any other living person.

Paz y amor,

Justin

The simplest answer to your inquiry will depend upon which church community you belong to and what its theology is regarding suffering. In general, in the West, there is an understanding of efficacious suffering. In the East, we pray for the dead, and emphasize God's great love and mercy.

There will be no truthful answer available for you on the web. I suggest very strongly that you speak with your pastor and let him both educate and guide your soul.

Blessings!

Eric,
Why are you bent out of shape on having an Eighth Ecumenical Council? I never said it would never happen or it would be impossible. I apologize for not making that clear. The only possible way I see for having an Eighth Ecumenical Council is if Rome came back in communion with the Orthodox Church. Know that the Orthodox Church can call for an Ecumenical Council but it is not the desire of the Holy Spirit at this time. Rome believes it has always maintained the theory of convening an Ecumenical Council when we all know that was never the case. Perhaps the exception to this is with the so-called 8-21 Ecumenical Councils of Rome. We have yet to see changes, ommissions, and revisions with these so-called Ecumenical Councils as general councils which are not binding on the Orthodox Church. The Orthodox Church , out of respect and good-will, has not convened an Eighth Ecumenical and most likely will not without the Roman communion. Rome will have to undergo a transformation in her understanding of the Unity of the Faith in communion with the Orthodox Church. The mentality of Rome throughout time and history has been a frightful one and one that tends to resemble instablility and insecurity. It is better to have no union than a false union. The Council of Florence was a false union if you read the history. An Ecumenical Council must be generally received by the whole and entire Universal Church. If Rome does not accept the understanding of communion with the Orthodox Church, Rome will continue her journey as the prodigal son. Therefore please forget the idea of an Eighth Ecumenical Council. It does not make sense to entertain the thought and to be teasing yourself.

As for my statement on birth control by American Catholics, I meant to say that there is a gulf of differences between American Catholicism and that of Rome. The practice and belief of Catholicism is very ackward here in this country and abroad. There are to many self-proclaimed "popes" that have their own interpretation of dogmas and teachings. This forum is one of them. The diversity of consistent & inconsistent beliefs within Catholicism really amazes me and quite perplexing. The use of contraceptions does not have an Ecumenical stand either in the West or in the East. There must be something Augustinian about contraceptives being sinful. There really is no offical ecumenical stance.

By the way have you ever studied the problems of the Concilliar tradition within Catholicism and the evolution of the papal monarchy? This can be a great place to start understanding the issues of the past and how they impact the present and the future.

Yes...Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scriptures go hand to hand...kind of.

What do I mean "kind of?" It's because...the Sacred Scriptures are the "written form" of the Sacred Tradition. And if I remember correctly...somewhere in the Sacred Scriptures...I don't know which book...maybe a letter by Saint Paul. But it says that "not everything is written down in the Scriptures."

It means that the Sacred Scriptures are just a tip of an iceberg. Can't you imagine the teachings of Christ for 3 YEARS being in the Scriptures? It can't be...there has to be volumes and volumes and volumes of them. But obviously not.

Perhaps only the most important parts of the Sacred Tradition needed to be recorded...especially the important parts of Jesus' life.

Also, I suppose the Council of Hippo (is that right?)...which is one of the original 7 Ecumencial Councils...to discern which book is deed worthy...and which is a hoax..etc.

That is why it is very important to pray to the Holy Spirit at all times...to make sure Sacred Tradition which is handed down orally through the successors of Apostles...to be accurate. And of course...Ecumenical Councils, Magisterium and Doctrines/Dogma...only affirms the Truth of the Sacred Tradition.

spdundas

Hey Bob!

I don't think I understand your position on birth control. Is it the one consistent with St. John Chrysostom, et al?