|
0 members (),
465
guests, and
112
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums26
Topics35,524
Posts417,640
Members6,177
| |
Most Online4,112
Mar 25th, 2025
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,264
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,264 |
And yet...
Are we not in danger of failing to recognize our fundamental unity?
The principal differences between Orthodoxy and Catholicism are NOT ontological. They are different expressions of the One True Faith, developed along distinct hitorical trajectories.
For myself, I would not favor leaving the Catholic communion for an Orthodox jurisdiction, because I do believe in the fulness of Petrine primacy residing in the Bishop of Rome. The ideal of the unia is to live and worship as an Orthodox Christian while in communion with your hierarch who is in communion with the Bishop of Rome. I believe in this ideal and strive for it. this is not "syncretism" it is synthesis. I do not see the ideals of Orthodoxy and Catholicism as mutually exclusive, but rather as complimentary.
Gordo
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,885
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,885 |
Gordo so what do you think then of the rest of the senario where those who faced with going to a Latin Rite Church would go to the Orthodox Church?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,855 Likes: 8
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,855 Likes: 8 |
Originally posted by ebed melech:
And yet...
Are we not in danger of failing to recognize our fundamental unity?
The principal differences between Orthodoxy and Catholicism are NOT ontological.
[. . .] I found this comment interesting, and -- for the sake of discussion -- thought that it would be appropriate to post a speech given by the Patriarch of Constantinople back in 1997: Address Of His All Holiness
Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew
Phos Hilaron
(Joyful Light)
Georgetown University, Washington, DC
21 October 1997
Your Eminences, Your Excellencies and Graces, Father O�Donovan, President of this University, Honored Guests, Beloved children in the Lord:
It is a special honor that this distinguished University confers the title of Honorary Doctor upon my Modesty. This is an opportunity for us to approach one another and communicate in the spirit of brotherhood. Although we proclaim that we worship the one and same Lord Jesus Christ, whose name we bear as Christians, we seek in common the causes of our divergence.
In the distant past, great attempts have been made by both sides to prove, and motivated by a different spirit, each side has judged the other as being divergent from the true faith.
This deeply rooted conviction of our divergence has led us to a thousand years of separate and autonomous courses. We confirm not with unexpected astonishment, but neither with indifference, that indeed the divergence between us continually increases and the end point to which our courses are taking us, foreseeably, are indeed different. Our heart is opposed to the specter of an everlasting separation. Our heart requires that we seek again our common foundations, and the original starting point that we share. So that, retrospectively we can discover the point and the reasons for our divergence that led to separate courses, and be able, by lifting blame, to proceed thereafter on the same road leading to the same common goal.
Assuredly our problem is neither geographical nor one of personal alienation. Neither is it a problem of organizational structures, nor jurisdictional arrangements. Neither is it a problem of external submission, nor absorption of individuals and groups. It is something deeper and more substantive.
The manner in which we exist has become ontologically different. Unless our ontological transfiguration and transformation toward one common model of life is achieved, not only in form but also in substance, unity and its accompanying realization become impossible.
No one ignores the fact that the model for all of us is the person of the Theanthropos (God-Man) Jesus Christ. But which model? No one ignores the fact that the incorporation in Him is achieved within His body, the Church. But whose church?
Because of the varying responses to these basic questions, we marched on divergent courses. This is easily understood and unavoidable. For whether we comprehend this or not, our existence is ontologically shaped in symphony and harmony with our inner self. According to the description of our Lord, in Matthew 15:11, not what goes into the mouth defiles a man, but what comes out of the mouth. This means that our essence is in continuous transformation [Romans 12:2; 2 Corinthians 3:18] by the renewing of your mind, and in the reflected glory of the Lord.
A characteristic detail, that cannot be understood without special attention, just as is described in the Old Testament, is that Jacob succeeded in having his flock bear multicolored lambs by placing before them multicolored rods [Genesis 30:37-43]. In a similar way, the Apostle Paul writing to the Corinthians says that we are being transformed into the likeness of the image of the glory of the Lord, which we reflect. Consequently the glory of the Lord, which we see, as in a mirror, is that which transforms us. This glory is that to which we are likened. The reflection of the divine glory recreates or otherwise regenerates us into something other or different in essence than our previous nature. Therefore, transformation into the image of the Lord and the image of His body becomes the fundamental pursuit of our life, accomplished in essence by the intervention of the Holy Spirit.
Therefore we do not engage in idle talk and discuss intellectual concepts which do not influence our lives. We discuss the essence of the Being who truly is, to whom we seek to become assimilated by the grace of God, and because of the inadequacy of human terms, we call this the image of the glory of the Lord. Based on this image, and in the likeness of this image, we become partakers of the divine nature [2 Peter 1:4]. We are truly changed, although neither earth, nor voice, nor custom distinguish us from the rest on mankind. [To Diognetos 2, P.G. 2,1173]
This change, which is bestowed on us from the right hand of the Most High, remains hidden, secret and mystical to many. And thus, a life which is directed toward Him is called mystical. That which leads to divine grace are called mysteries. The entire change of both language and intellect is beyond comprehension and when directed by God leads to unspeakable mysteries.
However, the change of man�s essence, theosis by grace, is a fact that is tangible for all the Orthodox faithful. Grace is not only obtained through the transformed relics of the saints, which is totally inexplicable without acceptance of the divine. Grace also radiates from living Saints who are truly in the likeness of the Lord [Luke 8:46]. This change is also obtained through Holy Baptism which through grace transforms the neophyte. The transformation may only be grasped and discerned by the senses of those, who have been baptized, and who are receptive to it without external persuasion. According to the trustworthy testimony of devout Christians, divine grace even infuses the inanimate. This too, is discerned by those who are sensitive and pure of heart. Grace can also be obtained by the presence of the Saints who have influenced and sanctified, and to a degree transformed, natural objects and places.
Therefore, the Orthodox Christian does not live in a place of theoretical and conceptual conversations, but rather in a place of an essential and empirical lifestyle and reality as confirmed by grace in the heart [Hebrews 13:9]. This grace cannot be put in doubt either by logic or science or other type of argument.
Our conception of Holy Tradition moves upon the same track. Holy Tradition for the Orthodox Christian is not just some collection of teachings, texts outside the Holy Scriptures and based on their oral tradition within the Church. It is this, but not only this. First and foremost, it is a living and essential imparting of life and grace, namely, it is an essential and tangible reality, propagated from generation to generation within the Orthodox Church. This transmittal of the faith, like the circulation of the sap of life from the tree to the branch, from the body to the member, from the Church to the believer, presumes that one is grafted to the fruitful olive tree [Romans 11:23-25], the embodiment in the body (Romans 12:5; 1 Corinthians 10:16-17, 12:12-27).
Membership in the Church is not an act of cataloging a person as a member of a group but it is the true rebirth of this person in a new world, the world of grace. From that moment forward, he or she is nourished and grows a new body which is of different substance than the body of the flesh, and is joined with the body of Christ through baptism.
The relevant baptismal Hymn, Whoever is baptized in Christ, has been clothed in Christ is not simply symbolism or a poetic allegory. It is a real fact that brings change in the substance of the human being.
Those baptized as infants, whose Orthodox parents grafted them into the body of the Church, are unable to express in words the change that took place in them, but they feel it. However, those present at the moment of baptism who have purity of heart see the grace that surrounds them. Those baptized at a more mature age and with depth of faith are able to describe the liberating feeling of renouncing the devil and joining Christ.
This ontological view of the life in Christ entails a substantial element of the experience of the Eastern Orthodox Church. The glow of its light illumines all facets of our ecclesiastical and personal life in the Church and disposes of the need for foolish inquires. The Master himself knocks on the door, and seeks that we open to him the door of our entire being, so that he may enter and break bread with us. This is the foundational issue and posture for us as Orthodox. Understanding this opens the door for communication and makes dialogue possible.
The same ontological position of the Orthodox Church brings us to the difficult issues before us.
Let us look at some:
Regarding Dogma, the Orthodox Church maintains an apparently opposing position. On the one hand, Orthodoxy has never started a dogmatic dialogue, on the other hand, the Church has never neglected one. And let me explain why.
As we have said, the Orthodox faithful awaits and desires to become the reflection of the glory of God and through the grace of the Holy Spirit he becomes an image of our Lord Jesus Christ. He desires, in other words, to immediately know one person of the Trinity, Jesus Christ, and through him the remaining two, the unapproachable person of the Father, and through the Son alone, the person of the Holy Spirit. The Orthodox Christian strives towards purity of Heart for the visitation of grace, and having been fulfilled, is able to behold the sought-after glory of God. Being thus transformed, from glory to glory, the Orthodox Christian approaches God. On the spiritual journey a dogmatic description of the manifestation of the Lord and his Body, the Church, is not required because our experienced guide at every moment protects us from deception, and allows us to accept the Glory of the Lord in any appearance it takes. Therefore, experiencing the Dogma of the Church is not something that is taught through intellectual teachings, but it is learned through the example of him who, through incarnation, joined Himself to us. To this point, dogma is life and life is the expression of dogma. However, a mere theoretical discussion on the meaning of life and dogma is unnecessary.
However, the evil opponent of man tries to interject between the enlightened faithful and the illuminating glory, his own distorted filter, that is a doctrine, a false glory, so that he might deceive the faithful as being the same. In this case, the Church, like a good shepherd, hurries to guide the faithful towards right glory. The entire body of the Church rises and vigorously warns that the said doctrine is false and that, by embracing it, it separates us from the true glory of God, leads us off the track resulting in the loss of our desired goal. The Church therefore, to protect the faithful from missing the mark, battles the distortions of the glory of God, that cunning spirits continuously plant.
Consequently, this difference in dogmatic theory does not lend itself to systematic analysis. Because, a systematic exposure of this dogmatic teaching could be understood only spiritually and therefore could harm the purity of the pure vision that the faithful has, by the voluntary import of all distortions. That is, immediate empirical and living knowledge of the only true glory of God and not the epistemological enumeration of a multitude of false imitations. This is summarized in the recognition that for those who have an immediate personal knowledge of the Lord, any description of him is rendered needless. For those that are on the road to knowing him, but still do not, a correct presentation of the basic elements of His glory is useful to have and particularly as much as it is necessary so that they do not engage in false beliefs.
Concerning those that have freely chosen to shun the correct Glory of God, the Orthodox Church follows the Apostle Paul�s recommendation which is a man that is a heretic after the first and second admonition, reject (Titus 3,10). The same, of course, does not hold true for those who ask you a reason for the hope that is in you with meekness and fear (1 Peter 3:15). Therefore the Orthodox Church is always open for every good-faith dialogue but declines to partake in planted squabbles, because there is always a danger to be misunderstood in such a context.
If time and your kindness permit, let us examine one such case so you can better discern our position.
The nature of the Church, viewed in the light of the Orthodox Faith, is a reality which is recognized spiritually and not descriptively. Each one of us knows the members of his own body not because he has been taught about them or because they have been described in detail by anyone. He knows them, in a special way, because of the direct and living bond with them, even if he does not understand this scientifically.
The Church is our body. As a result of the existence of its Head, our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, before all time, and before creation, the Church co-exists with Him before all time. The Church is not an imaginary entity, is not a legal entity, a mere gathering of the faithful, or a worldly establishment or creation. The Church is Christ and those that He chooses, in one body with him for all ages.
The comprehension of the meaning of this, as much as is possible, assumes living this reality fully. That is, what our hands have handled, concerning the Word of life (1 John 1:1), without exception, a sense of the union of all things in Christ, in Whom all things surmised, not pantheistically, but christologically.
All this leads to the conclusion that the organization, the goals, the functions and all aspects of the life of the Church are not determined by human judgment, but the real and unchanging nature of the Church. Thus, the steadfastness of the Orthodox Church on ecclesiastical assumptions of every type is not the product of any narrow perception, but the natural result of our living ecclesiastical experience. We are not talking about an object, subjected to our free manipulation, but of an existence independent of our desires and directed by him who governs all things and Who bestowed upon us limited responsibility or ministry. The starting point of the occasionally misunderstood position of the Orthodox Church concerning ecclesiological matters is rediscovered in the essence of this ministry in this real body directed by its head, the Lord Jesus Christ.
So much for this.
Time is passing and the subject cannot be exhausted. However, in these few words your judgment is expected regarding my thoughts about our hope, a hope starting from a living experience rather than an intellectual conception.
We thank you for your patience and attention. Our love towards you is warm. Let not the simplicity of my words cloud your judgment regarding their truth. You are able to understand the words of the divine Logos through the uttering of human words. Let us always hear the words of the divine Logos so that His grace may always be with us. For this indeed is our wish for you.
Thank you.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,405 Likes: 38
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,405 Likes: 38 |
Dear Friends,
In fact, when many Ukrainian Greek-Catholics found themselves in Europe and North America throughout the 20th century where RC's, so the rumour went, tried to get them to become full members of the Latin Church, Met. Andrew Sheptytsky advised his flock to attend an Orthodox parish whenever they could to avoid the deliberate missionary "pull" of the Latin Church.
The Basilian priests were quite horrified at this and so their prayerbooks have usually underlined the need for Greek-Catholics to attend an RC parish when none of their own exists . . .
Alex
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,555
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,555 |
Originally posted by theophan:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but this discussion seems to me to border on--or at least skate around--syncretism: the combination of two different forms of belief or practice. Dear Bob, This is a tough position to take Bob and I've argued something quite similar elsewhere for many the same reasons. Given what the Catholic Church teaches about Orthodoxy in her most recent papal and curial documents and in the CCC, I can't see any reason to call a life lived in both confessions by the name of syncretism. We are not substantially or essentially that far apart, the Ecumenical Patriarch's comments on ontological differences, notwithstanding, or at least our understanding of what he was trying to say. So I would not argue for the use of the term "syncretism" for those who truly live as Orthodox in communion with Rome, or even for those who might leave communion with Rome for communion with Orthodoxy.
I don't think any of the posters has thought about the DEEP implications of the question(s) posed or the eternal consequences of the moves that many seem to toss about so easily.
Both the Catholic and the Orthodox Church see themselves as the visible One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church spoken of in the Creed, the Symbol of Faith. To a member of either body, the act of separation from one's baptismal home is an act of apostasy--a serious sin that incurs excommunication. Now, I don't know what the current theological definition of excommunication is, but I was taught that this is more than simply the inability to participate in Eucharistic Communion at the public liturgy. It means that one's eternal relationship with Jesus Christ is cut off completely and that one deludes oneself in thinking that one can be in relationship with Christ and be so separated from His Church. In Christ,
BOB As far as this segment goes, this is where we might come much closer together but not quite the same in our understanding of "apostasy." The sin of apostasy that separates man from God, incurring the fullness of excommunication and eternal separation, is when one leaves the faith entirely. Not when one moves from one sister Church to the other. Since Orthodoxy is the closest of the Church's outside of communion with Rome and fully accepted as sacramentally grace-filled, then the formal definition for apostasy does not apply to leaving communion with Rome and entering communion with Orthodox faithful. At least it does not apply according to the teaching of the Catholic Church. What does apply in such a transfer is an objective sin against one's Baptism and THAT is a form of apostasy, though not in the same degree that would occur if one completely denied one's Baptism entirely. One has to take into consideration the spiritual maturity of the person and their intentions before suggesting confession and absolution in such an instance, but it is certainly not something to be taken lightly, to leave communion with the papal Church and move to Orthodoxy. By the very same token, it is just as serious when Orthodox faithful come into communion with the papal Church. If we were not so close. If the Holy Father had not made the full extent of that closeness abundantly clear to papal Catholics, then there might be some greater division perceived between us, and even I might be prone to encouraging Orthodox to "come home." But truly those days are behind us and God willing they will remain there. In another part of a small evangelical ministry that I embrace, I have often had opportunity to discourage moving in either direction, without guidance, prayer and consultation with one's pastor and with one's hierarch and without having lived the life of one or the other for several years before making the move. So while I do not embrace every word of your post, I am grateful to you for raising the issue, since it makes things a bit more difficult for the truely faithful. Fidelity to one's baptism, chrismation and eucharistic communion is never something to be taken lightly or without long consultation and experiential living-the-life for an extended period before finally moving anywhere. Eli
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,431
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,431 |
Originally posted by Rilian:
I'm not answering, but just offering a thought. I probably wouldn't have framed this question the way you have, both because abolishment is such a negative idea and is so unlikely.
I don't know exactly what type of insight you're looking for by asking this question, but I personally would move it out of the theoretical. I would ask something along the lines of "if you moved to an area with only a RC or an Orthodox church, what would you do?". Not only does it not engage with the negative implications of churches being abolished, I think it's actually a fairly realistic scenario.
Just a thought.
Andrew Dear Andrew, First, I tend to prefer your way of asking the question. Second, I'd like to take this opportunity to comment on the likelihood (or un-likelihood) of the abolition of EC churches. On the one hand, there are some Orthodox who insist on this happening as a pre-condition to talks with Rome. In particular, in their Letter to the Ecumenical Patriarch Concerning the Balamand Agreement, the Athonite monks complained that: Furthermore, Unia is receiving amnesty and is invited to the table of theological dialogue despite the contrary decision of the Third Pan-Orthodox Conference in Rhodes requiring: "the complete withdrawal from Orthodox lands by the Uniate agents and propagandists of the Vatican; the incorporation of the so-called Uniate Churches and their subjection under the Church of Rome before the inauguration of the dialogue, because Unia and dialogue at the same time are irreconcilable." On the other hand, this position is far less common then many Catholics make it out to be. For example, I don't know of any autocephelous or autonomous Orthodox churches which maintain it. (I think it is also worth noting that even the Athonites -- unreasonable though they may be -- are not so unreasonable as to say "ECs must return to their respective Orthodox churches prior to dialogue", although I have heard some Catholics claim that that is what the Orthodox say.) God bless, Peter.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 63
New
|
|
New
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 63 |
It is a dogma of the holy Catholic Church that "it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff."- Pope Boniface VIII 'Unam Sanctam.' If one were to leave the Catholic Church he would be in danger of losing his eternal soul. There is only ONE church and where Peter is there is the Church.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,555
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,555 |
Originally posted by Mike0126c:
It is a dogma of the holy Catholic Church that "it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff."- Pope Boniface VIII 'Unam Sanctam.' If one were to leave the Catholic Church he would be in danger of losing his eternal soul. There is only ONE church and where Peter is there is the Church. There were clarifications of that statement at the time of its making, and there have been further clarifications since. How did you miss all of that?  Eli
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,885
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,885 |
Extracts from
CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
The episcopal college and its head, the Pope
880 When Christ instituted the Twelve, "he constituted [them] in the form of a college or permanent assembly, at the head of which he placed Peter, chosen from among them."398 Just as "by the Lord's institution, St. Peter and the rest of the apostles constitute a single apostolic college, so in like fashion the Roman Pontiff, Peter's successor, and the bishops, the successors of the apostles, are related with and united to one another."399
881 The Lord made Simon alone, whom he named Peter, the "rock" of his Church. He gave him the keys of his Church and instituted him shepherd of the whole flock.400 "The office of binding and loosing which was given to Peter was also assigned to the college of apostles united to its head."401 This pastoral office of Peter and the other apostles belongs to the Church's very foundation and is continued by the bishops under the primacy of the Pope.
882 The Pope, Bishop of Rome and Peter's successor, "is the perpetual and visible source and foundation of the unity both of the bishops and of the whole company of the faithful."402 "For the Roman Pontiff, by reason of his office as Vicar of Christ, and as pastor of the entire Church has full, supreme, and universal power over the whole Church, a power which he can always exercise unhindered."403
883 "The college or body of bishops has no authority unless united with the Roman Pontiff, Peter's successor, as its head." As such, this college has "supreme and full authority over the universal Church; but this power cannot be exercised without the agreement of the Roman Pontiff."404
884 "The college of bishops exercises power over the universal Church in a solemn manner in an ecumenical council."405 But "there never is an ecumenical council which is not confirmed or at least recognized as such by Peter's successor."406
885 "This college, in so far as it is composed of many members, is the expression of the variety and universality of the People of God; and of the unity of the flock of Christ, in so far as it is assembled under one head."407
886 "The individual bishops are the visible source and foundation of unity in their own particular Churches."408 As such, they "exercise their pastoral office over the portion of the People of God assigned to them,"409 assisted by priests and deacons. But, as a member of the episcopal college, each bishop shares in the concern for all the Churches.410 The bishops exercise this care first "by ruling well their own Churches as portions of the universal Church," and so contributing "to the welfare of the whole Mystical Body, which, from another point of view, is a corporate body of Churches."411 They extend it especially to the poor,412 to those persecuted for the faith, as well as to missionaries who are working throughout the world.
887 Neighboring particular Churches who share the same culture form ecclesiastical provinces or larger groupings called patriarchates or regions.413 The bishops of these groupings can meet in synods or provincial councils. "In a like fashion, the episcopal conferences at the present time are in a position to contribute in many and fruitful ways to the concrete realization of the collegiate spirit."414
* The teaching office
888 Bishops, with priests as co-workers, have as their first task "to preach the Gospel of God to all men," in keeping with the Lord's command.415 They are "heralds of faith, who draw new disciples to Christ; they are authentic teachers" of the apostolic faith "endowed with the authority of Christ."416
889 In order to preserve the Church in the purity of the faith handed on by the apostles, Christ who is the Truth willed to confer on her a share in his own infallibility. By a "supernatural sense of faith" the People of God, under the guidance of the Church's living Magisterium, "unfailingly adheres to this faith."417
890 The mission of the Magisterium is linked to the definitive nature of the covenant established by God with his people in Christ. It is this Magisterium's task to preserve God's people from deviations and defections and to guarantee them the objective possibility of professing the true faith without error. Thus, the pastoral duty of the Magisterium is aimed at seeing to it that the People of God abides in the truth that liberates. To fulfill this service, Christ endowed the Church's shepherds with the charism of infallibility in matters of faith and morals. The exercise of this charism takes several forms:
891 "The Roman Pontiff, head of the college of bishops, enjoys this infallibility in virtue of his office, when, as supreme pastor and teacher of all the faithful - who confirms his brethren in the faith he proclaims by a definitive act a doctrine pertaining to faith or morals. . . . The infallibility promised to the Church is also present in the body of bishops when, together with Peter's successor, they exercise the supreme Magisterium," above all in an Ecumenical Council.418 When the Church through its supreme Magisterium proposes a doctrine "for belief as being divinely revealed,"419 and as the teaching of Christ, the definitions "must be adhered to with the obedience of faith."420 This infallibility extends as far as the deposit of divine Revelation itself.421
892 Divine assistance is also given to the successors of the apostles, teaching in communion with the successor of Peter, and, in a particular way, to the bishop of Rome, pastor of the whole Church, when, without arriving at an infallible definition and without pronouncing in a "definitive manner," they propose in the exercise of the ordinary Magisterium a teaching that leads to better understanding of Revelation in matters of faith and morals. To this ordinary teaching the faithful "are to adhere to it with religious assent"422 which, though distinct from the assent of faith, is nonetheless an extension of it.
ARTICLE 9
"I BELIEVE IN THE HOLY CATHOLIC CHURCH"
748 "Christ is the light of humanity; and it is, accordingly, the heart-felt desire of this sacred Council, being gathered together in the Holy Spirit, that, by proclaiming his Gospel to every creature, it may bring to all men that light of Christ which shines out visibly from the Church."135 These words open the Second Vatican Council's Dogmatic Constitution on the Church. By choosing this starting point, the Council demonstrates that the article of faith about the Church depends entirely on the articles concerning Christ Jesus. The Church has no other light than Christ's; according to a favorite image of the Church Fathers, the Church is like the moon, all its light reflected from the sun.
749 The article concerning the Church also depends entirely on the article about the Holy Spirit, which immediately precedes it. "Indeed, having shown that the Spirit is the source and giver of all holiness, we now confess that it is he who has endowed the Church with holiness."136 The Church is, in a phrase used by the Fathers, the place "where the Spirit flourishes."137
750 To believe that the Church is "holy" and "catholic," and that she is "one" and "apostolic" (as the Nicene Creed adds), is inseparable from belief in God, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. In the Apostles' Creed we profess "one Holy Church" (Credo . . . Ecclesiam), and not to believe in the Church, so as not to confuse God with his works and to attribute clearly to God's goodness all the gifts he has bestowed on his Church.138
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 63
New
|
|
New
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 63 |
Elitoft,
Here is a quote from the Second Vatican Council:
"Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,885
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,885 |
Where? Document and and page numbers please.
Also how does that fit in with the documents on the Orthodox Churches in particular.
Quoting past documents written in a style of writing now long past is not helpful in presenting a standpoint of that Church in todays world.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 63
New
|
|
New
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 63 |
Lumen Gentium, paragraph 14.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 63
New
|
|
New
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 63 |
Here is a wonderful article from catholic.com Salvation outside the Church
The Catechism of the Catholic Church, following historic Christian theology since the time of the early Church Fathers, refers to the Catholic Church as "the universal sacrament of salvation" (CCC 774�776), and states: "The Church in this world is the sacrament of salvation, the sign and the instrument of the communion of God and men" (CCC 780).
Many people misunderstand the nature of this teaching.
Indifferentists, going to one extreme, claim that it makes no difference what church one belongs to. Certain radical traditionalists, going to the other extreme, claim that unless one is a full-fledged, baptized member of the Catholic Church, one will be damned.
The following quotations from the Church Fathers give the straight story. They show that the early Church held the same position on this as the contemporary Church does�that is, while it is normatively necessary to be a Catholic to be saved (see CCC 846; Vatican II, Lumen Gentium 14), there are exceptions, and it is possible in some circumstances for people to be saved who have not been fully initiated into the Catholic Church (CCC 847).
Notice that the same Fathers who declare the normative necessity of being Catholic also declare the possibility of salvation for some who are not Catholics.
These can be saved by what later came to be known as "baptism of blood" or " baptism of desire" (for more on this subject, see the Fathers Know Best tract, The Necessity of Baptism).
The Fathers likewise affirm the possibility of salvation for those who lived before Christ and who were not part of Israel, the Old Testament People of God.
However, for those who knowingly and deliberately (that is, not out of innocent ignorance) commit the sins of heresy (rejecting divinely revealed doctrine) or schism (separating from the Catholic Church and/or joining a schismatic church), no salvation would be possible until they repented and returned to live in Catholic unity.
Ignatius of Antioch
"Be not deceived, my brethren: If anyone follows a maker of schism [i.e., is a schismatic], he does not inherit the kingdom of God; if anyone walks in strange doctrine [i.e., is a heretic], he has no part in the passion [of Christ]. Take care, then, to use one Eucharist, so that whatever you do, you do according to God: For there is one flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ, and one cup in the union of his blood; one altar, as there is one bishop, with the presbytery and my fellow servants, the deacons" (Letter to the Philadelphians 3:3�4:1 [A.D. 110]).
Justin Martyr
"We have been taught that Christ is the first-begotten of God, and we have declared him to be the Logos of which all mankind partakes [John 1:9]. Those, therefore, who lived according to reason [Greek, logos] were really Christians, even though they were thought to be atheists, such as, among the Greeks, Socrates, Heraclitus, and others like them. . . . Those who lived before Christ but did not live according to reason [logos] were wicked men, and enemies of Christ, and murderers of those who did live according to reason [logos], whereas those who lived then or who live now according to reason [logos] are Christians. Such as these can be confident and unafraid" (First Apology 46 [A.D. 151]).
Irenaeus
"In the Church God has placed apostles, prophets, teachers, and every other working of the Spirit, of whom none of those are sharers who do not conform to the Church, but who defraud themselves of life by an evil mind and even worse way of acting. Where the Church is, there is the Spirit of God; where the Spirit of God is, there is the Church and all grace" (Against Heresies 3:24:1 [A.D. 189]).
"[The spiritual man] shall also judge those who give rise to schisms, who are destitute of the love of God, and who look to their own special advantage rather than to the unity of the Church; and who for trifling reasons, or any kind of reason which occurs to them, cut in pieces and divide the great and glorious body of Christ, and so far as in them lies, destroy it�men who prate of peace while they give rise to war, and do in truth strain out a gnat, but swallow a camel. For they can bring about no �reformation� of enough importance to compensate for the evil arising from their schism. . . . True knowledge is that which consists in the doctrine of the apostles, and the ancient constitution of the Church throughout all the world, and the distinctive manifestation of the body of Christ according to the successions of the bishops, by which they have handed down that Church which exists in every place [i.e., the Catholic Church]" (ibid., 4:33:7�8).
Clement of Alexandria
"Before the coming of the Lord, philosophy was necessary for justification to the Greeks; now it is useful for piety . . . for it brought the Greeks to Christ as the law did the Hebrews" (Miscellanies 1:5 [A.D. 208]).
Origen
"[T]here was never a time when God did not want men to be just; he was always concerned about that. Indeed, he always provided beings endowed with reason with occasions for practicing virtue and doing what is right. In every generation the wisdom of God descended into those souls which he found holy and made them to be prophets and friends of God" (Against Celsus 4:7 [A.D. 248]).
"If someone from this people wants to be saved, let him come into this house so that he may be able to attain his salvation. . . . Let no one, then, be persuaded otherwise, nor let anyone deceive himself: Outside of this house, that is, outside of the Church, no one is saved; for, if anyone should go out of it, he is guilty of his own death" (Homilies on Joshua 3:5 [A.D. 250]).
Cyprian of Carthage
"Whoever is separated from the Church and is joined to an adulteress [a schismatic church] is separated from the promises of the Church, nor will he that forsakes the Church of Christ attain to the rewards of Christ. He is an alien, a worldling, and an enemy. He cannot have God for his Father who has not the Church for his mother" (The Unity of the Catholic Church 6, 1st ed. [A.D. 251]).
"Let them not think that the way of life or salvation exists for them, if they have refused to obey the bishops and priests, since the Lord says in the book of Deuteronomy: �And any man who has the insolence to refuse to listen to the priest or judge, whoever he may be in those days, that man shall die� [Deut. 17:12]. And then, indeed, they were killed with the sword . . . but now the proud and insolent are killed with the sword of the Spirit, when they are cast out from the Church. For they cannot live outside, since there is only one house of God, and there can be no salvation for anyone except in the Church" (Letters 61[4]:4 [A.D. 253]).
"When we say, �Do you believe in eternal life and the remission of sins through the holy Church?� we mean that remission of sins is not granted except in the Church" (ibid., 69[70]:2 [A.D. 253]).
"Peter himself, showing and vindicating the unity, has commanded and warned us that we cannot be saved except by the one only baptism of the one Church. He says, �In the ark of Noah a few, that is, eight souls, were saved by water. Similarly, baptism will in like manner save you" [1 Peter 3:20-21]. In how short and spiritual a summary has he set forth the sacrament of unity! In that baptism of the world in which its ancient wickedness was washed away, he who was not in the ark of Noah could not be saved by water. Likewise, neither can he be saved by baptism who has not been baptized in the Church which is established in the unity of the Lord according to the sacrament of the one ark" (ibid., 73[71]:11).
"[O]utside the Church there is no Holy Spirit, sound faith moreover cannot exist, not alone among heretics, but even among those who are established in schism" (Treatise on Rebaptism 10 [A.D. 256]).
Lactantius
"It is, therefore, the Catholic Church alone which retains true worship. This is the fountain of truth; this, the domicile of faith; this, the temple of God. Whoever does not enter there or whoever does not go out from there, he is a stranger to the hope of life and salvation. . . . Because, however, all the various groups of heretics are confident that they are the Christians and think that theirs is the Catholic Church, let it be known that this is the true Church, in which there is confession and penance and which takes a health-promoting care of the sins and wounds to which the weak flesh is subject" (Divine Institutes 4:30:11�13 [A.D. 307]).
Jerome
"Heretics bring sentence upon themselves since they by their own choice withdraw from the Church, a withdrawal which, since they are aware of it, constitutes damnation. Between heresy and schism there is this difference: that heresy involves perverse doctrine, while schism separates one from the Church on account of disagreement with the bishop. Nevertheless, there is no schism which does not trump up a heresy to justify its departure from the Church" (Commentary on Titus 3:10�11 [A.D. 386]).
Augustine
"We believe also in the holy Church, that is, the Catholic Church. For heretics violate the faith itself by a false opinion about God; schismatics, however, withdraw from fraternal love by hostile separations, although they believe the same things we do. Consequently, neither heretics nor schismatics belong to the Catholic Church; not heretics, because the Church loves God; and not schismatics, because the Church loves neighbor" (Faith and the Creed 10:21 [A.D. 393]).
"[J]ust as baptism is of no profit to the man who renounces the world in words and not in deeds, so it is of no profit to him who is baptized in heresy or schism; but each of them, when he amends his ways, begins to receive profit from that which before was not profitable, but was yet already in him" (On Baptism, Against the Donatists 4:4[6] [A.D. 400]).
"I do not hesitate to put the Catholic catechumen, burning with divine love, before a baptized heretic. Even within the Catholic Church herself we put the good catechumen ahead of the wicked baptized person . . . For Cornelius, even before his baptism, was filled up with the Holy Spirit [Acts 10:44�48], while Simon [Magus], even after his baptism, was puffed up with an unclean spirit [Acts 8:13�19]" (ibid., 4:21[28]).
"The apostle Paul said, �As for a man that is a heretic, after admonishing him once or twice, have nothing more to do with him� [Titus 3:10]. But those who maintain their own opinion, however false and perverted, without obstinate ill will, especially those who have not originated the error of bold presumption, but have received it from parents who had been led astray and had lapsed . . . those who seek the truth with careful industry and are ready to be corrected when they have found it, are not to be rated among heretics" (Letters 43:1 [A.D. 412]).
"Whoever is separated from this Catholic Church, by this single sin of being separated from the unity of Christ, no matter how estimable a life he may imagine he is living, shall not have life, but the wrath of God rests upon him" (ibid., 141:5).
Fulgentius of Ruspe
"Anyone who receives the sacrament of baptism, whether in the Catholic Church or in a heretical or schismatic one, receives the whole sacrament; but salvation, which is the strength of the sacrament, he will not have, if he has had the sacrament outside the Catholic Church [and remains in deliberate schism]. He must therefore return to the Church, not so that he might receive again the sacrament of baptism, which no one dare repeat in any baptized person, but so that he may receive eternal life in Catholic society, for the obtaining of which no one is suited who, even with the sacrament of baptism, remains estranged from the Catholic Church" (The Rule of Faith 43 [A.D. 524]).
NIHIL OBSTAT: I have concluded that the materials
presented in this work are free of doctrinal or moral errors.
Bernadeane Carr, STL, Censor Librorum, August 10, 2004
IMPRIMATUR: In accord with 1983 CIC 827
permission to publish this work is hereby granted.
+Robert H. Brom, Bishop of San Diego, August 10, 2004
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 63
New
|
|
New
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 63 |
Yes I am aware of Feeney. He was a heretic. For "Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience � those too may achieve eternal salvation" (Second Vatican Council, Lumen Gentium, 16).
|
|
|
|
|
