Are those who do not receive Jesus in Holy Eucharist really Christians? Is it insanity for them to continue claiming to be Christians?

[VARC]

First of all Catholic and Oriental Churches that hold still maintain valid Mysteries are precisely because they have valid Apostolic Succession.

This view represents a modernist form of orthodoxy. Indeed your entire thread reveals you to be a modernist in the orthodox church (not necessarily a bad thing). The traditional orthodox view was the Roman Catholics, Anglicans, Copts and Armenians are heretics so there sacraments do not convey grace even though their bishops trace back their orders to the apostles. But in modern times the more ecumenically minded orthodox have broke ranks with the traditionalists and accepted some grace in the monophysite (baptism and marriages) and western churches(baptism).

You would prefer that the Orthodox Church would view the Catholic Sacraments as invalid? Even though the Catholic Churches and the Orthodox Churches are not in communion with one another - each still maintains valid Mysteries. Being “in communion” with each other and having valid Communion are two separate things.

Again this is more modernism in orthodoxy. The Russian Orthodox Outside of Russia and other traditionalists would disagree with you.

Never in Church History did every single Church within the Ancient Original Church maintain identical canons - being canonical or not canonical has nothing to do with the validity of the Mysteries.

You missed my point. You were mocking the Roman Catholic Church and the rest of the Christian west because of the divisions that exist. Your criticism is hypocracy given the current schisms in your own communion over ecumenism and the liturgical calendar. There are a dozen or so “uncanonical” orthodox churches that all claim to be truly orthodox and claim that the EP is a heretic.

If you really knew what Orthodoxy taught you’d realize your arguement is a non-arguement. Study and pray - you will be converted.

Sure thing. Should I convert to the Coptic Church that regards you as a heretic for accepting the Tome of Leo. Or rather the Genuine Greek Orthodox Church in America that regards you a heretic for being an ecumenist.

 

[JonNC]

Is it me or am I the only one who takes offense to this thread?
IF the catholic church recognizes baptism (valid baptism, with water and the use of proper formula an intention, ect and so on) from say a nice Lutheran like Jon, then if Jon does not have the exact same belief (but much closer than non lutheran non catholics do) why would anyone say such nonsense that he may not be a christian?
This is just too funny for words.

Thank you. That was kind.

God bless,
Jon

 

[StMarina303ad]

You missed my point. You were mocking the Roman Catholic Church and the rest of the Christian west because of the divisions that exist. Your criticism is hypocracy given the current schisms in your own communion over ecumenism and the liturgical calendar. There are a dozen or so “uncanonical” orthodox churches that all claim to be truly orthodox and claim that the EP is a heretic.

Mocking something and pointing out something are two very different things. I was not mocking the Roman Catholic Church.

If you were to join the Coptic Catholic Church you’d find that you’d be on a different Calendar than you are now. Christmas is celebrated on Jan.7 th

 

[Peter_J]

But in modern times the more ecumenically minded orthodox have broke ranks with the traditionalists and accepted some grace in the monophysite (baptism and marriages) and western churches(baptism).

Actually I believe that a lot of Eastern Orthodox regard the “monophysite” (more correctly, miaphysite) Oriental Orthodox as having all valid Sacraments.

 

[notsmart]

Actually I believe that a lot of Eastern Orthodox regard the “monophysite” (more correctly, miaphysite) Oriental Orthodox as having all valid Sacraments.

I thought that was always agreed to as a heresy plain and simple.

 

[VARC]

Actually I believe that a lot of Eastern Orthodox regard the “monophysite” (more correctly, miaphysite) Oriental Orthodox as having all valid Sacraments.

Depends. There is a diversity of opinion in that communion. The most modern orthodox believe that the monophysite (or miaphysite if you prefer) sacraments contain grace to such an extent that they practice intercommunion. The tradionalists believe they are heretics for denying Chalcedon and thus have no grace in their sacraments.

 

[Peter_J]

I thought that was always agreed to as a heresy plain and simple.

Not so. See, for example, the Common Declaration of Pope Paul VI and Pope Shenouda III (Patriarch of the miaphysite Coptic Orthodox Church)

Also cnewa.org/ecc-bodypg-us.aspx?eccpageID=96

 

[notsmart]

Not so. See, for example, the Common Declaration of Pope Paul VI and Pope Shenouda III (Patriarch of the miaphysite Coptic Orthodox Church)

Also cnewa.org/ecc-bodypg-us.aspx?eccpageID=96

Hello Peter J,

I see no where in that document that Miaphysite or Monophisite views are compatible with Catholic ones.
The letter is not addressing that.

 

[AshleyBelle]

I haven’t been following this thread, but I wanted to drop by because the title has really been bothering me

I think that it's pretty standard to believe anyone who calls on the name of Jesus fits in the realm of "Christian."  And anyone who has ever had a valid baptism (done in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit) is considered a Christian in the state of grace (at least at the time of their baptism).

For Christians who don’t believe or partake in the eucharist, I don’t think I would consider them “insane”

I think if Christians UNDERSTOOD what the eucharist was and STILL didn’t care…then that would be insane. But the problem is, you cant’ force somebody to believe that it’s Jesus. You can’t “push them over that intellectual cliff” so to speak, in regards to this very difficult teaching. Even many of Christ’s disciples LEFT him, because they said it was a difficult teaching, and they had Christ HIMSELF explaining it! How can we expect our brothers and sisters in Christ to believe this teaching, when all they have are catholics whom they have been taught their WHOLE LIVES are 'wrong" explaining it?

Are they Christians? ABSOLUTELY!

Are the insane? NO.

But I have an intense ache in my heart that so many of my brothers and sisters in Christ simply do not know Him, present in the mass

 

[StMarina303ad]

I thought that was always agreed to as a heresy plain and simple.

The word heresy doesn’t mean the same in the East as it does in the West. It’s possible that someone can be in heresy but still have valid Sacraments - it’s not the kiss of death like it is in the West.

Orthodoxy teaches that Roman Catholic Church is has many, many heretical teachings - being a heretical Church and all, but that doesn’t meant that their Mysteries/Sacraments are not valid.

 

[Peter_J]

Hello Peter J,

I see no where in that document that Miaphysite or Monophisite views are compatible with Catholic ones.
The letter is not addressing that.

From cnewa.org/ecc-bodypg-us.aspx?eccpageID=96

Today it is widely recognized by theologians and church leaders on both sides that the Christological differences between the Oriental Orthodox and those who accepted Chalcedon were only verbal, and that in fact both parties profess the same faith in Christ using different formulas.

 

[notsmart]

Does that mean that council was in error?

 

[Peter_J]

Does that mean that council was in error?

On the contrary, the Oriental Orthodox are now admitting that Chalcedon was not a heretical council after all – and, at the same time, we “Chalcedonians” (in particular, Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholics) are now admitting that the Oriental Orthodox are not in heresy.

 

[notsmart]

On the contrary, the Oriental Orthodox are now admitting that Chalcedon was not a heretical council after all – and, at the same time, we “Chalcedonians” (in particular, Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholics) are now admitting that the Oriental Orthodox are not in heresy.

Well, this makes me ask a dumb question. Why did they think our side was in error, and now we say they are not in error for thinking we were in error?
Head spinning.

 

[VARC]

On the contrary, the Oriental Orthodox are now admitting that Chalcedon was not a heretical council after all – and, at the same time, we “Chalcedonians” (in particular, Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholics) are now admitting that the Oriental Orthodox are not in heresy.

If things are how you describe, then why isn’t there reunion? The answer is that things are not as you describe. The Orientals believe Leo was a Nestorian heretic even to this day…

Here (the 6th Ecumenical Council), as earlier in the decree, the Tome of Leo is expressly affirmed. The decree actually calls the Tome “the pillar of the right faith.” You can perhaps understand that all this is rather difficult for us to accept. For us Leo is still a heretic. It may be possible for us to refrain from condemning him by name, in the interests of restoring communion between us. But we cannot in good conscience accept the Tome of Leo as “the pillar of the right faith” or accept a council which made such a declaration. The council approves explicitly what I clearly regard as heresy in the Tome of Leo: “Each form does in communion with the other what pertains properly to it, the Word, namely doing that which pertains to the Word, and the flesh that which pertains to the flesh.” If one rightly understands the hypostatic union, it is not possible to say that the flesh does something on its own, even if it is said to be in union with the Word. The flesh does not have its own hypostasis. It is the hypostasis of the Word which acts through the flesh. It is the same hypostasis of the Word which does the actions of the Word and of his own flesh. The argument of the horos [dogmatic definition] in this Sixth Council is basically unacceptable to us (Review, p. 139; Does Chalcedon, p. 133).

Metropolitan Paulos Mar Gregorios
Malankara Orthodox Church

 

[Peter_J]

Good point. Not everyone agrees that “the other side” is not heretical.

 

[Mickey]

We’re not in agreement on this, but we will be on a future day.

Indeed!

 

[Mickey]

Depends. There is a diversity of opinion in that communion. The most modern orthodox believe that the monophysite (or miaphysite if you prefer) sacraments contain grace to such an extent that they practice intercommunion. The tradionalists believe they are heretics for denying Chalcedon and thus have no grace in their sacraments.

If you would like to start (yet another thread) on Holy Orthodoxy, go for it. But you and others here are way off topic. Thank you.

 

[brownjt]

Your comment reflects that you know nothing of Orthodoxy.

First of all Catholic and Oriental Churches that hold still maintain valid Mysteries are precisely because they have valid Apostolic Succession.

You would prefer that the Orthodox Church would view the Catholic Sacraments as invalid? Even though the Catholic Churches and the Orthodox Churches are not in communion with one another - each still maintains valid Mysteries. Being “in communion” with each other and having valid Communion are two separate things.

Never in Church History did every single Church within the Ancient Original Church maintain identical canons - being canonical or not canonical has nothing to do with the validity of the Mysteries.

If you really knew what Orthodoxy taught you’d realize your arguement is a non-arguement. Study and pray - you will be converted.

All of you need to study and pray on the New Testament - convert? You are alllll Christians! Study and pray on His word to equip yourselves - to know the heart and mind of God - before the real enemy comes one day to turn all our neighbors against us.

While you argue over the eastern and roman rites, etc, your former faithful in the catholic church are filling the pews of the evangelical protestant churches worldwide - why?

Because arguments like this do not out the “bread” on the “table of the soul”.

 

[brownjt]

Well, this makes me ask a dumb question. Why did they think our side was in error, and now we say they are not in error for thinking we were in error?
Head spinning.

Hohummm. Watch Joel Osteen and see why he puts 15,000 a week into his pews. Literal bread and wine aside, he is putting the “bread” on the “table of the soul” for thousand and thousands a week. Jesus said to his apostles 'Feed my Sheep". That means spiritually as well