Armenian Apostolic and Rome?

  • Thread starter Thread starter thephilosopher6
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have Orthodox who do not want to join with a Church, such as the Roman Church, which does not share their traditions and reverent liturgical practices. There are even some Roman Catholics who are uncomfortable with the New Mass, the guitar music, the annulment practices, and communion in the hand. Some have even been excommunicated because they refuse to attend the New Mass, and will only pray the Tridentine Latin Mass. If it is only a tradition, with a small t, why were these Traditional Catholics excommunicated? They have refused to give up their tradition of a latin Mass, but I don;t see where they rejected any doctrine or dogma, and still, they were excommunicated. Traditions are important to some Christians, even though you may not consider them to be doctrines or dogmas.
Lol what? Traditional Catholics are not excommunicated. Sedevancatist, radical Traditionalist who deny the current Pope are excommunicated. The Traditional Mass is on the rise. In 2007, Pope Benedict XVI reestablished the use of the Latin Mass in the Church. I consider myself a Traditionalist and have attended the Latin Mass many times when it’s celebrated in my area. So, I have no idea what you’re talking about. Traditionalist are an integral part of the Church. Do you not know about the priestly society of the FSSP? fssp.org/en/index.htm

I’m sure there are abuses in the new Mass, and it is sad that tradition has been thrown out by some priest. But the Church still hold fast to tradition. And our Eastern Catholic brothers and sisters still hold fast to all their traditions, especially the Byzantines who use the same liturgy as Eastern Orthodox. If the Eastern Orthodox truly wanted unity, they could accept other traditions out there besides their own. The Catholic Church embraces all traditions and liturgy’s. We have 23 eastern Catholic Churches who’s members number about 18 - 20 million worldwide.
 
Lol what? Traditional Catholics are not excommunicated. Sedevancatist, radical Traditionalist who deny the current Pope are excommunicated. The Traditional Mass is on the rise. In 2007, Pope Benedict XVI reestablished the use of the Latin Mass in the Church. I consider myself a Traditionalist and have attended the Latin Mass many times when it’s celebrated in my area. So, I have no idea what you’re talking about. .
Have you heard about the SSPX. I understand that they were in a state of excommunication for several years. It was only recently that their excommunication was lifted and still they are not in full communion with the Roman Catholic Church. Why doesn’t the Roman Catholic Church consider the SSPX to be in full communion with Rome? What dogma or doctrine did they ever deny when they were excommunicated? They only wanted to be able to keep their traditions and say the latin Mass and they were suppressed from 1980 on, and then 8 years later they were excommunicated.
Why give them such a difficult time by first excommunicating them and then several years later lift the excommunications? They wanted to keep their traditions. But Rome wanted them to change their traditions.
Traditions are very important to many Christians.
 
Have you heard about the SSPX. I understand that they were in a state of excommunication for several years. It was only recently that their excommunication was lifted and still they are not in full communion with the Roman Catholic Church. Why doesn’t the Roman Catholic Church consider the SSPX to be in full communion with Rome? What dogma or doctrine did they ever deny when they were excommunicated? They only wanted to be able to keep their traditions and say the latin Mass and they were suppressed from 1980 on, and then 8 years later they were excommunicated.
The SSPX are not in bad standing because they are Traditionalist, they are in bad standing because of how their founder, Bishop Lefebvre, went in trying to establish them. He did not follow the the correct procedures in establishing such a society that were in place at the time. Because of this they were in bad standing with Rome. However, Rome hadn’t formally condemned them until 1988 when Archbishop Lefebvre consecrated new Bishops illicitly without a papal mandate Albeit, the entire SSPX wasn’t excommunicated. Only those who took part in the consecration including Lefebvre himself. He tried circumventing the rules and laws of the Catholic Church. It has little to do with the fact that they’re Traditionalist. Although, many priest in the SSPX don’t seem to accept Vatican II. The funny this is, the SSPX still claims to submit to the current Pope. Not all members of SSPX have been excommunicated. They’re just in bad standing with Rome and because their canonical status is not recognized, their sacrament are illicit. They’re valid (with the exception of confession) but they’re illicit.
 
They’re just in bad standing with Rome
That is the point. The SSPX are a group of people who want to keep the old traditions. Traditions were important to them and they ended up in bad standing with Rome. If they had agreed to abandon the Latin Mass and go with the new tradition of the New Mass, they would not be in bad standing with Rome. So traditions are important if you want to be in good standing with Rome. The Orthodox traditions are important to the Orthodox and they do not want to give them up. Of course, the Romans say that they will not have to give up their traditions. But the Byzantine Catholics had to give up their tradition of married clergy in the USA. I don’t know if it has recently changed, (I think it has), but that is how it was in the past. If a married clergy is only a tradition, why did Rome not allow married Byzantine priests, generally in the USA, until recently? Rome excommunicated and anathematized Michael Cerularius and all his followers in 1054 and one of the reasons given was that the Greeks allowed a married clergy. So, traditions are important to Rome. They are so important that they listed some unacceptable traditions, such as a married clergy, in their letter of excommunication delivered in 1054.
 
I was simply remarking that Eastern Orthodox articles and websites are biased too. Especially ones such as orthodoxinfo.com/
How are they biased? They are explaining the teachings of their religion as best as they can and now you make a blanket statement that their website is biased without giving anything to back it up? What happened to Christian charity?
 
That is the point. The SSPX are a group of people who want to keep the old traditions. Traditions were important to them and they ended up in bad standing with Rome. If they had agreed to abandon the Latin Mass and go with the new tradition of the New Mass, they would not be in bad standing with Rome. So traditions are important if you want to be in good standing with Rome. The Orthodox traditions are important to the Orthodox and they do not want to give them up. Of course, the Romans say that they will not have to give up their traditions. But the Byzantine Catholics had to give up their tradition of married clergy in the USA. I don’t know if it has recently changed, (I think it has), but that is how it was in the past. If a married clergy is only a tradition, why did Rome not allow married Byzantine priests, generally in the USA, until recently? Rome excommunicated and anathematized Michael Cerularius and all his followers in 1054 and one of the reasons given was that the Greeks allowed a married clergy. So, traditions are important to Rome. They are so important that they listed some unacceptable traditions, such as a married clergy, in their letter of excommunication delivered in 1054.
Did you like not read what I posted? It has nothing to do with them wanting to celebrate the Latin Mass. It has to do with them not following the proper laws of the Catholic Church into how to set up a priestly society. They did not gain permission from their Bishop. It has nothing to do with them being Traditionalist. The Catholic Church has numerous Traditionalist priest society’s. The most notable and biggest is the FSSP which is in very good standing with Rome.

The Byzantine Churches have kept their traditions. Many, most in fact, Byzantine priest are married as far as I know. Celibacy is still practiced in the east. Priest ordained before they could get married cannot get married in both the Eastern Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches.

The reason why Rome excommunicated him was because of his apparent persecution of Latin Christians. He had men storm into Latin Churches and desecrate their Eucharist, claiming it was not valid. The current Pope at the time actually tried to make reconciliation, but he was hostile and so the Pope had him excommunicated. The Latin Church didn’t first require priest to be celibate until 1074, when Pope Gregory VII first issued a bull on it. And it wasn’t fully implemented until 1139. It was widely practiced throughout the 11th century indeed, and its origins go as far back at the 4th century. Even though yes, the west did at times try to make celibacy a theological issue, it wasn’t. Just like the east continually trys to make the filiqoue a theological issue. That was almost 1000 years ago, and in no way does the the Latin Church impose celibacy on eastern priest today. Vatican II called for the eastern Churches to keep their traditions.

Also, I’d like to note that the western and eastern Church still had good relations and did not see each other as divided even after 1054. It wasn’t until the time of the Crusades when the two Churches split apart.
 
How are they biased? They are explaining the teachings of their religion as best as they can and now you make a blanket statement that their website is biased without giving anything to back it up? What happened to Christian charity?
Everyone is biased, which is my point. Plus some of their articles do attack Catholicism and continue to push forward their false accusations about Catholicism.
 
The Byzantine Churches have kept their traditions. Many, most in fact, Byzantine priest are married as far as I know.
It is true that in 2014, Pope Francis approved married clergy within Eastern Catholic Churches through CCEO canon 758 § 3. with some exceptions for the Syro-Malabar and Syro-Malankara Catholic Churches,
Apparently, you have not heard about the papal decree given on March 1, 1929: Cum data fuerit , which mandated clerical celibacy for the Ruthenian Byzantine Catholics. Many Ruthenian Catholics in the United States were dissatisfied by this mandate and formed the American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese so that they could keep their tradition of a married clergy.
 
Because:
"The new doctrine, that “the Holy Ghost proceedeth from the Father and the Son,” is contrary to the memorable declaration of our LORD, emphatically made respecting it: which proceedeth from the Father (John xv. 26), and contrary to the universal Confession of the Catholic Church as witnessed by the seven Ecumenical Councils, uttering “which proceedeth from the Father.” (Symbol of Faith).

i. This novel opinion destroys the oneness from the One cause, and the diverse origin of the Persons of the Blessed Trinity, both of which are witnessed to in the Gospel.

ii. Even into the divine Hypostases or Persons of the Trinity, of equal power and equally to be adored, it introduces diverse and unequal relations, with a confusion or commingling of them.

iv. It censures the holy Fathers of the first Ecumenical Synod of Nicea and of the second Ecumenical Synod at Constantinople, as imperfectly expressing what relates to the Son and Holy Ghost, as if they had been silent respecting the peculiar property of each Person of the Godhead, when it was necessary that all their divine properties should be expressed against the Arians and Macedonians.

v. It reproaches the Fathers of the third, fourth, fifth, sixth, and seventh Ecumenical Councils, which had published over the world a divine Creed, perfect and complete, and interdicted under dread anathemas and penalties not removed, all addition, or diminution, or alteration, or variation in the smallest particular of it, by themselves or any whomsoever. Yet was this quickly to be corrected and augmented, and consequently the whole theological doctrine of the Catholic Fathers was to be subjected to change, as if, forsooth, a new property even in regard to the three Persons of the Blessed Trinity had been revealed.

vi. It clandestinely found an entrance at first in the Churches of the West, “a wolf in sheep’s clothing,” that is, under the signification not of procession, according to the Greek meaning in the Gospel and the Creed, but under the signification of mission, as Pope Martin explained it to the Confessor Maximus, and as Anastasius the Librarian explained it to John VIII.

vii. It exhibits incomparable boldness, acting without authority, and forcibly puts a false stamp upon the Creed, which is the common inheritance of Christianity.

viii. It has introduced huge disturbances into the peaceful Church of God, and divided the nations.

ix. It was publicly proscribed, at its first promulgation, by two ever-to-be-remembered Popes, Leo III and John VIII, the latter of whom, in his epistle to the blessed Photius, classes with Judas those who first brought the interpolation into the Creed.

x. It has been condemned by many Holy Councils of the four Patriarchs of the East.

xi. It was subjected to anathema, as a novelty and augmentation of the Creed, by the eighth Ecumenical Council, congregated at Constantinople for the pacification of the Eastern and Western Churches.

xii. As soon as it was introduced into the Churches of the West it brought forth disgraceful fruits, bringing with it, little by little, other novelties, for the most part contrary to the express commands of our Savior in the Gospel—commands which till its entrance into the Churches were closely observed…

xiii. It drove the theologians of the West, as its defenders, since they had no ground either in Scripture or the Fathers to countenance heretical teachings, not only into misrepresentations of the Scriptures, such as are seen in none of the Fathers of the Holy Catholic Church, but also into adulterations of the sacred and pure writings of the Fathers alike of the East and West.

xiv. It seemed strange, unheard of, and blasphemous, even to those reputed Christian communions, which, before its origin, had been for other just causes for ages cut off from the Catholic fold.

xv. It has not yet been even plausibly defended out of the Scriptures, or with the least reason out of the Fathers, from the accusations brought against it, notwithstanding all the zeal and efforts of its supporters. The doctrine bears all the marks of error arising out of its nature and peculiarities. All erroneous doctrine touching the Catholic truth of the Blessed Trinity, and the origin of the divine Persons, and the subsistence of the Holy Ghost, is and is called heresy, and they who so hold are deemed heretics, according to the sentence of St. Damasus, Pope of Rome, who says: “If any one rightly holds concerning the Father and the Son, yet holds not rightly of the Holy Ghost, he is an heretic” (Cath. Conf. of Faith which Pope Damasus sent to Paulinus, Bishop of Thessalonica). Wherefore the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church, following in the steps of the holy Fathers, both Eastern and Western, proclaimed of old to our progenitors and again teaches today synodically, that the said novel doctrine of the Holy Ghost proceeding from the Father and the Son is essentially heresy, and its maintainers, whoever they be, are heretics, according to the sentence of Pope St. Damasus, and that the congregations of such are also heretical, and that all spiritual communion in worship of the orthodox sons of the Catholic Church with such is unlawful. Such is the force of the seventh Canon of the third Ecumenical Council."
orthodoxinfo.com/ecumenism/encyc_1848.aspx
Pure nonsense
 
It is true that in 2014, Pope Francis approved married clergy within Eastern Catholic Churches through CCEO canon 758 § 3. with some exceptions for the Syro-Malabar and Syro-Malankara Catholic Churches,
Apparently, you have not heard about the papal decree given on March 1, 1929: Cum data fuerit , which mandated clerical celibacy for the Ruthenian Byzantine Catholics. Many Ruthenian Catholics in the United States were dissatisfied by this mandate and formed the American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese so that they could keep their tradition of a married clergy.
Vatican II has asked for Eastern Catholics to return to their traditions and they have. Eastern Catholic priest in North America can marry and it was put into full effect in 2015.

DECREE ON THE CATHOLIC CHURCHES
OF THE EASTERN RITE
ORIENTALIUM ECCLESIARUM
SOLEMNLY PROMULGATED BY HIS HOLINESS
POPE PAUL VI
ON NOVEMBER 21, 1964

“5. History, tradition and abundant ecclesiastical institutions bear outstanding witness to the great merit owing to the Eastern Churches by the universal Church.(5) The Sacred Council, therefore, not only accords to this ecclesiastical and spiritual heritage the high regard which is its due and rightful praise, but also unhesitatingly looks on it as the heritage of the universal Church. For this reason it solemnly declares that the Churches of the East, as much as those of the West, have a full right and are in duty bound to rule themselves, each in accordance with its own established disciplines, since all these are praiseworthy by reason of their venerable antiquity, more harmonious with the character of their faithful and more suited to the promotion of the good of souls.”

“6. All members of the Eastern Rite should know and be convinced that they can and should always preserve their legitimate liturgical rite and their established way of life, and that these may not be altered except to obtain for themselves an organic improvement. All these, then, must be observed by the members of the Eastern rites themselves. Besides, they should attain to an ever greater knowledge and a more exact use of them, and, if in their regard they have fallen short owing to contingencies of times and persons, they should take steps to return to their ancestral traditions.”

“Those who, by reason of their office or apostolic ministries, are in frequent communication with the Eastern Churches or their faithful should be instructed according as their office demands in the knowledge and veneration of the rites, discipline, doctrine, history and character of the members of the Eastern rites.(6) To enhance the efficacy of their apostolate, Religious and associations of the Latin Rite working in Eastern countries or among Eastern faithful are earnestly counseled to found houses or even provinces of the Eastern rite, as far as this can be done.(7)”
 
Pure nonsense
As long as Roman Catholics view and dismiss Orthodox beliefs and traditions with contempt and lack of respect as we see here, I doubt that you will see a reunion of east and west very soon.
 
It is true that in 2014, Pope Francis approved married clergy within Eastern Catholic Churches through CCEO canon 758 § 3. with some exceptions for the Syro-Malabar and Syro-Malankara Catholic Churches,
Apparently, you have not heard about the papal decree given on March 1, 1929: Cum data fuerit , which mandated clerical celibacy for the Ruthenian Byzantine Catholics. Many Ruthenian Catholics in the United States were dissatisfied by this mandate and formed the American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese so that they could keep their tradition of a married clergy.
Unia much?
 
Vatican II has asked for Eastern Catholics to return to their traditions and they have. Eastern Catholic priest in North America can marry and it was put into full effect in 2015.
But it was not so before that as is seen from the papal decree given on March 1, 1929: Cum data fuerit. Many Byzantine Catholics felt it necessary to join in union with the Orthodox church in order to maintain their eastern traditions.
 
As long as Roman Catholics view and dismiss Orthodox beliefs and traditions with contempt and lack of respect as we see here, I doubt that you will see a reunion of east and west very soon.
Well look who is talking, all I’ve seen is a lack of respect from you and others alike. The Catholic Church, especially since Vatican II has the utmost respect for all Greek traditions. For all eastern traditions. The Eastern Orthodox have none. They want us to remove the filioque; something that the Latin Church has used since day one.
 
The Catholic Church, especially since Vatican II has the utmost respect for all Greek traditions. For all eastern traditions. The Eastern Orthodox have none. They want us to remove the filioque; something that the Latin Church has used since day one.
Not true. The filioque was not used since day one. It was introduced much later, over the objections of the Eastern branch of Christianity. The original Nicene Creed did not have the filioque and the Latin branch of the Church agreed to it then.
 
I understand the concern, but the Oriental churches of the latin Rome is always meant to be understood in the rite of apostolic truth.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top