Assyrians Elect To Enter Into Full Communion W/ Catholic Church

[Voco_proTatiano]

Read up on them - in seeking communion with the Holy See they of course abjure all that would be heresy.

What is with the “G_d” your profile lists you as a nominal Anglican…

Yes, but I accept that I have views which may be seen as heretical.
Thus Like Jews, who consider IHVH to be incomprehensible and unfathomable, I consider likewise G_d to be beyond this universe, and we can only imagine of perceive shadows of G_d as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
Not that these shadows are demiurges, but are intrinsic artefacts of G_d.
If you hold a stone in your hand, you can see and feel only its two dimensional surface. Unless it is a rock crystal, you cannot see into its bulk. You certainly cannot feel it bulk, other than it has weight.
Thus with G_d.
The ‘bulk’ of G_d lies outside this universe, only the ‘surface’ of G_d, or the shadows of G_d can be perceived or imagined in this universe.

What does become a matter of infallable teaching your book?

Faith and morals.
Matters of science and logic are clearly not matters of faith.

 

[ronyodish]

Voco proTatiano,

Read the Common Christological Declaration

You may also want to look at this document, which states that the “Catholic Church recognizes the Assyrian Church of the East as a true particular Church, built upon orthodox faith and apostolic succession”

God bless,

Rony

 

[po18guy]

Voco proTatiano, Read the Common Christological Declaration You may also want to look at this document, which states that the “Catholic Church recognizes the Assyrian Church of the East as a true particular Church, built upon orthodox faith and apostolic succession” God bless, Rony

I speak only for myself, but these developments are the most exciting in Christendom. Surely the Lord is pleased.

Christ’s peace.

 

[natsclem]

Hesychios;3254090:

The SSPX is schismatic, despite their claims to not be schismatic. If they wanted to affiliate themselves with another group separated from Rome that would be their business. Rome would continue to seek reunification with all separated Christians no matter their affiliations. This would not be reason to cease efforts towards reestablishing unity. It seems to me that it is the Orthodox, some not all, who impede these discussions and find reasons to not have them and Rome that is always trying to establish and promote dialogue. The conclusion seems to be that the Orthodox do not want unity restored. It must be that separation is more painful to Rome than to the Orthodox. Disunity is disobedience to Christ who commanded unity of us. It pains His mother and those who seek His will.

Hey, SSPX is not schismatic. Archbishop Lefebvre at best committed a schismatic act but not a formal schism. Ask the Vatican. The bishops consecrated did not appropriate for themselves any bishoprics. You are not vested with authority to declare any group as schismatic. Leave the matter to the Vatican. Ok?

 

[Aramis]

grandfather;3256718:

Hey, SSPX is not schismatic. Archbishop Lefebvre at best committed a schismatic act but not a formal schism. Ask the Vatican. The bishops consecrated did not appropriate for themselves any bishoprics. You are not vested with authority to declare any group as schismatic. Leave the matter to the Vatican. Ok?

So, these so-called bishops have not been assigning priests to parishes (they have), have not ignored the ordinaries extant in the places they have put said so-called pastors (they have), have not granted faculties to hear confessions (they have) which is in fact forbidden to suspended priests to recieve AND is solely grantable by the Ordinary of the place…

The only non-schismatic aspect I can see is that they still commemorate the pope when they say the liturgy they have been forbidden to say…

… and the Vatican has not publicly rescinded the suspensions of the priests nor the excommunications of the individuals elevated to the episcopacy by ABp Lefebvre… So 4 ex-catholics are leading a group of Catholic priests and acting as if they were these priests’ valid bishops…

Oh, and one of them, just a few months back, violated yet another canon law, which requires the local ordinary’s permission to ordain priests, as well as the permission of the primatial bishop to ordain them for a different sui iruis church… a bunch of priests were ordained by an SSPX bishop for the FSSJ without the consent of either the Latin nor Unkrainian ordinaries, nor permission of the Major Archbishop of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church.

Ignoring canon law and papal decrees… and that isn’t schism? What the bloody blazes will it take for you to realize that the only reason they haven’t been declared in formal schism is that there is still hope they will cure their collective cranio-rectal insertion and beg forgiveness from the Pope!

 

[mardukm]

THIS IS JUST ANOTHER OF THE MANY MANY MANY REASONS WHY I AM SO GRATEFUL THAT GOD LED ME INTO THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. IF I REMAINED UNDER THE OMOPHORION OF HH POPE SHENOUTE (MANY YEARS TO HH), I WOULD UNFORTUNATELY NOT HAVE THE JOY OF BEING ABLE TO CALL MANY OF THE POSTERS IN THIS THREAD MY BROTHERS IN CHRIST.

TRULY, THE SPIRITUAL FRUIT OF UNDERSTANDING IS MOST EVIDENT IN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.

BLESSINGS FOR MY COE AND ACOE BRETHREN,
MARDUK, A Coptic Orthodox in Communion with Rome.

 

[po18guy]

natsclem;3340454:

So, these so-called bishops have not been assigning priests to parishes (they have), have not ignored the ordinaries extant in the places they have put said so-called pastors (they have), have not granted faculties to hear confessions (they have) which is in fact forbidden to suspended priests to recieve AND is solely grantable by the Ordinary of the place…

Was going to say that their behavior is about as disobedient as one can be. With the Motu Proprio, their chief gripe must be that it’s no longer 1910…

The disobedience of ego leads to all schisms.

May the unity of Christ be with all of us.

 

[natsclem]

natsclem;3340454:

So, these so-called bishops have not been assigning priests to parishes (they have), have not ignored the ordinaries extant in the places they have put said so-called pastors (they have), have not granted faculties to hear confessions (they have) which is in fact forbidden to suspended priests to recieve AND is solely grantable by the Ordinary of the place…

The only non-schismatic aspect I can see is that they still commemorate the pope when they say the liturgy they have been forbidden to say…

… and the Vatican has not publicly rescinded the suspensions of the priests nor the excommunications of the individuals elevated to the episcopacy by ABp Lefebvre… So 4 ex-catholics are leading a group of Catholic priests and acting as if they were these priests’ valid bishops…

Oh, and one of them, just a few months back, violated yet another canon law, which requires the local ordinary’s permission to ordain priests, as well as the permission of the primatial bishop to ordain them for a different sui iruis church… a bunch of priests were ordained by an SSPX bishop for the FSSJ without the consent of either the Latin nor Unkrainian ordinaries, nor permission of the Major Archbishop of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church.

Ignoring canon law and papal decrees… and that isn’t schism? What the bloody blazes will it take for you to realize that the only reason they haven’t been declared in formal schism is that there is still hope they will cure their collective cranio-rectal insertion and beg forgiveness from the Pope!

you wait for the Vatican to declare them to be schismatics. Then, you call them as such with gusto. By the way, the bishops are under the superior general of the SSPX. Their main function are to confirm and ordain in Tridentine Rite. They do not have episcopal jurisdictions. Frankly, their situation/position in the Catholic Church is really problematic & difficult. On our part, let us leave everything to the better judgment of the Vatican. Let’s us pray for them that they may not widen their rift from the Mother Church. Let’s refrain from any derogatory remarks–that’s against Charity and the spirit of unity that we are trying by the power of the Holy Spirit to achieve.

 

[veritashunter]

natsclem;3340454:

So, these so-called bishops have not been assigning priests to parishes (they have), have not ignored the ordinaries extant in the places they have put said so-called pastors (they have), have not granted faculties to hear confessions (they have) which is in fact forbidden to suspended priests to recieve AND is solely grantable by the Ordinary of the place…

The only non-schismatic aspect I can see is that they still commemorate the pope when they say the liturgy they have been forbidden to say…

… and the Vatican has not publicly rescinded the suspensions of the priests nor the excommunications of the individuals elevated to the episcopacy by ABp Lefebvre… So 4 ex-catholics are leading a group of Catholic priests and acting as if they were these priests’ valid bishops…

Oh, and one of them, just a few months back, violated yet another canon law, which requires the local ordinary’s permission to ordain priests, as well as the permission of the primatial bishop to ordain them for a different sui iruis church… a bunch of priests were ordained by an SSPX bishop for the FSSJ without the consent of either the Latin nor Unkrainian ordinaries, nor permission of the Major Archbishop of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church.

Ignoring canon law and papal decrees… and that isn’t schism? What the bloody blazes will it take for you to realize that the only reason they haven’t been declared in formal schism is that there is still hope they will cure their collective cranio-rectal insertion and beg forgiveness from the Pope!

 

[GregoryPalamas]

I don’t attend an SSPX parish. I don’t even know if I know anyone who does. But from my experience as a college teacher of Theology at a Catholic University I’d much more quickly take my chances with the SSPX than I would with several priests I’ve met over the years. I say, “Amen” to the suggestion that we leave these matters in the hands of those who know, or are at least charged with knowing, what they are doing.

CDL

 

[Voco_proTatiano]

Voco proTatiano,

Read the Common Christological Declaration

You may also want to look at this document, which states that the “Catholic Church recognizes the Assyrian Church of the East as a true particular Church, built upon orthodox faith and apostolic succession”

God bless,

Rony

Dear Rony,
Thankyou for those links.
Indeed the news is wonderful, more so than that the Jews are trying to reconcile with the Samaritans.
That this magnificent Church, which took the good news as far as China and India is being allowed to come out of exhile is indeed wonderful.
That the arguments over what Nestorius thought, are now being seen as only differences of perception, as I have always asserted, is also a blessing.
Is Mar Nestorius to be forgiven?

 

[Catherine_Grant]

Note from Moderator:

Anyone wanting to continue the discussion on the SSPX’s schismatic state may do so in Traditional Catholicism.

Please return to the thread topic, which is the Assyrians who have elected to enter into full communion with the Catholic Church.

Thank you.

 

[antgaria]

Dear All,

I just wanted to chime in on the Nestorius issue. Praise be to God that in recent years, the Catholic Church, and the Assyrian, have been able to approach St. Nestorius and Theodore with a clearer understanding and a more charitable approach. Scholarly review of the surviving works of Nestorius and Theodore has shown that their Christology was misunderstood and reconcilable with the Orthodox viewpoint. I personally think the strongest indication that this would be so was the peace made between St. Cyril of Alexandria and St. John of Antioch. It is unfortunate that misunderstanding, led to strife and division between Christian brothers. Yet, I have faith that all works to the good for those who love God.

Recently it has been put forth that if anything, Nestorius’s theology was weak, but not heterodox. I have been looking into St. Diodore of Tarsus’s works on the Psalms, and one thing that seems to be noticed by commentators is the lack of Christological heterodoxy in his works. Although his style, approach, and even scholastic abilities are questioned and attacked, it seems that Nestorian heresy cannot be attributed to him through his remaining work. In terms of his other commentaries or works, one can only conjecture.

In our quest for unity and communion with the Chaldean Catholic Church, we will of course seek to keep hold of our veneration of those Saints. We believe that it is time that the anathema be lifted from their persons. The teachings that were attributed to them are heresy and the CotE likewise anathemizes anyone who holds to the “nestorian heresy,” but we do not see that heresy as being held by the venerable Greek doctors.

One thing needs to be pointed out. This is my approach in going forward towards unity. Now if {as there is a chance for this, I’m not going to guess if it is a large probability or miniscule} the veneration of our Greek Doctors is not acceptable to the Catholic church, then Bishop Mar Bawai and his priests must consider things and pray, BUT for us, let us keep in mind, that Nestorius himself said that for the sake of unity of the Church, so long as it is in Orthodox belief, forget about Nestorius.

“The goal of my earnest wish, then, is that God may be blessed on earth as in heaven. But as for Nestorius, let him be anathema… and would to God that all men by anathemizing me might attain to a reconciliation with God.”

All encouragement and prayers for our diocese and peace and unity are very much appreciated and needed. God bless you all abundantly in turn.

Pace e bene,
Anthony

 

[ronyodish]

Is Mar Nestorius to be forgiven?

Voco proTatiano,

I defer to Anthony’s post.

God bless,

Rony

 

[Voco_proTatiano]

Voco proTatiano,

I defer to Anthony’s post.

God bless,

Rony

Dear Rony,
If I read Anthony correctly, then Nestorius himself, offered his head that the schism might be healed, and his sacrifice was refused.
Surely now, on the basis of this offer of a sacrifice of contrition, failure to forgive is scurrilous.

 

[ronyodish]

Dear Rony,
If I read Anthony correctly, then Nestorius himself, offered his head that the schism might be healed, and his sacrifice was refused.
Surely now, on the basis of this offer of a sacrifice of contrition, failure to forgive is scurrilous.

That’s an interesting way to put it

I’m all for forgiveness.

God bless,

Rony

 

[veritashunter]

To all regarding Nestorius:

Since we (living in this time) cannot know what was in the heart of Nestorius at the time of his death we can neither condemn nor commute his actions (realistically speaking). They were viewed as heretical and schismatic at that time by those faithful to the Church living through the effects of and during the time of such controversies.

But our all knowing God does know what was in his heart at the moment of his passing. If he truly repented before his death God will do the rest. And if he is to be forgiven it will be as with all of us, namely, by the grace of God. So, let us all live in the hope of His awesome and divine mercy not only for Nestorius, but for most certainly for ourselves.

Yours in Christ,

Veritashunter

 

[natsclem]

A simple question: why should every Independent church like ACOE join in full communion with Catholic Church? If not, does it matter? Yes, why?
For a brief history of ACOE visit: assyrianchurch.com.au/historyintro.htm

To be united with the Catholic Church? Of course. In the first place the canon law of ACoE recognizes the primacy of Peter among the apostles which means that St. Peter has authority over St Thomas, the apostle. This means that the Bishop of Rome, the Pope, has primacy over Patriarch Mar Dinkha. Therefore, by their own canon law, they must be subject to the authority of Pope Benedict XVI. Well, if the patriarch values his pride more than the dictate of the canon law of his own church, submission to the pope is a humbling experience. But, if he values submission to the will of Christ more than his pride, then that’s a liberating experience and that’s salvific.

 

[mardukm]

To be united with the Catholic Church? Of course. In the first place the canon law of ACoE recognizes the primacy of Peter among the apostles which means that St. Peter has authority over St Thomas, the apostle. This means that the Bishop of Rome, the Pope, has primacy over Patriarch Mar Dinkha. Therefore, by their own canon law, they must be subject to the authority of Pope Benedict XVI. Well, if the patriarch values his pride more than the dictate of the canon law of his own church, submission to the pope is a humbling experience. But, if he values submission to the will of Christ more than his pride, then that’s a liberating experience and that’s salvific.

This is very interesting. The Syrian Orthodox Church (Oriental, not Eastern) also considers it a canon of the Faith to believe that St. Peter had the primacy among the Apostles, and that this primacy was not just mere honor (the italicized portion which I’ve read some SOC clergy refer to as an innovation).

I am wondering if this appreciation for the primacy of St. Peter is characteristic of all the apostolic Churches of Syrian stock.

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[Hesychios]

Of course. In the first place the canon law of ACoE recognizes the primacy of Peter among the apostles which means that St. Peter has authority over St Thomas, the apostle.

No. it doesn’t, actually.

You are reading back into history your modern understanding of what primacy means. That is revisionism.

To modern Roman Catholics, there is only one primate and he is the boss. The history of your own church speaks against you, for the bishop of Rome had little authority outside of his own metropolitan area, meaning central Italy, until long after the ACofE found itself out of communion with him.

Even in large areas of the west, Spain and Gaul for example, the opinion of the bishop of Rome was ignored on important matters routinely. The local synods acted on their own.

This did not begin to change significantly until around the eight century. The ACofE was long gone, so they have no history of the bishop of Rome as a boss.

This means that the Bishop of Rome, the Pope, has primacy over Patriarch Mar Dinkha. Therefore, by their own canon law, they must be subject to the authority of Pope Benedict XVI.

Therefore, by the flaws of you own logic, you are misrepresenting the role of the bishop of Rome to assyrian73.

Michael