Calling All Orthodox!

[fhansen]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Original_sin

Reading further, it says that the RC denies this, but I’ve heard both from various sources and Catholics.

The guilt of OS is conceived thusly, from para 404 of the CCC:

** “It is a sin which will be transmitted by propagation to all mankind, that is, by the transmission of a human nature deprived of original holiness and justice. And that is why original sin is called “sin” only in an analogical sense: it is a sin “contracted” and not “committed” - a state and not an act.”**

It’s not considered to be a personal fault but rather a deprivation of original justice. Another way of saying this is that man is born in an unjust state, separated from communion with God, a communion which is the rightful order of things for man.

 

[GaryTaylor]

Perhaps you’ve just pointed out another difference about our views of the intermediate state. We believe that ALL souls will be there till Last Day. You believe that SOME souls will be there for various lengths of time (with various things, prayer/indulgences/etc) will shorten time in such a state and that people can transfer those from one to another. It seems that Catholics view the intermediate state as something that is purely horrid. Orthodox do not.

How do you know all souls will be there till the last day, where is “there”? How do you know who isn’t there? So if your not a Saint where is “there”?

 

[MommaduckofMany]

The guilt of OS is conceived thusly, from para 404 of the CCC:

** “It is a sin which will be transmitted by propagation to all mankind, that is, by the transmission of a human nature deprived of original holiness and justice. And that is why original sin is called “sin” only in an analogical sense: it is a sin “contracted” and not “committed” - a state and not an act.”**

It’s not considered to be a personal fault but rather a deprivation of original justice. Another way of saying this is that man is born in an unjust state, separated from communion with God, a communion which is the rightful order of things for man.

And we do not believe it’s a state, but an act. A child has the ability to sin, but they do not sin until THEY sin.

 

[MommaduckofMany]

How do you know all souls will be there till the last day, where is “there”? How do you know who isn’t there? So if your not a Saint where is “there”?

How do you know that only SOME will be in an intermediate state? How do you know that it’s subject to time and can be shortened by prayers and indulgences?

 

[GaryTaylor]

And we do not believe it’s a state, but an act. A child has the ability to sin, but they do not sin until THEY sin.

Then why baptize infants according to the Creed for the remission of sins?

 

[GaryTaylor]

How do you know that only SOME will be in an intermediate state? How do you know that it’s subject to time and can be shortened by prayers and indulgences?

When you tell me where “there” is, which I assume is the purgatory you don’t believe in and think is horrible, then I shall talk about redemptive suffering and intercession.

 

[fhansen]

And we do not believe it’s a state, but an act. A child has the ability to sin, but they do not sin until THEY sin.

We believe OS was an act, of course, and also that personal sins are acts and that Adam’s descendants didn’t commit his sin. But it’s also true that the state of Adam was different from our state now in that he “walked” with God, knowing Him in a more immediate manner than we do now, as well as not yet having received the consequence of mortality. Why do you think sin is so universal now, since God obviously didn’t create us to sin?

 

[MommaduckofMany]

Again, if you really believe that there is NO difference, then please feel free to change your wording and rejoin with the rest of the Churches.

 

[GaryTaylor]

Again, if you really believe that there is NO difference, then please feel free to change your wording and rejoin with the rest of the Churches.

This Church?

“Our creation and God’s Incarnation most intimately connected. As by the Word man was called from non-existence into being, and further received the grace of a divine life, so by the one fault which forfeited that life they again incurred corruption and untold sin and misery filled the world.”

St Athanasius

newadvent.org/fathers/2802.htm

 

[fhansen]

Again, if you really believe that there is NO difference, then please feel free to change your wording and rejoin with the rest of the Churches.

Well, you didn’t answer the question. And maybe that’s the point, which wording should I agree with; Orthodox commentators don’t always use the same wording for or agree on the concept of OS or AS.

 

[Jon_S_1]

I don’t see it as clarity. I see it as Rome speculating and adding innovation to something that is a mystery.

Key word being speculation. Why a problem with speculation? By definition the speculation is just an educated guess.

 

[SteveVH]

Again, if you really believe that there is NO difference, then please feel free to change your wording and rejoin with the rest of the Churches.

Why would we do that? The Orthodox cannot even agree among themselves. The Church was given not only the authority but the obligation to define dogma. The fact that the EO have chosen basically to refrain from any definitive wording does not invalidate the teaching of the Catholic Church.

 

[Jon_S_1]

And we do not believe it’s a state, but an act. A child has the ability to sin, but they do not sin until THEY sin.

Isn’t that ability. Or better propensity to sin original sin. M

Adam and Eve could have lived for em their whole lives without sinning.

We are incapable of that by our nature. So there is something fundamental that causes that. That is what we call original sin.

 

[Jon_S_1]

Why would we do that? The Orthodox cannot even agree among themselves. The Church was given not only the authority but the obligation to define dogma. The fact that the EO have chosen basically to refrain from any definitive wording does not invalidate the teaching of the Catholic Church.

This is a very crucial and important point !

In Matt 18, Christ tells us of a church we can go to to settle disputes. What greater dispute than an issue of heresy or dogma and doctrine?

Yet it seems by what I am reading here, the orthodox have chosen not to or are unable to dogmatically declare anything outside of a council that they do not hold.

So how is that in line with Matt 18. The Catholic Church has a clear method of doing exactly this, so is there anything the Orthodox do?

Or do they just have a voice from the church’s past and not a living voice today ?

 

[dzheremi]

Key word being speculation. Why a problem with speculation? By definition the speculation is just an educated guess.

Our father among the Romans, St. Arsenius, tells us “I have often regretted speaking; I have never regretted keeping silent.”

Speculation on the part of Latin professional philosopher-logician-theologians has led to rupture in the Church due to the indulgence of the intellect in its prodding into the mysteries of God. From speculation every heresy has sprung, and nobody (Catholic, Orthodox, or whatever) is even 1/10th as smart as they think they are. True wisdom comes in humility and submission before the Lord who declares that His thoughts and His ways are not ours, and enlightens us instead by the mysteries of the Holy Church. It has nothing at all to do with education. Many simple men and women are wise in ways that the educated among us cannot even imagine, and teach more through dedication along their path than any educated guesser will ever stumble upon by accident through his or her systematic codification of speculation. What is it that Thomas Aquinas said at the end of a lifetime of philosophizing God? “All that I have written is but straw compared to that which has been revealed to me” (or some such)? He very well may have been on to something there, but not so much before.

In the conclusion of the Coptic liturgy of St. Basil, we pray that the Lord observe our metania, a word from Greek that is often translated as ‘repentance’ (and can be used in other contexts in Coptic for ‘prostration’; I’m not sure if the same is true in Greek or not), but is more perhaps more accurately rendered as ‘transformational renewal/change of the mind’ (there is no exact translation of this from the Greek either into Coptic or English, so we keep it the original in both languages). This is what we aim for as Orthodox Christians – not that we might speculate and discover some new thing about God with our big fancy brains (which are faulty), but that they (like the rest of us) may be transformed and changed and blessed by the Lord in His new creation, the “new man” that we put on in baptism, and every time we receive of Him at the summit of the liturgy by entering into His death and resurrection and partaking of His eternal life-giving flesh and blood.

 

[Jon_S_1]

Our father among the Romans, St. Arsenius, tells us “I have often regretted speaking; I have never regretted keeping silent.”

Speculation on the part of Latin professional philosopher-logician-theologians has led to rupture in the Church due to the indulgence of the intellect in its prodding into the mysteries of God. From speculation every heresy has sprung, and nobody (Catholic, Orthodox, or whatever) is even 1/10th as smart as they think they are. True wisdom comes in humility and submission before the Lord who declares that His thoughts and His ways are not ours, and enlightens us instead by the mysteries of the Holy Church. It has nothing at all to do with education. Many simple men and women are wise in ways that the educated among us cannot even imagine, and teach more through dedication along their path than any educated guesser will ever stumble upon by accident through his or her systematic codification of speculation. What is it that Thomas Aquinas said at the end of a lifetime of philosophizing God? “All that I have written is but straw compared to that which has been revealed to me” (or some such)? He very well may have been on to something there, but not so much before.

In the conclusion of the Coptic liturgy of St. Basil, we pray that the Lord observe our metania, a word from Greek that is often translated as ‘repentance’ (and can be used in other contexts in Coptic for ‘prostration’; I’m not sure if the same is true in Greek or not), but is more perhaps more accurately rendered as ‘transformational renewal/change of the mind’ (there is no exact translation of this from the Greek either into Coptic or English, so we keep it the original in both languages). This is what we aim for as Orthodox Christians – not that we might speculate and discover some new thing about God with our big fancy brains (which are faulty), but that they (like the rest of us) may be transformed and changed and blessed by the Lord in His new creation, the “new man” that we put on in baptism, and every time we receive of Him at the summit of the liturgy by entering into His death and resurrection and partaking of His eternal life-giving flesh and blood.

Speculation only creates division and heresy when it is dogmatically declared as certainty.

Ex:

Baptist says dogmatically infant baptism is worthless based on his speculation of reading the Bible.

But dogmatically holding that there is a transition from this life to the next and then speculating on what it might look like is not a problem. It’s not heresy and it’s not dividing.

 

[SteveVH]

Our father among the Romans, St. Arsenius, tells us “I have often regretted speaking; I have never regretted keeping silent.”

Speculation on the part of Latin professional philosopher-logician-theologians has led to rupture in the Church due to the indulgence of the intellect in its prodding into the mysteries of God. From speculation every heresy has sprung, and nobody (Catholic, Orthodox, or whatever) is even 1/10th as smart as they think they are. True wisdom comes in humility and submission before the Lord who declares that His thoughts and His ways are not ours, and enlightens us instead by the mysteries of the Holy Church. It has nothing at all to do with education. Many simple men and women are wise in ways that the educated among us cannot even imagine, and teach more through dedication along their path than any educated guesser will ever stumble upon by accident through his or her systematic codification of speculation. What is it that Thomas Aquinas said at the end of a lifetime of philosophizing God? “All that I have written is but straw compared to that which has been revealed to me” (or some such)? He very well may have been on to something there, but not so much before.

In the conclusion of the Coptic liturgy of St. Basil, we pray that the Lord observe our metania, a word from Greek that is often translated as ‘repentance’ (and can be used in other contexts in Coptic for ‘prostration’; I’m not sure if the same is true in Greek or not), but is more perhaps more accurately rendered as ‘transformational renewal/change of the mind’ (there is no exact translation of this from the Greek either into Coptic or English, so we keep it the original in both languages). This is what we aim for as Orthodox Christians – not that we might speculate and discover some new thing about God with our big fancy brains (which are faulty), but that they (like the rest of us) may be transformed and changed and blessed by the Lord in His new creation, the “new man” that we put on in baptism, and every time we receive of Him at the summit of the liturgy by entering into His death and resurrection and partaking of His eternal life-giving flesh and blood.

The Catholic Church does not depend on “big fancy brains”. It depends upon the Holy Spirit who Christ promised would lead us into all truth. The Church allows "big fancy brains" to speculate but this speculation does not find its way into Catholic doctrine and no one is bound to believe it.

 

[dzheremi]

The Catholic Church does not depend on “big fancy brains”. It depends upon the Holy Spirit who Christ promised would lead us into all truth. The Church allows "big fancy brains" to speculate but this speculation does not find its way into Catholic doctrine and no one is bound to believe it.

Out of respect for where I’m posting and the sincerely-held beliefs of the Catholic posters, I will only say that I disagree with both you and the previous poster. From an Orthodox perspective, such speculation based on the elevation of the human intellect has absolutely found its way into the Roman Catholic Church and is at the root of the doctrinal differences we observe between us and the RCC.

 

[SteveVH]

Out of respect for where I’m posting and the sincerely-held beliefs of the Catholic posters, I will only say that I disagree with both you and the previous poster. From an Orthodox perspective, such speculation based on the elevation of the human intellect has absolutely found its way into the Roman Catholic Church and is at the root of the doctrinal differences we observe between us and the RCC.

Disagree all you want. We’re use to it. We get the same thing from Protestants. Your disagreement, however, has no bearing on truth. The Church is a living institution. One would expect, over the centuries, that we might come to a better understanding of the Apostolic faith as the Church matures. Explaining and defining that faith is not speculation and is not based upon the “elevation of the human intellect”. It is based upon the exercise of the authority given to the Church by Christ himself, confidence in His promises, and the faith given to us by the Apostles.

 

[josie_L]

An individual pope was recognized as having not been legitimately excommunicated. Rome remains off the dyptychs of the various Orthodox Churches. Two different issues.

So then it was not merely symbolic?