Catholic and Orthodox: Best of both worlds

  • Thread starter Thread starter DJLake
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Peter_J said:
The internet certainly makes it seem that way. Whether it is actually true, I can’t really say with certainty.
Click to expand...
Okay, let me rephrase that. Most ECs who are aware of the CCEO abhor it. The great majority of ECs are oblivious to it.
 
Peter_J said:
The internet certainly makes it seem that way. Whether it is actually true, I can’t really say with certainty.
Click to expand...
Interestingly, it’s pretty much those who label themselves as “Orthodox in Communion with Rome” who “abhor” it. 😉
 
ConstantineTG said:
At the end of it, one of us has to be right. It can’t be that both of us are right while both of us disagree.
Click to expand...
This is not logically correct. First, there is always the possibility that both are wrong. More importantly, there is the possibility that the premises of disagreement are mistaken, in a way that obscures the fact that on the fundamental truth there is no contradiction. Situations akin to this have happened many times in the history of science.
 
dvdjs said:
This is not logically correct. First, there is always the possibility that both are wrong.
Click to expand...
True, although for purposes of this thread I think we’re all assuming that isn’t the case.
 
Peter_J said:
True, although for purposes of this thread I think we’re all assuming that isn’t the case.
Click to expand...
I am not so sure. I think think that there is a line of thought that says if I prove A is false, then it follows that B must be right. But I would agree that my latter point is more pertinent.
 
dvdjs said:
I am not so sure. I think think that there is a line of thought that says if I prove A is false, then it follows that B must be right. But I would agree that my latter point is more pertinent.
Click to expand...
Well, if there aren’t other p.o.v. represented on the thread (in the form of e.g. Anglican or Lutheran posters) then the thread tends to go on the assumption that only Catholicism and Orthodoxy are worth considering. (Although I admit that may be circular phenomenon: *if *the thread goes on the assumption that only Catholicism and Orthodoxy are worth considering, *then *there probably won’t be other p.o.v. represented on the thread.)
 
Peter_J said:
Well, if there aren’t other p.o.v. represented on the thread (in the form of e.g. Anglican or Lutheran posters) then the thread tends to go on the assumption that only Catholicism and Orthodoxy are worth considering. (Although I admit that may be circular phenomenon: *if *the thread goes on the assumption that only Catholicism and Orthodoxy are worth considering, *then *there probably won’t be other p.o.v. represented on the thread.)
Click to expand...
Here’s why I think there is an ‘assumption’ that only Catholicism & Orthodoxy are worth considering:

Lutheran was founded by a man, Catholic monk Martin Luther; not by the God-Man, Jesus Christ

Anglican was founded by a King, Catholic King Henry the 8th; not by the KING of Kings, Jesus Christ

Only Orthodoxy & Catholicism were actually and historically verifiably, founded by the God-Man & KING of Kings our Lord Jesus Christ and; therefore, in my ignorant opinion, the only 2 Christian Churches worth considering.

The hard part for many who investigate is determining 1,000 yrs after Orthodoxy & Catholicism split is which stayed 100% true to the teachings of Jesus Christ & which drifted away?
 
ComeHome2Rome said:
Here’s why I think there is an ‘assumption’ that only Catholicism & Orthodoxy are worth considering:

Lutheran was founded by a man, Catholic monk Martin Luther; not by the God-Man, Jesus Christ

Anglican was founded by a King, Catholic King Henry the 8th; not by the KING of Kings, Jesus Christ
Click to expand...
Yes. And Eastern Orthodoxy was founded by a man, Mark of Ephesus, not the God-Man, Jesus Christ.

👍
 
ComeHome2Rome said:
…

Only Orthodoxy & Catholicism were actually and historically verifiably, founded by the God-Man & KING of Kings our Lord Jesus Christ and; therefore, …
Click to expand...
This idea is highly debatable. There are other churches that can validly make this claim,. And many more who claim that they practice the Apostolic faith that was lost by other groups.
The hard part for many who investigate is determining 1,000 yrs after Orthodoxy & Catholicism split is which stayed 100% true to the teachings of Jesus Christ & which drifted away?
Click to expand...
Especially if the reduction to these two is not validated.
 
ConstantineTG said:
I think you missed my point. The CCEO was written by the Roman Curia, you know, the governing arm of the Pope of Rome. It is not a bunch of canons written by the Eastern Churches themselves. So to say that these canons are “Eastern” is a gross misrepresentation by any stretch of the imagination. In fact, most ECs abhor the CCEO, but they adhere to it to play nice with the Pope until a proper solution can be worked out. Case in point, the issue about Rome having a say in the appointment of Bishops in Eastern Churches, up to and including Major Archbishops.
Click to expand...
Think about what you just said. Is anybody holding a gun to anybody’s head? No. Looking at this possitively, John 17:20-23

Those who refuse to be led by Peter, are those who Satan has successfully sifted away. Luke 22:31-32 When Jesus explains to Peter in front of all the apostles who were in an argument over who is greatest among THEM, that Satan demans to sift “you”, as in all of you, that first time “you” is “plural”. The 2nd time Jesus mentions “you” it’s singular, meaning Jesus prays especially for Peter that he will lead and strengthen his brothers through the sifting. Does Satan ever stop sifting? No. Which means Peter is always going to be necessary in the Church. And for Peter to do what Jesus commands, those Peter is to lead, which is everyone in Our Lord’s Church, must do their part also and obey Jesus, by being willing to be led by Peter.

Othewrwise we see what happens. Division, which is condemned, occurs. ITMT, those united to Peter are doing as Our Lord commanded
 
ComeHome2Rome said:
Name those other churches that can validly make the claim that they were founded by Jesus Christ.
Click to expand...
Since you talk of two churches, you must also include all of the non-Chalcedonian Orthodox churches (EOs and OOs are certainly not one church), and the Assyrian Church of the East.
 
dvdjs said:
This is not logically correct. First, there is always the possibility that both are wrong. More importantly, there is the possibility that the premises of disagreement are mistaken, in a way that obscures the fact that on the fundamental truth there is no contradiction. Situations akin to this have happened many times in the history of science.
Click to expand...
I know about the possibility that both are wrong, but do you really want to follow a faith that you think has the possibility of being wrong? I mean, if we’re both wrong, then we’re both simply heretics. Isn’t that a sad thought?
 
steve_b said:
Think about what you just said. Is anybody holding a gun to anybody’s head? No. Looking at this possitively, John 17:20-23

Those who refuse to be led by Peter, are those who Satan has successfully sifted away. Luke 22:31-32 When Jesus explains to Peter in front of all the apostles who were in an argument over who is greatest among THEM, that Satan demans to sift “you”, as in all of you, that first time “you” is “plural”. The 2nd time Jesus mentions “you” it’s singular, meaning Jesus prays especially for Peter that he will lead and strengthen his brothers through the sifting. Does Satan ever stop sifting? No. Which means Peter is always going to be necessary in the Church. And for Peter to do what Jesus commands, those Peter is to lead, which is everyone in Our Lord’s Church, must do their part also and obey Jesus, by being willing to be led by Peter.

Othewrwise we see what happens. Division, which is condemned, occurs. ITMT, those united to Peter are doing as Our Lord commanded
Click to expand...
This is your own personal interpretation of scripture that was never taught by any of the Church Fathers.
 
ConstantineTG said:
I know about the possibility that both are wrong, but do you really want to follow a faith that you think has the possibility of being wrong? I mean, if we’re both wrong, then we’re both simply heretics. Isn’t that a sad thought?
Click to expand...
Of course … just like it’s a sad thought for one person to be a heretic.

To paraphase More, it’s not a happy word, it’s not a happy thing.
 
dvdjs said:
Since you talk of two churches, you must also include all of the non-Chalcedonian Orthodox churches (EOs and OOs are certainly not one church), and the Assyrian Church of the East.
Click to expand...
EO & OO are both Orthodox - EO are in union with the Ecumenical Patriarch & OO are not. There are also Coptic Catholics are they are in union with Rome. Assyrian Church is Orthodox not un union with the Ecumenical Patriarch, but I’ve also heard that some Assyrian Churches are in union with Rome.

We’re still left with Orthodox & Catholic.
 
ConstantineTG said:
This is your own personal interpretation of scripture that was never taught by any of the Church Fathers.
Click to expand...
True that interpretation is not found in the Fathers, but to be fair, I think it’s not just his interpretation of Scripture, but the current Catholic interpretation that he’s referring to.
 
ComeHome2Rome said:
EO & OO are both Orthodox - EO are in union with the Ecumenical Patriarch & OO are not. There are also Coptic Catholics are they are in union with Rome. Assyrian Church is Orthodox not un union with the Ecumenical Patriarch, but I’ve also heard that some Assyrian Churches are in union with Rome.

We’re still left with Orthodox & Catholic.
Click to expand...
Yes, there is little that divides the EO and OO today. Though we haven’t achieved full communion, we’re closer to one another than any of the other Churches with each other. Some theologians believe union can be achieved within our lifetimes.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top