Catholic and Orthodox: Best of both worlds

  • Thread starter Thread starter DJLake
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
JMJ_coder said:
Really?! So the Sacrament of Reconciliation is pointless? It must be if all of our sins have already been forgiven by our baptism. So if a baptized man becomes a mass murderer and a heretic and never repents, he’ll still go to heaven because those post-baptismal sins were covered by his baptism? Surely ye jest.
Click to expand...
Repentance is still required. We’re not speaking in absolutes here. There has never been a church teaching that if you get baptized you are automatically saved. Nor that you will automatically be saved through confession, or any of the Holy Mysteries. They all work together.
 
JMJ_coder said:
So if there is no concept of infallibility in the Eastern Orthodox Church, how do you know that any Ecumenical Council is correct? How do you know that the Council of Nicea is true and that the Arians weren’t actually correct (as just one example)?
Click to expand...
The same way that you know the council of Nicaea is true, faith.
 
Mickey said:
What is relevant is: the Holy Orthodox Church is not forced to believe what we consider a non-patristic doctrine. 🤷
Click to expand...
What about the remission of sin/Baptism and we confess? And my point earlier that Fr John is wrong about Augustine. I have no idea of the rest of his thinking, but ancestral and original sin also do-not appear in patristic writing in the first couple centuries?
 
Mickey said:
What is relevant is: the Holy Orthodox Church is not forced to believe what we consider a non-patristic doctrine. 🤷
Click to expand...
According to your Orthodox mind, what is the patristic age? When does it start and when does it end. And more importantly, why is it so definitive? And what is so lacking in our own age that was abundant in that age?
 
jimmy said:
The same way that you know the council of Nicaea is true, faith.
Click to expand...
The Catholic Church professes the infallibility of doctrinal teachings of Ecumenical Councils. The Orthodox Church, according to the Orthodox posters here, does not.
 
ConstantineTG said:
Anyone who knows revelation and lives it can discern the truth.
Click to expand...
Nine_Two said:
Repentance is still required. We’re not speaking in absolutes here. There has never been a church teaching that if you get baptized you are automatically saved. Nor that you will automatically be saved through confession, or any of the Holy Mysteries. They all work together.
Click to expand...
The Orthodox posters here are sounding more and more like liberal Protestants by the post. We have Sola Scriptura and Once Saved Always Saved expressed here so far (that I’ve noticed).
 
JMJ_coder said:
The Catholic Church professes the infallibility of doctrinal teachings of Ecumenical Councils. The Orthodox Church, according to the Orthodox posters here, does not.
Click to expand...
Infallibility give a person a certainty of truth. If a guarantee on a box says it is the best, does that make it so? You still must have faith that the CC has remain true. What is the difference between the Orthodox saying we believe Nicaea was true, and the Catholics saying we believe Nicaea was true? Both believe it was true.
 
JMJ_coder said:
The Orthodox posters here are sounding more and more like liberal Protestants by the post. We have Sola Scriptura and Once Saved Always Saved expressed here so far (that I’ve noticed).
Click to expand...
Why, doesn’t the Catholic Church teach that revelation ended with the Apostles?
 
dvdjs said:
Origin is. And the CC is in agreement. But if you think the Creed should say originate, then translate it that way.
Click to expand...
Well perhaps the Greek was clear to those who spoke it in 325AD. Isn’t the biggest issue with the Filioque is that “procedit” has a different meaning in the Latin context? Something got lost in translation.
 
Mickey said:
It is quite humorous that being devoid of a proper response, you resort to accusations of Protestantism. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Just calling a spade a spade. If it sounds like a duck and quacks like a duck…

We have one poster claiming that every individual can come to a proper understanding of truth with just Revelation and themselves (and presumably the Holy Spirit). Aside from the presumed addition of Tradition, how is this really different than the Protestant who claims that Scripture and the Holy Spirit guiding the individual is enough for anyone to gain a proper understanding of truth?

We have another poster claiming that Baptism forgives all sins that a person will ever commit. When called on it to explain the obvious case of someone who becomes a notorious sinner after their baptism there is wriggling going on. I don’t see an essential difference between this response and the OSAS Protestant who claims that once a person is saved by Baptism and/or accepting Jesus as their personal Lord and Savior that they cannot lose that salvation. When they are pressed with the notorious sinner question, they usually fall back on the they obviously weren’t saved to begin with response - and that seems to be where this poster was learing into.

I will say that I don’t actually think these posters are presenting what Orthodoxy actually teaches (not that I’ve ever heard from the Orthodox laity and clergy that I’ve met in real life). I would request they provide some sort of evidence (e.g., cite a Synod of Orthodox Bishops) to show that this is what Orthodoxy really teaches.
 
JMJ_coder said:
Just calling a spade a spade. If it sounds like a duck and quacks like a duck…

We have one poster claiming that every individual can come to a proper understanding of truth with just Revelation and themselves (and presumably the Holy Spirit). Aside from the presumed addition of Tradition, how is this really different than the Protestant who claims that Scripture and the Holy Spirit guiding the individual is enough for anyone to gain a proper understanding of truth?

We have another poster claiming that Baptism forgives all sins that a person will ever commit. When called on it to explain the obvious case of someone who becomes a notorious sinner after their baptism there is wriggling going on. I don’t see an essential difference between this response and the OSAS Protestant who claims that once a person is saved by Baptism and/or accepting Jesus as their personal Lord and Savior that they cannot lose that salvation. When they are pressed with the notorious sinner question, they usually fall back on the they obviously weren’t saved to begin with response - and that seems to be where this poster was learing into.

I will say that I don’t actually think these posters are presenting what Orthodoxy actually teaches (not that I’ve ever heard from the Orthodox laity and clergy that I’ve met in real life). I would request they provide some sort of evidence (e.g., cite a Synod of Orthodox Bishops) to show that this is what Orthodoxy really teaches.
Click to expand...
And Orthodox call Catholics protestants too.
 
ConstantineTG said:
Well perhaps the Greek was clear to those who spoke it in 325AD. Isn’t the biggest issue with the Filioque is that “procedit” has a different meaning in the Latin context? Something got lost in translation.
Click to expand...
And the Greek is clear even now.
 
ConstantineTG said:
Why, doesn’t the Catholic Church teach that revelation ended with the Apostles?
Click to expand...
Yes, public revelation ended with the death of the last Apostle, Saint John. But, there was never a guarantee to laity to understand Revelation by themselves.

Remember that Saint Peter told us that there are many things that are in Scripture that are difficult to understand and condemns private interpretation (cf. 2 Pt 1:20-21;3:16). And our faith comes by hearing, as Saint Paul tells us (cf. Rom 10:17). But, who should we listen to? Jesus Christ tells us to listen to the Apostles and their successors the Bishops (cf. Lk 10:16) and Saint Paul tells us that we should listen to the Church that is the pillar and foundation of truth (cf. 1 Tim 3:15). I guess we can now ask ourselves which Church is it that makes such a bold claim that I am the pillar and foundation of truth, listen to me and you have an infallible guarantee to hear the truth…
 
Revelation of the full deposit of Christ ended at the Council of Nicea when Christ was affirmed True God and True Man, and this profession we profess as Catholic/Orthodox in recitation of the Nicene Creed.

Subsequently the aposotlic, universal Church proclaimed the fullness of the deposit of faith in Jesus Christ, just as she compiled and affirmed the books of Sacred Scripture.
 
JMJ_coder said:
Just calling a spade a spade. If it sounds like a duck and quacks like a duck…
We have another poster claiming that Baptism forgives all sins that a person will ever commit.
Click to expand...
And the poster who made that claim isn’t Orthodox; he’s Catholic.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top