Do not deny sincerity of worship.

  • Thread starter Thread starter JohnJFarren
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
StrawberryJam said:
Oh, my apologies to Agiosoheneos and to all of you for that oversight on my part.

I can see why the eastern orthodox could feel this way considering what happened at Hagia Sofia and in other times in history. They suffered greatly, and Rome was not very helpful at all in their dire distress…
Click to expand...
It has nothing to do with sentiments against Jews or Muslims. As a matter of fact, I’m an American convert with no connections with any of the major ethnic groups. I just think this is the properly orthodox understanding of worship.
 
PaulDupre said:
What what my EO friends have told me of their faith, Agiostheos does not hold “orthodox” EO beliefs in this case.
Click to expand...
Given that the EOC usually has a greater emphasis both on Trinitarianism and Supersessionism than the RCC, I find this hard to believe.
 
StrawberryJam said:
They don’t have a pope to answer to, so he just may be of a different EO jurisdiction. I am assuming. Unless, they now do have a pope, and a final authority on all matters on each topic, which I don’t believe they have.
Click to expand...
Well, both the EO and the OO refer to their Patriarchs of Alexandria as Pope.

But no, neither communion has a supreme bishop to be generally answered to.

The EO have the Ecumenical Patriarch, who has certain universal prerogatives, but nowhere near the point of papal supremacy.

The OO do not have even the equivalent of this, and at best the Coptic Pope is regarded as first among equals.
 
Nine_Two said:
Although his religion also says he’s looking into the OO, and I have no idea if they have an official possition, or what it might be, although I think they’re probably the same as the EO.
Click to expand...
The OO have an even thinner dogmatic tradition than the EO. They weren’t given anywhere near as much room to develop as the Byzantines, as they almost all fell to the Arab invasions at the very beginning.
 
StrawberryJam said:
Rome should be ashamed moreso, than the repugnant millitant muslims that ransacked Hagia Sofia IMHO that will be blasted here of course.

The muslims were UNABLE to paint over the icons, and beautiful religious art even though they tried and tried for YEARS.

Could that be why they finally turned it into a museum covering the icons over with their artifacts, and well basically UNABLE to cover over the icons that kept showing up no matter how hard they tried to layer over layer of paints,???

They stole it, murdered eastern orhtodox priests in cold blood, and ones whith the Eucharist in their very hands,

It makes me ill how they had such little respect for other’s deeply held beliefs, ransacked the most beautiful church in the entire world, and killed these men for NO REASON…

Sorry, it just gets me upset…

and Rome knew they were in trouble and did NOTHING to help!!! Some “True Church” that is!!!:mad:
Click to expand...
I’m guessing you don’t know much about the Fourth Crusade.
 
JohnJFarren said:
JMJ / MMM 091104 Wednesday
Brother and Sisters in Jesus Christ –
Let us not deny the sincerity of a Muslim’s worship … anymore than we must not deny the sincerity of a Jew’s worship.

In a small chapel that I frequently visit, where the Holy Eucharist is permanently kept, often when I pray there, a Muslim sometimes positions himself on the floor at the rear, on a small prayer rug, and silently prays.

In my heart, as he prays, I bless him and his prayer. And I hope he thinks of blessing me and my prayer also.

I do not say that Islam has the fulness of God’s Revelation as I am privileged to have. I recognize that the Roman Catholic Church is the one Church founded by Jesus Christ … and only in that Church is the Fulness that Christ gave to his Church.

But I dare not deny or question the sincerity of this Muslim’s worship of God … this Muslim who claims to be a descendant of Abraham … as do Jews also.

I close my posting with these words from CCC 841 … with no apology to those Catholics who have a blind spot and a weak heart in reference to Vatican II. CCC 841: “The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge of the last day.”
A special Blessing upon us all! John (JohnJFarren)
Click to expand...
I do not think that worshiping God is enough to have salvation. You can honestly and sincerely worship the God of Abraham, but if you deny that Jesus Christ was his son and that he died on the cross for the world, I do not see how that worship turns into salvation. How does the worship turn into salvation? What about water baptism? What about observing communion?

Acts 4:12

…It is by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified but whom God raised from the dead, that this man stands before you healed. 11He is " ‘the stone you builders rejected, which has become the capstone.’ 12 Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved."

Romans 10:8-10

8But what does it say? “The word is near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart,” that is, the word of faith we are proclaiming: 9That if you confess with your mouth,** “Jesus is Lord,” **and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved.

1 John 2:21-23

21I do not write to you because you do not know the truth, but because you do know it and because no lie comes from the truth. 22Who is the liar? It is the man who denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a man is the antichrist—he denies the Father and the Son. 23No one who denies the Son has the Father; whoever acknowledges the Son has the Father also.

KORAN:

“The Messiah, Jesus the son of Mary, was no more than God’s apostle . . .God is but one God. GOD FORBID THAT HE SHOULD HAVE A SON!” (4:171)

Those who say: “The Lord of Mercy has begotten a son, preach a monstrous falsehood, at which the very heavens might crack . . .” (19:88)

”God forbid that He Himself should beget a son!” (19:29)

“Praise be to God who has never begotten a son; who has no partner in His Kingdom . . .” (17:111)

“God has begotten a son. ‘God forbid! Self-sufficient is He.! (10:68)

“If the Lord of Mercy had a son, I would be the first to worship him.” (43:72-81)
 
agiosotheos said:
I’m guessing you don’t know much about the Fourth Crusade.
Click to expand...
No, I did not at the time of posting. However, I am researching it now and let me just say that if I were dissapointed in Rome earlier with the scaps of information I did have, I am now at the point of utter disgust and anger. What an outrage!

I was going to go to 10:30 Mass but I won’t be going back until I can reconcile this atrocity.
 
JMJ / MMM 091107 Saturday
firstborn –

In response to my original posting you have written, “I do not think that worshiping God is enough to have salvation. You can honestly and sincerely worship the God of Abraham, but if you deny that Jesus Christ was his son and that he died on the cross for the world, I do not see how that worship turns into salvation. How does the worship turn into salvation? What about water baptism? What about observing communion?”

It was never my intention to imply otherwise. Much more is required for salvation than simply worship.

A sincere worship of God – as one understands God – is necessary but not sufficient. But such worship IS a BEGINNING in the right direction.
John (JohnJFarren)
 
Thank you for your calm reply to my just finding this information out, and was utterly stunned. However, you say Pope Innocent III excommunicated many involved… wasn’t He involved himself??:confused: Even if it were the pope prior to him who would have born more responsibility? I have to go back to my research to see who was in charge leading up to this to get a handle on this.
 
StrawberryJam said:
Thank you for your calm reply to my just finding this information out, and was utterly stunned. However, you say Pope Innocent III excommunicated many involved… wasn’t He involved himself??:confused: Even if it were the pope prior to him who would have born more responsibility? I have to go back to my research to see who was in charge leading up to this to get a handle on this.
Click to expand...
I believe even beforehand, the Pope forbade that they attack Christian lands, but they didn’t even listen to him.
 
agiosotheos said:
I believe even beforehand, the Pope forbade that they attack Christian lands, but they didn’t even listen to him.
Click to expand...
Then the Pope was meaningless to them.
And, he apparently was also meaningless to those who were ransacked and worse names I don’t want to use …
Because he did not do a single thing in his lifetime to offer them any kind of consolation, or anything else. How cold!

“Bishop amoung equals???”

“Acting in LOVE???”
 
StrawberryJam said:
Then the Pope was meaningless to them.
And, he apparently was also meaningless to those who were ransacked and worse names I don’t want to use …
Because he did not do a single thing in his lifetime to offer them any kind of consolation, or anything else. How cold!
Click to expand...
Now that we’ve established how the peoples of the West were generally free to act independent on the word of the Pope, perhaps you could understand that he was not always in a great position to be offering help to the Byzantines, given his lack of solid influence in the political realm.
StrawberryJam said:
“Bishop amoung equals???”
Click to expand...
The EO generally don’t recognize him as first among equals after the point of the East-West Schism; his status as truly a bishop and successor of the Apostles is even questioned. The EO recognize the primacy of honor as having shifted to the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople after the Schism, him having been the second among equals before the Schism.
 
I’m devastated about learning all this now. I am really mixed up about how I feel about Rome now. I feel as if I can not trust her.
 
StrawberryJam said:
I’m devastated about learning all this now. I am really mixed up about how I feel about Rome now. I feel as if I can not trust her.
Click to expand...
This is the mere basis of your distrust of Rome?

There are things much more untrustworthy, from what I can see.
 
Yes, but we are here at the Catholic Answers forum, which teaches that the Catholic Church in union with Rome is the correct one.

I think the CCC says something about what appropriate actions one must take after stealing from another.
 
I appreciate the spirit of your post John J Farren. Fr. Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange, a rather Traditional repository of Scholastic theology and philosophy has a chapter in one of his books which I regard as somewhat controversial, but which you should find encouraging as to your point of view.

From the chapter titled Mystics Outside the Church in his work Our Saviour and His Love For Us:
Mystical graces improperly so-called or minor mystical graces not only are possible outside the visible Church, but they can occur rather frequently in the holiest souls in the stae of grace, as a means of making up for the indigence of the environments where God’s children find so little help. In this way souls really endowed with good faith and good will in the theological sense can attain a true spirit of prayer, as missioners have often noticed. In consequence these souls may make more or less permanent attempts at attaining God’s intimacy, especially if there remain traces of the Gospel in their religious teachings, as in the doctrines of Islam and in some of its traditions.
Click to expand...
—TAN Books and Publishers, 1998, p. 379
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top