Doctrinal Development

[GaryTaylor]

The someone I spoke to was sincere in their question so the idea of being their infallible doesnt matter…

Does the Church so quickly dismiss someone who is asking a sincere question of conscience?

That would be sad…

Does the Church have that hard of a time answering a sincere question?

You refuse to answer the same question you ask, then would answer questions with questions.

I didn’t question his sincerity, some sincerely could care less about the Church. I asked if he was infallible? And if not why should anyone pay attention to a no named comment from whoever? Is it infallible?

 

[Marie5890]

You refuse to answer the same question you ask, then would answer questions with questions.

I didn’t question his sincerity, some sincerely could care less about the Church. I asked if he was infallible? And if not why should anyone pay attention to a no named comment from whoever? Is it infallible?

No human is infallible, including my friend.

Why ignore a sincere question? I’ll keep encouraging them to pray for an answer, I havent been able to answer their question or direct them in a sincere manner.

I appreciate your trying though, Gary. And I am giving the benefit of the doubt that you are not being cynical in a sincere question .

God Bless!

 

[GaryTaylor]

No human is infallible, including my friend.

You answered your own question.

 

[Marie5890]

You know what I see as truly sad?

I know of people, sincere, honest, people of good conscience who are seeking authentic, credible answers to their spiritual questions.

I try to help guide them or point them in the right direction. In my effort to do so, I seek authentic and credible answers to that end…

But often times what emerges isnt truly helpful or earnest.

It’s almost defensive. (deep sigh)

How can we, as those who are striving to be authentic disciples of Our Lord, be expected to evangelize in an authentic and credible way, if we held suspect in our strivings to find and direct them to authentic and credible answers…??

Maybe it’s more of the western ego driven competeness? or need to “win” or something…

But it doesnt help us cultivate sincere and credible faith in Our Lord if even we, His disciples, are viewed with something of skepticism…

May He have Mercy on all of us.

 

[Marie5890]

You answered your own question.

But your answer does not help me direct my friend to find the answers needed…

If you feel a need to “win”…fine, check “win” in your column…

Im seeking answers to help direct a friend…

 

[GaryTaylor]

Does ego exist only in the West or only inflated ego in your fallible opinion of course?

I’m not sure you arrived yet to have a sincere conversation talking as such. I can’t imagine how I arrived at that sincere assessment. Perhaps we are all being sincere?

 

[Marie5890]

Does ego exist only in the West or only inflated ego in your fallible opinion or course?

I’m not sure you arrived yet to have a sincere conversation talking as such. I can’t imagine how I arrived at that sincere assessment. Perhaps we are all being sincere?

I suppose the wisest course of direction would be to tell him his answer lies in prayer and not to looking to we humans for answers.

I appreciate your willing to respond, Gary, in all of this and add your .02, but I realize neither your .02 or mine, will help him find his answers…

More and more I am reminded of how important it is that we all have our own personal relationship with Our Lord as no human can truly answers the deepest of deep question of our souls…

We are all creatures and are subject to the fallen nature.
Thanks for helping me refine the advice he needs.

 

[GaryTaylor]

I suppose the wisest course of direction would be to tell him his answer lies in prayer and not to looking to we humans for answers.

I appreciate your willing to respond, Gary, in all of this and add your .02, but I realize neither your .02 or mine, will help him find his answers…

More and more I am reminded of how important it is that we all have our own personal relationship with Our Lord as no human can truly answers the deepest of deep question of our souls…

We are all creatures and are subject to the fallen nature.
Thanks for helping me refine the advice he needs.

Marie5890; God established a Church through His Apostle’s and through its continued tradition we all acknowledge infallible. This is far more than which flavor one prefers be it EO or CC and most in both these Church’s acknowledged this.

I say “Thank You Lord” when someone from here enters the EO or CC or OO.

As far as the Pope being infallible. I don’t know a soul who believes that. That is misunderstanding. Now the supreme infallible authority of V-I which I would venture to say is what your really speaking about is for the Pope to reconcile with his brothers.

I’m in sinner seeking Christ crucified. Far by me to suggest to them what they should do. However that said I am of the firm conviction one needs to be in one of the Church’s and the above should not be a reason for them not to be.

 

[Marie5890]

Gary, my friend seeks what is authentic and what is credible, spiritually speaking. That is the most honest explanation I can provide…

He has a lot of questions, based on a 2000 year spectrum, of what may or may not reflect spiritual reality…

He has asked about things like the Immaculate Conception or Perpetual Virginity and other doctrines/dogmas held by the Catholic Church. He is sincere in his searching and seeking.

He often times has mentioned the difference between the Orthodox and the Catholic views on such…

He is sincere.

The more I ask and research to help him, the more and more I come to this…He is going to have to have a personal relationship with Lord Himself to seek the answers he needs on where credibility is…

All of us, me, you, him, the pope and popes before this pope, patriarchs etc etc etc etc are fallen creatures, all very broken and fallible and subject to ego and arrogance, whatever.

He seeks purity amongst the impurest of creatures. Somehow he is going to have to reconcile that with his search of the Divine.

You have been very helpful to me in refining the advice I can give him, as weak as the advice will ultimately be…

He + The Lord will lead him where he needs to go and be.
You, I, and others, are nothing but a footnote of suggestions.

 

[GaryTaylor]

What is he now mainline protestant? With “He has asked about things like the Immaculate Conception or Perpetual Virginity and other doctrines/dogmas held by the Catholic Church. He is sincere in his searching and seeking.”

Reluctantly we debate this but the truth is the truth illuminates itself and at some point most of us begin to realize this. There’s not much difference here. This is supernatural. Gods spiritual law already predestined by God and by Isaiah in scripture is acknowledged with for example perpetual virginity. All the church’s acknowledged this east west and early on when in communion. Just as with the Incarnation and Christs nature ecumenical councils and so forth.

We would then be talking church’s which date back to within ten years of the Cross. And they are still here. Not much changed.

 

[Marie5890]

What is he now mainline protestant? With “He has asked about things like the Immaculate Conception or Perpetual Virginity and other doctrines/dogmas held by the Catholic Church. He is sincere in his searching and seeking.”

Reluctantly we debate this but the truth is the truth illuminates itself and at some point most of us begin to realize this. There’s not much difference here. This is supernatural. Gods spiritual law already predestined by God and by Isaiah in scripture is acknowledged with for example perpetual virginity. All the church’s acknowledged this east west and early on when in communion. Just as with the Incarnation and Christs nature ecumenical councils and so forth.

We would then be talking church’s which date back to within ten years of the Cross. And they are still here. Not much changed.

The Assumption dates back as far as the 2nd or 3rd century, or at least that is where I have been able to show him. If you can help me show closer to the Crucifixion I would be grateful…

Hopefully if he will take up the challenge of personal relationship with Christ over historical “I can point you to here” demonstrations, that will help him…

He knows enough about human weakness and it’s leaning on myths and legends that he does want it demonstrated, beyond myth and legend, at least to some degree, spiritual reality…

Any specific information that I can direct him to would be appreciate…

The earliest I have been able to find when it comes to the Assumption is 2nd/3rd century…and his ROLLS HIS EYESBALLS AT Me! when I talk about that…

It’s the looks of “boy you are gullible” I face when we talk about that…a couple-few hundred years is a lot for a myth to crystalize so he says…

(His pointed comment to me was…“200 hundred years? …200 years would put American back in the early 1800’s ya know? Myths and legends dont take that long to permiate the human mind”… )

He is an intellect and, although open, wants a more than myth based explanation to various doctrines and dogmas…I admit to not being as intellectually prepared to answer his question as he would need. His is not stupid when it comes to human behaviors and weaknesses. )

 

[Celticnovice]

Regarding doctrine we don’t accept development. We claim to hold the Faith as it was handed down to us by the Apostles. We do accept the development of non-faith related practices, however. Such as hesychism, the Divine Liturgy (St. John Chrysostom adapted St. Basil’s liturgy whom I believe adapted St. James’ liturgy. That this is happening hundreds of years later isn’t an issue for us) and the like.

I would back what Catholic posters are saying regarding Ecumenical Councils - that their job is not to create new doctrine but to confirm what was always believed. This is one reason we have not needed an Ecumenical Council in the East, the need to confirm has not been there (The closest we came was the Synod of Jerusalem which concluded that yes, Calvinism is heretical).

Hi Nine_Two,

You’re the first Orthodox poster I have seen admit the bolded on this forum. Thank you

 

[Nine_Two]

Thanks Nine_Two,

I always appreciate the Orthodox view on various subjects.

I had someone once explain a big difference between the East and the West in these terms

The East (Orthodox) are comfortable living the Mystery of the Incarnation.
The West (Catholic) needs to deliniate every bit of this and that of the Mystery…

There is something very Divine about living the approach that the Orthodox takes…The Catholic very can be something of a mill stone around the neck of it’s adherents…

From Sacred Scripture, that was even happening in the days of Our Lord…

I was recently reading St. John of Damascus (whom both Catholics and Orthodox recognize as a saint), “An Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith”, he spends the first several chapters speaking of how God is unknowable and we just have to accept it. I found it interesting that in over 1200 years his explanation is still the best description of God out there.

 

[Nine_Two]

I asked if he was infallible? And if not why should anyone pay attention to a no named comment from whoever? Is it infallible?

Does that mean we shouldn’t pay attention to the saints, all of whom were fallible in life?

 

[Nine_Two]

Hi Nine_Two,

You’re the first Orthodox poster I have seen admit the bolded on this forum. Thank you

I may be the first you’ve seen, but I’ve seen others acknowledge it and I think most take it as a given. Evidence of these minor changes are all around you if you look at our practices.
But that is all it is, a development of how we practice the faith, not what we believe.

 

[Marie5890]

I was recently reading St. John of Damascus (whom both Catholics and Orthodox recognize as a saint), “An Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith”, he spends the first several chapters speaking of how God is unknowable and we just have to accept it. I found it interesting that in over 1200 years his explanation is still the best description of God out there./QUOTE]

Again, in so many ways, the Orthodox is comfortable with the Mystery of God without having to deliniate every freaking thing which so often leads to ego …



So glad you are part of the forum Nine_Two.

 

[GaryTaylor]

The Assumption dates back as far as the 2nd or 3rd century, or at least that is where I have been able to show him. If you can help me show closer to the Crucifixion I would be grateful…

Hopefully if he will take up the challenge of personal relationship with Christ over historical “I can point you to here” demonstrations, that will help him…

He knows enough about human weakness and it’s leaning on myths and legends that he does want it demonstrated, beyond myth and legend, at least to some degree, spiritual reality…

Any specific information that I can direct him to would be appreciate…

The earliest I have been able to find when it comes to the Assumption is 2nd/3rd century…and his ROLLS HIS EYESBALLS AT Me! when I talk about that…

It’s the looks of “boy you are gullible” I face when we talk about that…a couple-few hundred years is a lot for a myth to crystalize so he says…

(His pointed comment to me was…“200 hundred years? …200 years would put American back in the early 1800’s ya know? Myths and legends dont take that long to permiate the human mind”… )

He is an intellect and, although open, wants a more than myth based explanation to various doctrines and dogmas…I admit to not being as intellectually prepared to answer his question as he would need. His is not stupid when it comes to human behaviors and weaknesses. )

The Dormition/Assumption is dated based on information existing and on tradition.

The Assumption concludes that there is no eyewitness to the events and as your friend stated a lack of historical evidence. Nevertheless it acknowledges the tradition which is the same as the Dormition. Though we [Catholic Church] dosen’t say Mary had to die, when or where, then was resurrected on the third day since we do not know anyone who was there to validate. What was she guilty of?

Thus, Assumed body “and” soul, is the dogma … “not soul then body” . It cannot be proven this dogma is not true. Very much on the contrary. One would have to establish an argument that Mary wasn’t perfectly graced and wasn’t in communion with the Lord. I fail to see how any intellect can do that following the ecumenical councils and scripture thus the theological implications.

That’s why the CC states, assumed “body and soul”. Because there was no eye witness who documented otherwise which we can verify. Its “most fitting” is what the Assumption states in acknowledgement of the documentation of the Dormition and early documented history.

Thus no myth just sound theological arguments.

 

[GaryTaylor]

Does that mean we shouldn’t pay attention to the saints, all of whom were fallible in life?

What does hear-say of an unknown individual being fallible have to do with the Saints? If I told you AKA John Doe told me your church was in error and I told you he was sincere. How in the world would you connect that to the Saints?

 

[Nine_Two]

What does hear-say of an unknown individual being fallible have to do with the Saints? If I told you AKA John Doe told me your church was in error and I told you he was sincere. How in the world would you connect that to the Saints?

You dismissed the individual on the grounds that they were fallible.

I’ll grant you that the fallibility of men is a reason we shouldn’t take everything said as gospel, but it is certainly not a reason to dismiss what people said.

If you are going to dismiss one persons opinion on the grounds that they are fallible you should be consistent and dismiss everyone who is fallible, including the saints. Fallibility shouldn’t even enter into an argument on why you want to accept something or not, it should be a given.

 

[GaryTaylor]

You dismissed the individual on the grounds that they were fallible

"I had someone once explain a big difference between the East and the West in these terms

The East (Orthodox) are comfortable living the Mystery of the Incarnation.
The West (Catholic) needs to deliniate every bit of this and that of the Mystery…"

This you are talking about? This is fallible, hear-say, from an unknown, I don’t see any merit to the proposition. Yup, pretty much dismissed it without second thought.

I don’t see where one can …

1.describe something: to describe or explain something in detail
2.draw something: to sketch or draw something in outline
3.portray something visually: to represent something visually using something such as a chart or graph

…in regards to the Incarnation, without “living the mystery” to coin the phrase.

To me it sounded like the frustration of reading and comprehending genius. I agree and sympathize, its easier said than done. But the point is, well, just plain wrong.