Eastern Orthodox and Infallibility

[dzheremi]

We could talk about formal communion and implicit and explicit desire, etc., but the bottom line is that you, as a member of the Orthodox Church, are ultimately a member of the one body of Christ which is known properly as the “Catholic Church”. Thus, you ARE in some communion with Rome whether you like it or not.

The Catholic Church, yes; Rome, no. They’re not the same thing.

I know you think that which is what is so distressing. Lutherans and Anglicans have far less in common with Catholicism than you do, yet they are more eager to acknowledge that they are Catholics than you.

What do Lutherans have to do with anything? And of course we acknowledge that we are catholic (quite explicitly, in fact); we just don’t understand that term in the same way that you do. Catholic is properly understood as an adjective, not a noun, and has nothing to do with our relation to the bishop of Rome. We didn’t stop being catholic when Rome attempted to abscond with the term any more than we stopped having a Pope when Rome put its own unique spin on that term, too. Rome is not the center of the ecclesiastical universe for anyone other than modern, post-schism Latins.

There is a deep, bitter root in Orthodoxy that has to be removed.

Hardly. This is just proper ecclesiology. We practice closed communion for much the same reason as you guys do: To maintain the purity and unity of faith.

Gee…the very sentiments for which Protestants usually slam Catholics.

Then you should understand what I’m saying and why I’m saying it, and not assume bitterness where there is none.

 

[cmodrmac]

I have enjoyed this debate greatly and the depths of the responses have been quite impressive-

The role of the Laity in the Orthodox Churches was enlightening-

I have found the Orthodox Churches in the USA to be quite ethnic in nature- Clearly Greeks are not Lebanese nor Syrians-different cultures and presumably somewhat different world views-conceivably one Orthodox Church could accept one doctrine or practice while the others do not - perhaps as stated unanimity is not needed in all practices and dogmas but the essential ones

By the way the the Antiochan Orthodox Church is quite ethnically diverse in our area -the only one that is

 

[Peter_J]

I’ve just read through everything in this thread that has been posted since I posted this morning (several pages!) and now I’m beginning to question why I’m here. I thought it was to learn about Catholicism and interact with Catholics on an ecumenical level, but all these loaded questions… what do we Orthodox accomplish by being here?

I can’t help but wonder how many will be banned or warned as a result of this thread?

If your current caf-habits aren’t working for you, you could always try using the “Ignore” feature. (Although to be honest, I don’t use it myself. Generally I’ll glance at a post, read the first few words, and then listen to my gut saying “Read it” or “Skip it”.)

Incidentally, although I’m Catholic I did for a while decide that I was better off participating on a certain Orthodox forum rather than a Catholic forum. Over time, though, I’ve come to a each-forum-has-its-faults philosophy. (Granted, there are some forums that are *especially *bad, like one I’ve heard about called “Carma” or “Carnage” or something.)

 

[benjohnson]

For what it’s worth: I’ve learned a lot form you good Orthodox posters. Frankly, I’m a bit envious in many regards, but you also have given me a way of understanding the God-given gifts of our church.

 

[jimmy]

Is this in theory or has there been any situation where an Eastern Laity has rejected something presented by the bishops? Does this apply even with bishops in ecumenical council?

Would this be an Eastern equivalent of the Western concepts of sensus fidelium and acceptance by the people?

The lay monks of Africa and Syria were extremely influential in the first millennium. The success or lack of success of a council was largely dependent upon whether these lay people supported or opposed it. Even the monastic community in Constantinople determined the position of Constantinople to a large extent.

 

[dzheremi]

There is a legend known in the Coptic Orthodox Church (told to me during my time as a catechumen by one of our priests) that imperial representatives came to the Coptic monasteries in the wake of Chalcedon bearing copies of the Tome of Leo and hoping to convince the monks to endorse it. Legend has it the monks sat down in the presence of the legates, read it, and tore it to pieces before their eyes, vowing that they would never accept the things written therein.

Probably not what you were going for by asking that question, Jimkhong, but a rather stern example of Jimmy’s point in action, far removed from Constantinople.

 

[jimkhong]

If your current caf-habits aren’t working for you, you could always try using the “Ignore” feature. (Although to be honest, I don’t use it myself. Generally I’ll glance at a post, read the first few words, and then listen to my gut saying “Read it” or “Skip it”.)

Incidentally, although I’m Catholic I did for a while decide that I was better off participating on a certain Orthodox forum rather than a Catholic forum. Over time, though, I’ve come to a each-forum-has-its-faults philosophy. (Granted, there are some forums that are *especially *bad, like one I’ve heard about called “Carma” or “Carnage” or something.)

Hi Peter, which Orthodox forum would you recommend?

 

[chimo]

To All Orthodox:

I appreciate the fact that some of you are unhappy with a few of my questions and posts.To be fair, I’m not entirely comfortable with all of yours, either.

Perhaps some context for my statements will help. I see the world as an increasingly dangerous place for people of faith. Militant Islam is on the rise, secular humanism and an agressive atheism are making inroads into what was, here in the US, a predominantly Christian society. The days are shortening, night is getting longer, and the enemy is encamped around us. This is not a time for disunity and discord.

Sacred Scripture reveals that the unity of the Body of Christ was intended to be a sign to the world that Jesus was sent from the Father. It stands to reason, then, that our lack of unity has weakened our witness to the Truth. As the world slides into disbelief, not only are souls lost, but we ourselves are endangered. An apologist whose name I have forgotten once offered the idea that one reason for doing apologetics is to make our own lives better. It’s not the primary reason, of course, but I agree with his point: it would be wise for us to convert our enemies before they convert or kill us.

With these thoughts in mind, I am seeking to understand what divides Christianity. Catholic and Protestant. East and West. I read, I listen to debates, I ask questions, I poke, and I prod. I quote from what I read and watch the reactions to those quotes.

Sometimes, as someone rightly pointed out, I am guilty of “triumphalism”. Well, I’m guilty of believing in “American Exceptionalism”, too. Just as no country on earth has brought freedom to more people than the U.S., so, too, no other church has brought the good news to more people than the Catholic Church. I’m proud of this.

Until a month or so ago, I rarely ventured into this subforum. I spent all my time in the Apologetics forum where I fielded questions from Catholics and Protestants alike. But I wanted to learn more about what other faiths believe, so here I am. It’s been an eye-opening experience. Two examples will suffice.

In the past, I’ve had real, serious doubts about Martin Luther personally and Lutheranism in general. If you were to read my older threads and posts on Lutheranism, you would be in no doubt about my disdain and contempt. However, recently, very recently, I was intrigued by someone’s reference to a document produced by the Lutheran-Roman Catholic Commission on Unity, so I began to read it (lutheranworld.org/sites/default/files/From%20Conflict%20to%20Communion.pdf).

Needless to say, my eyes have been opened. While it is fair to say that there is much work yet to be done to heal the divide that separates us - truthfully, more than may ever be accomplished - I’m very encouraged by what I read, and my attitude toward Lutherans has done a complete 180. I’m still not a fan of Martin Luther, though.

At about the same time, I also opened several threads on Eastern Orthodoxy. I’m college-educated, reasonably well-read in some subjects, and I’m highly interested subjects relating to our common faith. Yet, in my entire life, I think I have known exactly two people who were Orthodox. So, I have much to learn.

Now, I can appreciate that my approach needs polishing and that my style tends to be more aggressive than some people can handle. For all of that I apologize. But I am open-minded and eager to understand. And thus far, I don’t. What I’m hearing from Orthodox is that you have no interest whatsoever in re-uniting with Rome, that our laity are nominal at best, that our liturgy is a joke, and that the Bishop of Rome is directly responsible for all that has gone wrong in the West. That may not be what you meant, but that’s what I’ve heard. I hope that official East-West dialogue is more cordial than that, but I’d have to read something better than the posts in this forum to believe that they are.

Gentlemen, we don’t have time for this. The prophet Nehemiah said,

“You see the trouble we are in: Jerusalem lies in ruins, and its gates have been burned with fire. Come, let us rebuild the wall of Jerusalem, and we will no longer be in disgrace (Neh 2:17).”

Can we rebuild together?

Randy Carson

Not everyone thinks of Rome this way Randy. I am for Rome because she is an integral part of who Jesus Christ is. Rome is just as important to me as the Orthodox are and if you checked out something about me I include our Protestant brethren, our Coptic brethren and our Eastern Catholic brethren. But if you think the Orthodox all think this way, I apologize for my brethren who have not taken the time to see Rome as she deserves to be seen. Her witness to the Lord, to the many responses of requests to His Mother when she invited them to pray and to have faith, to her Saints that are a light for us to follow after their example, to her increased knowledge that is contained in her Catechism, to her commitment to witness to the world and her commitment to bring Jesus Christ through the Mass which is this great act of Sacrifice that presents our Lord’s continuous love to all who can be present is certainly this need for us to stop for a while just to look and admire her. Her incredible witness to this growth into a maturity that we all need to exemplify is a credit to the sufferings and pains she has to put up with and in truth by which His whole Church undergoes for the salvation of this troubled yet searching world. In time I am hopeful for this unity which will transform our own troubles into something more glorious for the world to see. Be patient Randy, it will come.

 

[Reuben_J]

**

. What I’m hearing from Orthodox is that you have no interest whatsoever in re-uniting with Rome, that our laity are nominal at best, that our liturgy is a joke, and that the Bishop of Rome is directly responsible for all that has gone wrong in the West. That may not be what you meant, but that’s what I’ve heard. I hope that official East-West dialogue is more cordial than that, but I’d have to read something better than the posts in this forum to believe that they are.

**

Heresy - obstinate denial of certain belief of the Church.

Schism - obstinate denial of union with the Church.

Apostasy - obstinate rejection of the Church.

The Catholic Church considers the Orthodox Church as part of her in the bigger context. They have all the Sacraments except not in union with her and thus schismatic.

 

[Reuben_J]

However man is prone to error - so no man can be infallible.

The gift of infallibility. Not so much what a man does but what he does as led by the Holy Spirit in leading the Church. Why is this so important? What might be the consequences of not having such a gift? Because the mission of the infallible Magisterium (the Church teaching Office)** is linked to the definitive nature of the covenant established by God with his people in Christ**. It is this Magisterium’s task to preserve God’s people from deviations and defections and to guarantee them the objective possibility of professing the true faith without error.

CCC 890 The mission of the Magisterium is linked to the definitive nature of the covenant established by God with his people in Christ. It is this Magisterium’s task to preserve God’s people from deviations and defections and to guarantee them the objective possibility of professing the true faith without error. Thus, the pastoral duty of the Magisterium is aimed at seeing to it that the People of God abides in the truth that liberates. To fulfill this service, Christ endowed the Church’s shepherds with the charism of infallibility in matters of faith and morals. The exercise of this charism takes several forms:

 

[GaryTaylor]

Infallibility? Is that located in the same section of Holy Scripture as “First Among Equals” ?

Patristic? Developed Doctrine?

 

[jimmy]

The gift of infallibility. Not so much what a man does but what he does as led by the Holy Spirit in leading the Church. Why is this so important? What might be the consequences of not having such a gift? Because the mission of the infallible Magisterium (the Church teaching Office)** is linked to the definitive nature of the covenant established by God with his people in Christ**. It is this Magisterium’s task to preserve God’s people from deviations and defections and to guarantee them the objective possibility of professing the true faith without error.

CCC 890 The mission of the Magisterium is linked to the definitive nature of the covenant established by God with his people in Christ. It is this Magisterium’s task to preserve God’s people from deviations and defections and to guarantee them the objective possibility of professing the true faith without error. Thus, the pastoral duty of the Magisterium is aimed at seeing to it that the People of God abides in the truth that liberates. To fulfill this service, Christ endowed the Church’s shepherds with the charism of infallibility in matters of faith and morals. The exercise of this charism takes several forms:

Why wouldn’t the Holy Spirit make everyone infallible, that way no one could err?

 

[Peter_J]

Hi Peter, which Orthodox forum would you recommend?

I’m afraid I can’t really advise you on that. I’ve only spent time on the Orthodox Christianity forum (quite a lot of time, actually, but I’ve recently cut down). I never spent much time on The Ancient Way.

 

[Reuben_J]

Why wouldn’t the Holy Spirit make everyone infallible, that way no one could err?

We should be but the promise of Jesus Christ that the Gate of Hell will not prevail against His Church would necessitate that this gift is specifically given to the person who leads that Church so that he be able to exercise the Key to Heaven and to bind and to loose.

It can also to be said that along the life of the Church that her belief would always be challenged and without the gift of infallibility, she will not stand.

 

[jimkhong]

I’m afraid I can’t really advise you on that. I’ve only spent time on the Orthodox Christianity forum (quite a lot of time, actually, but I’ve recently cut down). I never spent much time on The Ancient Way.

Thanks, Peter, I have registered on Orthodox Christianity but I still haven’t received the link to activate it. So, it looks like their server and my browser are not in communion.

 

[chimo]

Why wouldn’t the Holy Spirit make everyone infallible, that way no one could err?

I presume infallibility from the Holy Spirit would also mean to love God as He deserves to be loved. Probably this type of relationship should be more taught. Knowledge says St. Paul is useless unless it is grounded on love and more specifically on God’s love. If we err it is because we really do not love as Jesus loves. Don’t get me wrong. Knowledge has its place and purpose but so does using this knowledge (hopefully a more perfect knowledge) to be guided under the principal of a love, mercy and discipline. The more we can love like God the more infallible you can become. So in a sense we can all learn to love.

 

[dzheremi]

I presume infallibility from the Holy Spirit would also mean to love God as He deserves to be loved.

That’s quite a presumption. So the Roman Pope just happens to be literally the only in the world who loves God as He deserves to be loved? Well that’s convenient…

 

[Misplaced_Book]

To All Orthodox:

I appreciate the fact that some of you are unhappy with a few of my questions and posts.To be fair, I’m not entirely comfortable with all of yours, either.

Perhaps some context for my statements will help. I see the world as an increasingly dangerous place for people of faith. Militant Islam is on the rise, secular humanism and an agressive atheism are making inroads into what was, here in the US, a predominantly Christian society. The days are shortening, night is getting longer, and the enemy is encamped around us. This is not a time for disunity and discord.

Sacred Scripture reveals that the unity of the Body of Christ was intended to be a sign to the world that Jesus was sent from the Father. It stands to reason, then, that our lack of unity has weakened our witness to the Truth. As the world slides into disbelief, not only are souls lost, but we ourselves are endangered. An apologist whose name I have forgotten once offered the idea that one reason for doing apologetics is to make our own lives better. It’s not the primary reason, of course, but I agree with his point: it would be wise for us to convert our enemies before they convert or kill us.

With these thoughts in mind, I am seeking to understand what divides Christianity. Catholic and Protestant. East and West. I read, I listen to debates, I ask questions, I poke, and I prod. I quote from what I read and watch the reactions to those quotes.

Sometimes, as someone rightly pointed out, I am guilty of “triumphalism”. Well, I’m guilty of believing in “American Exceptionalism”, too. Just as no country on earth has brought freedom to more people than the U.S., so, too, no other church has brought the good news to more people than the Catholic Church. I’m proud of this.

Until a month or so ago, I rarely ventured into this subforum. I spent all my time in the Apologetics forum where I fielded questions from Catholics and Protestants alike. But I wanted to learn more about what other faiths believe, so here I am. It’s been an eye-opening experience. Two examples will suffice.

In the past, I’ve had real, serious doubts about Martin Luther personally and Lutheranism in general. If you were to read my older threads and posts on Lutheranism, you would be in no doubt about my disdain and contempt. However, recently, very recently, I was intrigued by someone’s reference to a document produced by the Lutheran-Roman Catholic Commission on Unity, so I began to read it (lutheranworld.org/sites/default/files/From%20Conflict%20to%20Communion.pdf).

Needless to say, my eyes have been opened. While it is fair to say that there is much work yet to be done to heal the divide that separates us - truthfully, more than may ever be accomplished - I’m very encouraged by what I read, and my attitude toward Lutherans has done a complete 180. I’m still not a fan of Martin Luther, though.

At about the same time, I also opened several threads on Eastern Orthodoxy. I’m college-educated, reasonably well-read in some subjects, and I’m highly interested subjects relating to our common faith. Yet, in my entire life, I think I have known exactly two people who were Orthodox. So, I have much to learn.

Now, I can appreciate that my approach needs polishing and that my style tends to be more aggressive than some people can handle. For all of that I apologize. But I am open-minded and eager to understand. And thus far, I don’t. What I’m hearing from Orthodox is that you have no interest whatsoever in re-uniting with Rome, that our laity are nominal at best, that our liturgy is a joke, and that the Bishop of Rome is directly responsible for all that has gone wrong in the West. That may not be what you meant, but that’s what I’ve heard. I hope that official East-West dialogue is more cordial than that, but I’d have to read something better than the posts in this forum to believe that they are.

Gentlemen, we don’t have time for this. The prophet Nehemiah said,

“You see the trouble we are in: Jerusalem lies in ruins, and its gates have been burned with fire. Come, let us rebuild the wall of Jerusalem, and we will no longer be in disgrace (Neh 2:17).”

Can we rebuild together?

Randy Carson

Randy,

Forgive me if I came across as blunt. I could have shown a little less exasperation in my posts.

Your point about us having “bitterness” is wrong. It isn’t bitterness to reject the claims of Old Rome, which we do. We believe Universal Jurisdiction and Papal Infallibility are heterodox, erroneous teachings…and we will not submit to them.

Your claim about people wanting to “horn in on our brand” rests on the assumption that the Latin Church is THE Catholic Church. We would say that this is not the case, and that WE are the Catholic Church…and it is the Latins who are in schism.

Obviously you deny this, but we too honor and cherish the faithful and Orthodox bishops of Old Rome who remained steadfast to the Truth. That is what makes Old Rome’s schism all the more painful to us.

We have differing points of view, you see.

We are quite interested in Re-union, but we will not betray The Fathers and Orthodox Teaching to do it. What we all believe matters, and our spirited defense of Orthodoxy is no different than your defense of the Papal Claims.

We want unity, but not if it means accepting what we know to be false.

I certainly don’t think that your Liturgy is “a joke”, but it is lamentable that the Latin Church treats it like a tinker toy. I am missing the part where someone attacked your laity…I certainly did not, as lukewarm behavior is across the board.

You can have the last word, as I think there is nothing more I can say.

Lord have Mercy on me and us all.

 

[Misplaced_Book]

Not everyone thinks of Rome this way Randy. I am for Rome because she is an integral part of who Jesus Christ is. Rome is just as important to me as the Orthodox are and if you checked out something about me I include our Protestant brethren, our Coptic brethren and our Eastern Catholic brethren. But if you think the Orthodox all think this way, I apologize for my brethren who have not taken the time to see Rome as she deserves to be seen. Her witness to the Lord, to the many responses of requests to His Mother when she invited them to pray and to have faith, to her Saints that are a light for us to follow after their example, to her increased knowledge that is contained in her Catechism, to her commitment to witness to the world and her commitment to bring Jesus Christ through the Mass which is this great act of Sacrifice that presents our Lord’s continuous love to all who can be present is certainly this need for us to stop for a while just to look and admire her. Her incredible witness to this growth into a maturity that we all need to exemplify is a credit to the sufferings and pains she has to put up with and in truth by which His whole Church undergoes for the salvation of this troubled yet searching world. In time I am hopeful for this unity which will transform our own troubles into something more glorious for the world to see. Be patient Randy, it will come.

Old Rome is important to me as an old and venerable See, but the schism and errors have to be addressed. It is one thing to respect, but it is something else to accept the differences as if they don’t matter. I see virtues in the Latin Church, but that doesn’t necessarily mean inter-communion should happen tomorrow.

This will be my last post in this thread, I would encourage you to look to our Orthodox Fathers, Chimo…and to the Church for guidance and clarity on this matter.

 

[Reuben_J]

chimo:

I presume infallibility from the Holy Spirit would also mean to love God as He deserves to be loved. Probably this type of relationship should be more taught. Knowledge says St. Paul is useless unless it is grounded on love and more specifically on God’s love. If we err it is because we really do not love as Jesus loves. Don’t get me wrong. Knowledge has its place and purpose but so does using this knowledge (hopefully a more perfect knowledge) to be guided under the principal of a love, mercy and discipline. The more we can love like God the more infallible you can become. So in a sense we can all learn to love.

If the Holy Spirit tells us how to love, of course then that is infallible as it is Him who defines it. Frankly I have not heard Christians talk in this manner with regards to infallibility but essentially here it is often connected to the Church and her teachings but especially to non-Catholics, to the Pope as the main objection.

All churches have their own teachings to be believed by their members whether their leaders are infallible or not. The teachings were nevertheless infallible that were taught by the apostles or the subsequent leadership and when they were taught these leaders spoke infallibly. So it is not something new. Even if the Holy Orthodoxy’s doctrine has stopped developing, she still had someone or a group spoke infallibly before to come out with an infallible teaching which she is following now.

Infallibility is about the Church’s teaching. In Catholicism, it is called the Magisterium or the Church’s teaching office. There are four categories or three rather, of the Magisterium:

1. Ordinary Magisterium – the pope and the bishops united with him teach ‘in matters of faith and moral’.
2. Universal Ordinary Magisterium – teachings not formerly defined but constantly taught and believed throughout the history of the Church.
3. Extraordinary Magisterium – when an ecumenical council declares a revealed dogma of the faith, ratified by the pope; or when the pope formally defines an ex cathedra doctrine.
4. Supreme Extraordinary Magisterium (closely related to 3) – when the pope speaks ex cathedra on his own.
5. Many Church teachings have never been disputed, thus no need for a solemn definition.