How do protestants explain the time between Christ and the reformation?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Eark
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Isaac14 said:
40.png
steve-b:
Non-Catholics who qualify under section 3 must “ask on their own for the sacraments”—this means there can be no general invitation to them—and they must be “properly disposed,” which means in the state of grace. "

(proper disposition (state of grace), as in, not in mortal sin) which is what I meant by Orthodox need to follow the rules just as Catholics do.
Click to expand...
Clarify for me then, this question:
Is it possible for an Orthodox Christian to be properly disposed to receive the Eucharist in a Catholic Church without having repented of the mortal sin of schism from the Catholic Church? Or is it that we must be properly disposed according to the norms and rules of our own church?
Click to expand...
For purposes of discussion, taking this in sections

Let me ask,

When we say the creed in mass, and we get to the point in the creed where it says

I believe in One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church,

can one say that, meaning they say yes to all that means, without playing games with any of those terms?
 
Last edited:
steve-b said:
For purposes of discussion,

Let me ask,

When we say the creed in mass, and we get to the point in the creed where it says

I believe in One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church,

can one say that, meaning they say yes to all that means, without playing games with any of those terms?
Click to expand...
Are you asking if I can say that? Who is the “one” you refer to?
 
steve-b said:
Alexius , the deposed Emperor, struck a deal with the crusaders who were passing Constantinople on their way to Jerusalem to free the city from the Muslims. He offered to pay the crusaders if they returned him to power.
Click to expand...
Yes, the Byzantines already had a civil war/succession crisis on their hands. No, that does not make what the Venetians did somehow right.
 
steve-b said:
When we say the creed in mass, and we get to the point in the creed where it says

I believe in One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church,

can one say that, meaning they say yes to all that means, without playing games with any of those terms?
Click to expand...
The answer is YES.
 
steve-b said:
Good 🙂
Click to expand...
So where does that leave my question as to whether an Orthodox Christian can receive? Does “proper disposition” require confessing the mortal sin of schism or is being properly disposed a matter of being so according to the rules and norms of the Orthodox Church?
 
Isaac14 said:
40.png
steve-b:
Good 🙂
Click to expand...
So where does that leave my question as to whether an Orthodox Christian can receive? Does “proper disposition” require confessing the mortal sin of schism or is being properly disposed a matter of being so according to the rules and norms of the Orthodox Church?
Click to expand...
Receiving in the Catholic Church, It’s according to the rules of the Catholic Church.

So the individual, yes Orthodox as well, needs to be in the state of grace as in no mortal sin on their soul before receiving the Eucharist.

The police force is Jesus.
 
Last edited:
MarysLurker said:
40.png
steve-b:
Alexius , the deposed Emperor, struck a deal with the crusaders who were passing Constantinople on their way to Jerusalem to free the city from the Muslims. He offered to pay the crusaders if they returned him to power.
Click to expand...
Yes, the Byzantines already had a civil war/succession crisis on their hands. No, that does not make what the Venetians did somehow right.
Click to expand...
No one said it was. When Pope Innocent III, got news of the event, he excommunicated all the crusaders who were involved.

JPII , 2001, apologizes to Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I for the sacking of Constantinople , in 1204 , by Catholic Crusaders. Bartholomew accepts the apology
. News Features | Catholic Culture

This would be a good time for a reciprocal apology from the Orthodox spokesman for what the Orthodox did in 1182. But none came. Silence
 
Last edited:
RaisedCatholic said:
But you still have to face the reality that God does create people knowing the vast majority of them WILL end up in Hell (Matthew 7:13-14). Even if you wish to espouse to the school that only those who are responsible for their “choice” to reject God end up in Hell, God still created them knowing that they would spend eternity burning in Hell, while “He throws on the CD track of Throw Another Log On The fire.”
Click to expand...
This is assuming that God’s decision to create is based on His foreknowledge. In fact, God’s foreknowledge of creatures’ future free actions is based on His decision to create them in the first place.
 
Last edited:
steve-b said:
Receiving in the Catholic Church, It’s according to the rules of the Catholic Church.

So the individual, yes Orthodox as well, needs to be in the state of grace as in no mortal sin on their soul before receiving the Eucharist.

The police force is Jesus.
Click to expand...
My apologies for being dense, but I just want clarity…An Orthodox Christian must confess the mortal sin of schism from the Catholic Church before being allowed to receive the Eucharist in accordance with Canon 844? Yes or no?
 
Isaac14 said:
40.png
steve-b:
Receiving in the Catholic Church, It’s according to the rules of the Catholic Church.

So the individual, yes Orthodox as well, needs to be in the state of grace as in no mortal sin on their soul before receiving the Eucharist.

The police force is Jesus.
Click to expand...
My apologies for being dense, but I just want clarity.
Click to expand...
My apologies, I probably was not getting fast enough to the point. 🙂
40.png
Isaac14:
…An Orthodox Christian must confess the mortal sin of schism from the Catholic Church before being allowed to receive the Eucharist in accordance with Canon 844? Yes or no?
Click to expand...
Allow me to pass your question, off to an Eastern Catholic bishop emeritus for his answer.

Bp Elya in a Q/A » Are we Orthodox united with Rome?

Excerpt:
When the bishop says the following

"If an Orthodox subscribes to the Canon quoted above, he/she can be called Catholic and be considered “united to Rome” or in full communion with the Catholic Church."

That canon Bp Elya quotes, is a perfect answer IMV for what it means in the creed, when we say

"I believe in One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church"

His answer puts depth to the understanding to that phrase in the creed. After all, how else can one identify communion without union with both Jesus AND His body the Church He established on Peter and those in union with him…right?

Does that work for you?
 
Last edited:
steve-b said:
Allow me to pass your question, off to an Eastern Catholic bishop emeritus for his answer.
Click to expand...
I was asking you, not Bishop Elya.

Again, yes or no, may I as an Orthodox Christian receive the Eucharist in a Catholic Church in accordance with Canon 844?
steve-b said:
Does that work for you?
Click to expand...
No. His Grace isn’t speaking to the question of whether Canon 844 provides for the reception of the Eucharist by an Orthodox Christian in a Catholic Church.
 
Isaac14 said:
40.png
steve-b:
Allow me to pass your question, off to an Eastern Catholic bishop emeritus for his answer.
Click to expand...
I was asking you, not Bishop Elya.

Again, yes or no, may I as an Orthodox Christian receive the Eucharist in a Catholic Church in accordance with Canon 844?
Click to expand...
I already showed you what section 3 of that code means. You need to be in a state of grace (no mortal sin on your soul at the time of reception), same as a Catholic
steve-b said:
Does that work for you?
Click to expand...
40.png
Isaac14:
No. His Grace isn’t speaking to the question of whether Canon 844 provides for the reception of the Eucharist by an Orthodox Christian in a Catholic Church.
Click to expand...
Ok

From canon law, again
Can. 844

§3 Catholic ministers may lawfully administer the sacraments of penance, the Eucharist and anointing of the sick to members of the eastern Churches not in full communion with the catholic Church, if they spontaneously ask for them and are properly disposed. The same applies to members of other Churches which the Apostolic See judges to be in the same position as the aforesaid eastern Churches so far as the sacraments are concerned.

Note: it’s conditional.
  1. If they ask for the sacrament IOW it is not open communion.
  2. AND one needs to be properly disposed as in they are in a state of grace (not in mortal sin) just as required for Catholics
 
Last edited:
I believe, based on what you’ve quoted, that without confessing the mortal sin of schism from the Catholic Church, I as an Orthodox Christian may NOT receive communion per Canon 844.

In other words, although Canon 844 is directed to non-Catholics, we may not receive unless we become Catholic? It seems to me that having to confess the mortal sin of schism implies that I will no longer be Orthodox but will become Catholic. In which case, Canon 844 makes absolutely no sense. Am I misunderstanding?
 
steve-b said:
From canon law, again
Can. 844
Click to expand...
Isaac14 said:
I believe, based on what you’ve quoted, that without confessing the mortal sin of schism from the Catholic Church, I as an Orthodox Christian may NOT receive communion per Canon 844.
Click to expand...
The first rule of canon law is you do not grab the code and start making conclusions based on the code alone. Canon law is organic, evolving historically. The canons have to be read in light of tradition, jurisprudence, praxis and (especially in the East) economia.

Somewhere back in this thread I posted a link to the USCCB norms for receiving Holy Communion. I think it got buried. Here it is again.
http://www.usccb.org/prayer-and-wor...guidelines-for-the-reception-of-communion.cfm

According to the bishops’ conference of the USA: Members of the Orthodox Churches, the Assyrian Church of the East, and the Polish National Catholic Church are urged to respect the discipline of their own Churches. According to Roman Catholic discipline, the Code of Canon Law does not object to the reception of Communion by Christians of these Churches (canon 844 §3).

So either @steve-b is wrong or the USCCB is. I’m going with the bishops.
 
Last edited:
MarysLurker said:
So either @steve-b is wrong or the USCCB is. I’m going with the bishops.
Click to expand...
I’m familiar with the statement from the USCCB. I’ve read it many times in the missal at my wife’s Catholic Church.

I’ve been pushing Steve for a definitive answer because what he’s implying does indeed seem to be at odds with the both the language of 844 & the USCCB statement.
 
Isaac14 said:
I’ve been pushing Steve for a definitive answer because what he’s implying does indeed seem to be at odds with the both the language of 844 & the USCCB statement.
Click to expand...
I can’t speak for him, but he reminds me a lot of myself shortly after my baptism. I was (and still am) enthusiastic about being a Catholic and so convinced to prove to all my family and friends that they were missing out. Enthusiasm is great, but not if it causes you to stumble, in this case by denying the very authority you’re asking everyone else to submit to. Recent Convert Syndrome™️ makes you look like a know-it-all both to cradle Catholics and to people in general, and it sends a bad impression about the Church. And in my situation (which is surely common) it turned out to be a symptom of perfectionism and scrupulosity. I’m not saying, and I don’t know, if that’s Steve’s situation but it just looks too familiar to me.

Anyway, back to the OT.

The existence of the Orthodox Churches destroys the Protestant argument for the gap: a big bad dark age where everyone was to stoopid to reed good the Bible and so no one knew that the Catholic Church had devolved into the cult of the Theotokos. Of course, once you start looking into history you see that VERY BAD THINGS happen when you try to get rid of said Theotokos. Things like Nestorianism and nontrinitarianism and gnosticism… and Protestantism’s current descent into atheism.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top