How to Deal With Orthodox Friend

  • Thread starter Thread starter GloriaDei
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
It doesn’t “jive” because Canon 844 is from the current 1983 Code of Canon Law, whereas the OP is posting stuff from the old 1917 Code of Canon Law that was replaced by the new 1983 Code of Canon Law.

Under the 1917 Code, it was indeed considered wrong for a Catholic to go to any non-Catholic service.
 
Last edited:
it’s always a bit mind-boggling to me that people don’t get how the pope has the authority to make changeds in discipline or of a pastoral nature.
the protestants of today are hardly the same people are the renaissance reformers

similarly, the orthodox of today are not the same people as in 1054
 
You have to realize that the evil one has been trying to divide the Church since the beginning. Sedevacantism is not the answer. I saw a meme today, and it rings true here:

Sedevacantism is just like Protestantism, only with incense.

Don’t fall for that idea that sedevacantism could be consistent with true Tradition. I think we can all admit that there are many Catholics today who have misinterpreted what the Second Vatican Council did. But we have seen this going on for centuries in the Church. We think it’s bad now with some of the controversies we have, but how bad would it be if we had bishops denying the divinity of Christ, as we did during the Arian heresy? Trust our Lord’s promise, that the gates of hell won’t prevail against the Barque of Peter, even if she appears to be sinking. Call to mind what Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI said at the funeral of a cardinal in 2017:
What particularly impressed me in that last talk with the retired Cardinal, was the loosened joy, the inner joy, and the confidence he had found. We know that this passionate shepherd and pastor found it difficult to leave his post, especially at a time in which the Church stands in particularly pressing need of convincing shepherds who can resist the dictatorship of the spirit of the age and who live and think the faith with determination. However, what moved me all the more was that, in this last period of his life, he learned to let go and to live out of a deep conviction that the Lord does not abandon His Church, even when the boat has taken on so much water as to be on the verge of capsizing.
Click to expand...
I will keep you in my prayers during this time, GloriaDei. Cling ever closer to Holy Mother Church at this time. Pray for the intercession of the great saintly popes, including St. John Paul II, as they represented the visible unity we share with Christ, the Head of the Church.

And while I understand what you mean, that your friend is (misguidedly) looking out for your soul, you might also ask your friend what his particular Church teaches on the indissolubility of marriage, and contraception as well. Not to mention, Byzantine Catholics don’t add the Filioque in their recitation of the Creed, so I don’t know why he brings that up. Nostra Aetate is orthodox, but again, certain groups of people like to twist its words, just as certain priests and bishops twisted Scripture to make Christ not appear divine during the Arian controversy.

Feel free to send me a PM at any time, and be assured of my prayers. Do not lose faith in Christ’s Church! Again, from Pope Benedict:
The Church – and in her, Christ – still suffers today… Again and again the little barque of the Church is ripped apart by the winds of ideologies, whose waters seep into her and seem to condemn her to sink. Yet, precisely in the suffering Church, Christ is victorious…

He stays in his barque, in the little boat of the Church.
Click to expand...
 
How can the Catholic Church claim that Christians ought to act a certain way in the world, and turn it directly on its head, and claim to have the unchanging Tradition of the Apostles? If there are contradictions between Councils, Canon Law, or anything of the sort, isn’t that a huge problem? I admit ignorance on many points as still being new to Catholicism, but there does appear to be a huge elephant in the room nobody wants to acknowledge. What is ‘Tradition’? Is it unchangeable, or is it to change by the whims of the days we live in, and it’s culture?
 
[First]
Not being an expert on Vatican Councils, but nevertheless, remarkably well understood the condition and point of them.

Vatican II Council was taking everything in the First Vatican Council. Expounding upon it. Then, to move forward. The Church witnessed two World Wars. And the after affects of them. The faithful who hid Jews. And, other evils the faithful were faced with, during that time. There was a lot of prayer, and faith during those wars as well.

Vatican II was to call the faithful out of hiding and fear. To not be afraid! For Saint Pope John Paul II, a man who was faced with war over his country. And later on, wherefore assassination was attempted upon his life. This man told the Bishops to take courage!

The Second Vatican Council was supposed to work in this way. To prepare for the Springtime of Evangelizaiton. But, as anything the Church does, the devil is always in the works. This was the wonder of the sex revolutionists, who wanted the Church to change Her teachings beside on rubrics of the Mass. They wanted to have Her change Her teaching on sexuality too. Which by this great distraction given upon Her to protect the rubrics of the Mass. This then created Traditionalist Schisms. This then, also gave sexual predators entrance into religious orders. Thus, the Church had two wars She was being affronted with: War on Rubrics of the Mass, and War on Her teaching on Sexuality.

The Second Vatican Council did not elevate a war upon the Sacraments, or Her teaching on sexuality and the family. However, dissolute fallen men and women did!
 
[Second]
I have yet to see these people named for the cover that this gave to child sexual predatorial men and women who entered. I have yet til even the state government which also edified these aggrandizement and satisfaction of lustful perverse men, and their disordered ways. Trending through the sexual revolution. I have yet to see the great condemnation of the state, society, and those who preferred the Church to accept them.

I have yet to see the Justice Department taken to task for the all sexual predators permitted under the veil of Civil Rights and Justice. Which in their legal regimen, they allowed for.

I have yet to see the heinous society of men and women criticized and named from the sixties, seventies, and eighties (the Michael Jackson generation.) I have yet to see these people condemned for their promiscuous concept and lifestyle which was advertised and welcome to the very sexual crimes that were enacted during that time.

It wasn’t the Second Vatican Council that was a problem, or the problem But a bunch of sexual crazed men and women in society from that much celebrated generation of the Beatles, and every misfortune of Rock and Roll, which includes sex. And drugs. I have for the clowns of that time to hang their heads low in shame. And found apart of the same corrupt institution of society that allowed for sexual predatorial men seeking especially the young.

I have yet to hear that expressed and condemned. Every one from that generation that shared in the highlights and perversity. And yes, those who lowered their guard and protection of young children during that time. And that was the problem. Not the Second Vatican Council.
 
It’s because of what angel11 said about these rules being of a pastoral nature.

In past centuries, including the first half of the 20th century, there was a great concern about Catholics being somehow led away from the Church by associating with non-Catholics, like going to their churches, marrying them, etc. The Church responded by basically trying to keep Catholics away from them. Post-Vatican II, the Church has decided to try a different strategy of building more bridges with non-Catholic groups.

I’ll admit to being a little dubious about it at times because no matter how nice the Protestant or other non-Catholic people are, sooner or later a strong Catholic is going to have to put his foot down about how the non-Catholic church is simply wrong on this or that, or in cases other than Orthodox does NOT have the Real Presence, and then the non-Catholic people get all upset about the Catholic telling the truth, with which they disagree. (This happens all the time on threads about non-Catholic religion on here.) At times like that, I feel like it would have been easier to just keep the previous directive of non-association. But we do have to live in the world, they are our neighbors and share a lot of our social concerns like a desire for peace, so I try to keep an open mind. In any event, it doesn’t violate any commandment of God to pray with some non-Catholics occasionally as long as we do not desert our church or Jesus in order to do so. It’s not a doctrinal change. It’s just a change in pastoral approach.
 
Last edited:
It is has deep roots in the “spiritism” around the turn of the 20th century as well.
 
GloriaDei said:
How can the Catholic Church claim that Christians ought to act a certain way in the world, and turn it directly on its head, and claim to have the unchanging Tradition of the Apostles?
Click to expand...
In the same way our One and Only God demanded His Faithful to abstain from eating shell fish, pork and other unclean foods, but that same God revealed to St. Peter that His Faithful are now permitted to eat all types of meat. In the Old Testament, in the Macabees we read how an entire family was tortured to death for refusing to disobey God’s original commandment not to eat shellfish pork and unclean foods, but I doubt that they’re complaining about God changing that law. Laws can change. Truth cannot.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top