I am considering the Orthodox Church

[Lapell]

Can you sacramentally say to a faithful that you forgive him his sins in the Name of the Father, the Son, and the holy Spirit?

This the pope can, a bishop can, a priest can. But you and me can’t, or can we?

 

[Lapell]

I became Catholic four years ago. It is embarrassing to have to live through these scandals to say the least. I considered Orthodoxy before I became Catholic. I am not convinced you would not find the same sort of scandal among Orthodox priests. Like Billy Graham once said, if you find a perfect church join it and it won’t be perfect anymore. Wheat and tare grow side by side – it’s not easy to know who is a wheat and who a tare. Most people are a little bit of both.

I am a bit afraid that if Hollywood ever makes a remake of Bells of Saint Mary’s or Going My Way they will decide to star Ricky Martin in them. That’s becoming the unfortunate stereotype.

What does “The Bells of St.Mary’s” have to do with “Going My Way”? And what is the Latino singer Ricky Martin doing in the picture? (Maybe it’s because I’m not American nor an English-speaker, but I am often slow on these kinds of imaged speech…)

 

[Catholic20064]

What does “The Bells of St.Mary’s” have to do with “Going My Way”? And what is the Latino singer Ricky Martin doing in the picture? (Maybe it’s because I’m not American nor an English-speaker, but I am often slow on these kinds of imaged speech…)

Both were movies starring Bing Crosby as a Catholic priest. Ricky Martin just announced that he’s gay.

 

[Lapell]

Both were movies starring Bing Crosby as a Catholic priest. Ricky Martin just announced that he’s gay.

So, that’s what it was… I first thought you had mistaken the actor Steve Martin for the singer, and the I couldn’t see what it would mean either… thank you for your explanation! Good Holy Week!

 

[Mickey]

Ahem! Hum, Mickey, when we confess with all our being (including the deeds) that Christ is the Messiah, the Son of the living God, we may be eligible to some access to the mystery of God, but as to being in hold of the keys… we may do foolish things after that, even lose our salvation through our own fault, and then how can we even be admitted in the Kingdom of God?

Do you think that you are holding the keys?!?

 

[dzheremi]

O.K., which dogmas in the Catholic Church are not true? I am speaking of dogmas here.

Respectfully, I’m not sure that it is wise to derail this thread further by getting into this. I have problems with various aspects of the Catholic Church, including some of its key dogma. I would not be abstaining from attending Mass or receiving the Eucharist if I did not.

 

[Mickey]

Yes. The Church, provided that she remains in unity with Peter

With all the Apostles.

In Ephrem’s days, the Church certainly was in unity with the pope in Rome, wasn’t she?

Of course. Rome had not yet separated from the other Patriarchates.

 

[Mickey]

Can you sacramentally say to a faithful that you forgive him his sins in the Name of the Father, the Son, and the holy Spirit?

I’m not sure what you are trying to say. If someone wrongs me and asks forgiveness–I say: “God forgives and so do I”.

If someone comes to me for confession, I will direct them to a priest or bishop–but of course it is not the priest or bishop who absolves them of their sins.

 

[Lapell]

Respectfully, I’m not sure that it is wise to derail this thread further by getting into this. I have problems with various aspects of the Catholic Church, including some of its key dogma. I would not be abstaining from attending Mass or receiving the Eucharist if I did not.

Well, if you can’t discuss it on this thread, you can send me a PM. I might come back to the computer next week, though, to view it and examine it, since the Holy Triduum is coming, and tomorrow night we’ll have the Chrismal Mass. O.K.? Happy Pascha!

 

[Mickey]

Happy Pascha!

You say “Pascha” also?!? Wonderful!
God bless!

 

[Lapell]

I’m not sure what you are trying to say. If someone wrongs me and asks forgiveness–I say: “God forgives and so do I”.

If someone comes to me for confession, I will direct them to a priest or bishop–but of course it is not the priest or bishop who absolves them of their sins.

I mean when he/she needs forgiveness and it’s not against you!
On the 2nd part, he still says: “Through the ministry of the Church, I forgive you your sins, in the Name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Go in peace!” He doesn’t say: “God forgives and so do I”… but “I forgive you your sins in the Name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.” Have you or not received such authority, Mickey?

 

[Mickey]

I mean when he/she needs forgiveness and it’s not against you!
On the 2nd part, he still says: “Through the ministry of the Church, I forgive you your sins, in the Name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Go in peace!” He doesn’t say: “God forgives and so do I”… but “I forgive you your sins in the Name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.” Have you or not received such authority, Mickey?

Let’s start again–we are having a communication breakdown. If someone has offended me and asks forgiveness I forgive them because Christ tells us to forgive seventy times seven times. If they need confession, I send them to an Orthodox priest or bishop. In confession, it is Christ who forgives a contrite heart.

The priest is a witness bearing testimony before Christ of all things which are being confessed.

 

[dzheremi]

You say “Pascha” also?!? Wonderful!
God bless!

I think English is virtually alone in calling it “Easter”. Wikipedia has a pretty interesting section on its etymology in various languages here.

I call it “Pascha”, too…if I am speaking Russian. But also in Spanish we call it “Pascua” (from the same root), so I probably use that more than “Easter” because I know more religious latinos than anglos.

 

[Mickey]

I think English is virtually alone in calling it “Easter”. Wikipedia has a pretty interesting section on its etymology in various languages here.

I call it “Pascha”, too…if I am speaking Russian. But also in Spanish we call it “Pascua” (from the same root), so I probably use that more than “Easter” because I know more religious latinos than anglos.

 

[josie_L]

The keys were given to all the Apostles (binding and lossing) (Matt18:18)

St. Optatus of Milevis (ca. 370 a.d.):

"Blessed Peter, to whom after his denial, it were enough if he obtained pardon, merited both to be preferred before all the Apostles, and he alone received of the kingdom of heaven the keys** to be communicated to the others.** . . .Optatus, De Schism, Don, 1. vii. n. 3, Galland, t. v. p. 501, in Colin Lindsay, The Evidence for the Papacy, (London: Longmans, 1870), 30.

St Peter’s confession of faith is “Rock”—and all the Apostles were given the power to bind and loose–hence the keys (Matt 18:18).

St. John of Damascene (ca. 680-740 a.d.):

Peter’s faith is undoubtedly the unshakable rock upon which the Church rests, but this faith is not separable from Peter’s person: it is indeed Peter who is the rock." (Homily on Holy Saturday 33, col. 636., col. 560C)

“He is at the same time the** key-bearer **of the kingdom of heaven.” (Ibid., col. 556C)

“Orderer [Peter} of the Universal Church.” (Ibid., 16, col. 569D)

“The regulator **responsible for the power of the keys.” (Ibid., 16, col. 556C)

Oh come on now. Binding and loosing is a clear reference to the keys.

It is a reference of the power of the keys not a reference of who holds the keys.

Yes. We are loke St Peter when we confess that Christ is the Messiah, the Son of the living God.

Yes, we are to look to St. Peter who lives on in the bishops of Rome.

 

[josie_L]

The vast majority of the Church Fathers believed the ‘rock’ to be Peter’s confession- including St. Augustine as noted in his work “Retractions”. That’s a concensus worth considering.

The vast majority actually refer to Peter as the rock not his confession of faith, and those who do say that the rock is his confession also state that Peter is the rock, there is no Church father that I’m aware of who ever said that the rock is EXCLUSIVELY his confession of faith, including St. Augustine.

Peter is the ‘rock’ for what reason? Just because? Denying Christ three times doesn’t seem to show the characteristic of ‘rockiness’ if we mean to imply steadfastness in faith. Either Peter was called a ‘rock’ for his confession of faith, or he was called such for no reason at all, and this naming was completely arbitrary. If that is the case we are then expected to throw out the partistic concensus and logic itself.

This should put things into perspective:

St. John of Damascene (ca. 680-740 a.d.):

Peter’s faith is undoubtedly the unshakable rock upon which the Church rests, but this faith is not separable from Peter’s person: it is indeed Peter who is the rock." (Homily on Holy Saturday 33, col. 636., col. 560C)

 

[josie_L]

Papal infallibility is a 19th century innovation.

I think I’ll just rehash my last post to Michael for this one: Universal jurisdiction was a prerogative of popes (John 21:15) that was consistently supported by popes as well as many Church fathers. Moreoever, there is a plethora of evidence indicating that the pope was indeed infallible in that there was no recourse to his decisions, i.e., no higher authority of appeal within the Church, and all conciliar decisions needed to be ratified (as evidenced by history and tradition) by the pope before they could be made into law.

St. Nicephorus, Patriarch of Constantinople (758-828 a.d.):

Without whom (the Romans presiding in the seventh Council) a doctrine brought forward in the Church could not, even though confirmed by canonical decrees and by ecclesiastical usage, ever obtain full approval or currency. For it is they (the Roman pontiffs) who have had assigned to them the rule in sacred things, and who have received into their hands the dignity of headship among the Apostles. (Nicephorus, Niceph. Cpl. pro. s. imag. c 25 (Mai N. Bibl. pp. ii. 30)

Theodore the Studite (759-826 a.d.)

Let him (Patriarch Nicephorus of Constantinople) assemble a synod of those with whom he has been at variance, if it is impossible that representatives of the other Patriarchs should be present, a thing which might certainly be if the Emperor should wish the Western Patriarch (the Roman Pope) to be present, to whom is given authority over an ecumenical synod; but let him make peace and union by sending his synodical letters to the prelate of the First See. (Theodore the Studite, Patr. Graec. 99, 1420)

“I witness now before God and men, **they have torn themselves from the Body of Christ, from the supreme see, in which Christ placed the keys of the faith, against which the gates of hell (I mean the mouths of heretics) have not prevailed, and never will until the consummation, according to the promise of Him who cannot lie. ** Let the most blessed and apostolic Paschal rejoice therefore, for he has fulfilled the work of Peter” (Theodore of Studite, Bk. II Ep. 63, Patr. Graec. 99, 1281)

Peter of Chrysologus (c. A.D. 400-450)

"We exhort you in every respect, honourable brother, to heed obediently what has been written by the Most Blessed Pope of the City of Rome; for Blessed Peter, who lives and presides in his own see, provides the truth of faith to those who seek it. For we, by reason of our pursuit of peace and faith, cannot try cases on the faith without the consent of the Bishop of the City of Rome."

Flavian (Patriarch of Constantinople, d. A.D. 449) - to Pope Leo I

“The whole question needs only your single decision and all will be settled in peace and quietness. Your sacred letter will with God’s help completely suppress the heresy which has arisen and the disturbance which it has caused; and so the convening of a council which is in any case difficult will be rendered superfluous.”

St. Maximus the Confessor (c. 650)

The extremities of the earth, and everyone in every part of it who purely and rightly confess the Lord, look directly towards the Most Holy Roman Church and her confession and faith, as to a sun of unfailing light awaiting from her the brilliant radiance of the sacred dogmas of our Fathers, according to that which the inspired and holy Councils have stainlessly and piously decreed. For, from the descent of the Incarnate Word amongst us, all the churches in every part of the world have held the greatest Church alone to be their base and foundation, seeing that, according to the promise of Christ Our Savior, the gates of hell will never prevail against her, that she has the keys of the orthodox confession and right faith in Him, that she opens the true and exclusive religion to such men as approach with piety, and she shuts up and locks every heretical mouth which speaks against the Most High. (Maximus, Opuscula theologica et polemica, Migne, Patr. Graec. vol. 90)

How much more in the case of the clergy and Church of the Romans, which from old until now presides over all the churches which are under the sun? Having surely received this canonically, as well as from councils and the apostles, as from the princes of the latter (Peter and Paul), and being numbered in their company, she is subject to no writings or issues in synodical documents, on account of the eminence of her pontificate …**even as in all these things all are equally subject to her (the Church of Rome) according to sacerodotal law. And so when, without fear, but with all holy and becoming confidence, those ministers (the popes) are of the truly firm and immovable rock, that is of the most great and Apostolic Church of Rome. **(Maximus, in J.B. Mansi, ed. Amplissima Collectio Conciliorum, vol. 10)

John, Patriarch of Jerusalem (575 - 593 A.D.) to the Archbishop of the Georgian monks who had a colony in his city:

"As for us, that is to say, the Holy Church, we have the word of the Lord, who said to Peter, Chief of the Apostles, when giving him the primacy of the Faith for the strengthening of the churches. ‘Thou are Peter, etc.’ To this same Peter He has given the keys of heaven and earth; it is in following his faith that to this day his disciples and the doctors of the Catholic Church bind and loose; they bind the wicked and loose from their chains those who do penance. Such is, above all, the privilege of those who on the first most holy and venerable See are the successors of Peter, sound in the Faith, and according to the Word of the Lord, infallible."

to be continued. . .

 

[josie_L]

St. Sophronius, Patriarch of Jerusalem (ca. 638 a.d)

Traverse quickly all the world from one end to the other until you come to the Apostolic See, where are the foundation of the orthodox doctrine, make clearly knows to the most holy personages of that throne the questions agitated among us. Cease not to pray and to be then until their apostolic and Divine wisdom shall have pronounced the victorious judgment and destroyed from the foundation. . . . the new heresy." (Sophoronius [quoted by Bishop Stephen of Dora to Martin I at Lateran council]
, Mansi, x, 893).

St. Isidore of Seville

We know who is in charge in the Church of Christ to the extent that we reverently, humbly, and devoutly profess more especially to give due obedience in all things to the Roman Pontiff as God’s Vicar. Whoever proudly resists this principle, we decree, is altogether outside the fellowship of the faithful as a heretic. (Isidore, Ep. ad Claud. ducem)

Three councils in Africa, in their Synodical letter sent to Pope Theodore, and read in the Council of Rome under Martin I a.d. 646: - 'No one can doubt that there is in the Apostolic See a great unfailing fountain, pouring forth waters for all Christians; whence rich streams proceed, bountifully irrigating the whole Christian world; to which See also, in honour of blessed Peter, the decrees of the Fathers gave special veneration in searching out the things of God, which ought by all means to be carefully examined; and above all, and justly, is, as well to condemn evils as to commend things that are to be praised. For by the ancient discipline it is ordained that whatsoever be done, even in provinces remote and afar off, shall neither be treated or nor accepted, unless it be first brought to the knowledge of your August See, so that a just sentence may be confirmed by its authority, and and that the other Churches may thence receive the original preaching as from its native source, and that the mysteries of saving faith may remain in uncorrupt purity throughout the various regions of the world. (Epist. Synod. ad Pap. Theod. lect. in Concil. Rom. ann. 649, sub. P. Mart.)

[St. Gregory the Great] Gregory receives this oath from a bishop returning from schism: "And therefore after I discovered the snare of division by which I was held,** I humbly and spontaneously was led by divine grace to return to the unity of the apostolic see (Rome) and lest I be thought to return not through a pure intention but deceitfully, I swear, under pain of the loss of my order, and under the bond of anathema, and promise to thee, and through thee to Saint Peter, prince of the apostles, and to his vicar, the most blessed Gregory or his successors , that I will never, through anyone’s persuasion or in any other way return to schism**, from which I have been delivered through the mercy of our redeemer, but shall always remain, throughout all things, in the unity of the holy Catholic Church and the communion of the Roman Pontiff." (St. Gregory the Great, Register of Epistles , Book XII, Ep. 7).

Pope Pelagius II (ca. 579-590 a.d. ):

“Since the authority of convoking General synods by a singular privilege has been delivered to the Apostolic See of Blessed Peter, and we do not read that any synod was ever considered ratified which was not supported by Apostolic authority.” (Pope Pelagius II, Ep. 6 ad Orient)

Roman Synod in 531 writing to Pope Boniface II:

"Nor is it lawful for us to dissent in any way from the height of Your Apostleship, whom Christ our Lord willed, in his place, to be the head of us all on earth." (Ep. ad Bonif.)

Emperor Justinian I (520-533 a.d.)

"Nor do we allow that any of these things, concerning ecclesiastical institution, should fail to be brought before his Holiness, as being the head of all the holy priests of God, and because as often as heretics have arisen in these parts, have been repressed by the sentence and judgment of that Holy See." (Justinian Epist. ad Epiphan. Cod. Justinian, lib. i. n. 7)

"Yielding honour to the Apostolic See, and to your Holiness, and honouring your holiness, as one ought to honour a father. . . we have hastened to subject all the priests of the whole Eastern district, and to unite them to the See of your Holiness. . . For we do not allow of any point, however manifest and indisputable it be, which relates to the state of the Churches, not being brought to the cognizance of your Holiness, since you are the Head of all holy churches." (Justinian, Epist. ad Pap. Joan. ii. Cod. Justin. lib. i. tit. 1)

St. Avitus

**“You know that the Synodal laws have it that if any doubt arise in matters pertaining to the state of the Church, we have recourse to the Bishop of the Roman Church as to our head.” **(Avitus, Fragm. i., p. 746, t.x. Galland.)

Pope St. Gelasius (ca. 492 a.d.)

The first See both confirms every synod by its authority, and guards by its continuous rule, by reason, to wit, of its supremacy, which, received by the Apostle Peter from the mouth of the Lord, the Church nevertheless seconding, it both always has held and retains. . . **We will not pass over in silence what every Church throughout the world knows, that the See of the Blessed Apostle Peter has the right to absolve from what has been bound by the sentence of any prelates whatsoever, in that it has the right of judging of the whole Church; neither is it lawful for any one to pass judgment on its judgment, seeing that the canons have willed that it may be appealed to from any part of the world, but that from it no one be permitted to appeal." **(Gelasius, Epist. xiii, ad Episc. Dardum, p. 1200, Labbe; and Thiel, Epist. xxvi. n. 5, tom. i. p. 399)

to be continued. . .

 

[jam070406]

No he’s not. You read papal supremacy/infallibility into the text when it is not there.

No, I don’t see the text saying “you are all rocky and upon all you rockies I will build my Church” which is what he stated.
I merely stated it was Peter, who’s confession was revealed to him by the Father. And you claim they were all little Peters by their confession but when Jesus asked them, they all, but Peter (who recieved Divine revelation) got it wrong. And you didn’t Answer why Jesus didn’t change Andrew’s name to Peter. And why did Jesus specifically pray for Peter that he would strengthen his brothers? Why didn’t he just pray for all the “Peters”?

All of the Apostles were given the authority to bind and loose. They were all “singled out”.

Peter (and his confession) was singled out as the Rock while they were at Caesarea Philippi.

He needed the triple affirmation of Jesus Christ to restore his apostolic standing.

How did the others have their “apostolic standing” restored after they abandoned Jesus? And why was only Peter singled out for such affirmation?

Do you remember the heretic Honorius?

Yes, because you love to bring him up so often.
Not sure what he has to do with this discussion though.

Huh?

Why would you quote Augustine when, according to you, he didn’t even get one of the basic tenets of the Faith, Original Sin, correct?

 

[josie_L]

Emperor Valentinian III (ca. 450 a.d):

“The primacy of the Apostolic See having been established by the merit of the Apostle Peter, by the dignity of the city of Rome, and by the authority of the holy Synod, **no pretended power shall arrogate to itself anything against the authority of that See. For peace can be universally preserved only when the whole Church acknowledges its ruler **[445 a.d.].” (Valentinian, in Ap. Neander, Hist. of Ch. iii. p. 246)

Theodoret, Bishop of Cyrus (ca. 450 a.d.):

**“I, therefore, beseech your holiness to persuade the most holy and blessed Archbishop (Leo) to use his apostolic power, and to order me to hasten to your Council. For that most holy throne has the sovereignty over the churches throughout the universe on many grounds.” **(Theodoret, Tom. iv. Epist. cxvi. Renato, p. 1197)

Pope Celestine (ca. 423 a.d.)

"Placed as we are by God on a watchtower, . . . our spiritual care fails not as regards places however distant, but extends through all places where the name of God is preached." (Celestine, Epist. iv. Univ. Episc. per Vienn et Narbonens Prov. n. 1. Galland, ix.)

Pope St. Innocent I (410 a.d.)

[To the Council of Milevis} Yea, **why have you confirmed this by your own act, but that you know that, throughout all the provinces, answers to questions always emanate from the Apostolic spring. Especially, as often as questions of faith are agitated

, I am of opinion that all our brethren and fellow -bishops ought not to refer but to Peter - that is, to the Author of their name and honour - even as your friendliness has now referred (to ascertain) what may be for the common weal of all the churches throughout the whole world. For the authors of these evils must needs be more cautious, in seeing themselves, upon the report of two synods, separated from the communion of the Church, by the Decree of our sentence." (Innocent, Ep. xxx. ad Concil. Milev. n. 1,2, 6. Ib. p. 602-3)

“These are the things which it behooves every Catholic Bishop, having before his eyes the judgment of God, henceforward to observe. . . That if any causes, or contentions, arise between clergy of the higher, or even of an inferior order, the dispute be settled agreeable to the Synod of Nicaea, by an assembly of the Bishops of that same province, and that it be not lawful for any one . . . .to leave these priests (bishops), who by the will of God govern the Church of God, and to have recourse to other provinces. ** If any greater causes shall have been brought forward (or discussed), let them, after episcopal judgment, be referred to the Apostolic See, as the synod (of Nicaea) resolved, and a blessed custom requires.”** (Innocent, Ep. ii. ad Victric. n. 1,2,3,5,6, Galland. t. viii. p. 547)

Alcuin, English Monk (780 a.d.)

"Lest he be found a schismatic or a non-Catholic, let him follow the most approved authority of the Roman Church, so that we may ever have the examples of our salvation from the same place we received the beginnings of the Catholic faith." (Alcuin, Ep. 70)

The formula of Pope Hormisdas, a.d. 519, by the Eastern Emperor, Patriarch, and (Eastern) Bishops (and confirmed in 869 by the Fathers of the eight General Council) is as follows:

"In the Apostolic See the Catholic religion has always been kept undefiled and her holy doctrine proclaimed. Desiring, therefore, not to be in the least degree separated from the faith and doctrine of that See, we hope that we may deserve to be in the one communion with you which the Apostolic See preaches, in which is the entire and true solidity of the Christian religion: promising also that the names of those who are cut off from communion of the Catholic Church, that is, not consentient with the Apostolic See, shall not be recited during the sacred mysteries. This is my profession, I have subscribed with my own hand, and delivered to you Hormisda, the holy and venerable pope of the city of Rome." (Form. Hormisd. Episc. Orient. Praescript. Denzinger’s Enchirid. p. 42, ed. 1874)

to be continued. . . .