They sure are rare, but I do know of a few (Roman Catholic):
And
And
Last edited:
- Status
And
And
Looks good to me. When I said “do they not use icons?”, that was my way of saying “don’t they use icons?”, not “is it true that they do not use icons?”.HomeschoolDad:
No, they definitely use icons:
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
Again very beautiful if you ask me, I wouldn’t mind at all if more of our altars looked like this.
A
AlNg
Guest
AFAIK, No such thing is said in Holy Scripture, or in Unam Sanctam or in the Baltimore Catechism or in the CCC. If what you say is not heresy, show us your claim in the CCC or in official church documents:
Your claim:
AFAIK, it is similar for those who claim that at the last split second before death, a non-Catholic will be given the choice to submit to the Roman Pontiff or to go to hell. There is no such thing ever said like that in the bible or in the CCC.
Jesus didn’t, but Paul had plenty to say about not needing to circumcise, have a look:
A
AlNg
Guest
I don’t see any possibility of a reunion between Orthodox and Catholic as long as Catholics continue to claim that everyone in the world is subject to the Roman Pontiff and further that the Roman Pontiff has supreme and universal jurisdiction over the whole church including the liturgy of the Eastern Churches. And the teaching of Vatican I on infallibility of the Pope. Do you really think that the Orthodox are going to accept these teachings? If so, please read the following letter to Pope Francis and see how many Orthodox view the possibility of reunion:
http://orthodoxinfo.com/ecumenism/epistle-to-pope-francis.pdf
Last edited:
P
Paul_Edwards
Guest
Any Bishop who says that has failed in his mission that was given to him by Christ as a successor of the apostles, even if for the sake of argument that Bishop was to be a Roman Pontiff.
As faithful Catholics, we will continue to follow the mission Our Lord have to His Church, and bring Christ to everyone and Baptise all nations. All the apostles were Jewish and hence Christ broke this modernist rule by bringing them to Himself (and we still imitate Christ in this).
A
AlNg
Guest
Do you say that the Vatican has failed in its mission?
Last edited:
O
OrbisNonSufficit
Guest
Thank you, I was aware of that and used it as way to say “not everything needs to be said by Jesus to be true”. Apostles have power of their own which came from our Lord and was given to the Church.
I do. After all, East was once aware of inerrancy of Rome (St. George the Hagiorite, St. Maximus the Confessor etc), so maybe Orthodox can return to their roots. Anyway, Papal Infallibility is not there for Pope to invent new religion but to safeguard what has been handed down to us in Apostolic Faith. It can be clarified how do other Bishops play a role in this in accordance with Primacy and collegiality- but some Orthodox also accept this High-Petrine view already.
I would say they ignorantly put it on hold, and that is wrong but it isn’t like they are going to stay this way.
Thank you, I found this thread. Unam Sanctam explains that it is necessary for salvation (for plan of salvation), that every creature is subject to Roman Pontiff- meaning inside the Church. Same language “subject to” is used by Pope St. Gregory the Great when speaking about Constantinople (“who doubts it is subject to Apostolic See?”). Orthodox apologetics say it means formal submission to primacy (nonsensical if you do realize what Primacy meant in historical context) and therefore means those in communion with Roman Pontiff to Orthodoxy, so not much of a stretch as it basically combines two things:
Where is Peter, there is the Church. (St. Ambrose of Milan)
Church is salvation (Bishop Kallistos Ware)
Our Lord already established everything necessary for salvation on this world and hence He already established every creature as subject to Roman Pontiff because it was necessary for salvation. Same way Lord’s Coming was necessary for salvation, so He came.
Last edited:
Z
ziapueblo
Guest
Both East and West used leavened bread. About halfway through the first millennium the Latin Church began using unleavened bread.
ZP
A
AlNg
Guest
How can the Vatican be ignorant if Jesus gave them the keys to loose and to bind?
A thread on CAF is not an official Church document.
Last edited:
Z
ziapueblo
Guest
Because St Maximus the Confessor makes a statement about the Church of Rome it means he accepted Papal supremacy? Both East and West were in communion at the time. When Constantinople fell to heresy, St Maximus then adhered to the correct confession of Rome. It makes sense if Rome carries the Orthodox faith it would be reaffirmed but it does not mean that St Maximus believed in supreme and immediate jurisdiction over the whole Church. Again, at this time all the Patriarchs were in communion with one another (except for the Oriental Orthodox of course).
St Theodore the Studite, too, appealed to Rome during the Iconoclastic Controversy, and his praise of Rome’s correct beliefs is likewise misrepresented as support for a notion of Papal primacy. It seems anytime an Eastern Saint speaks of Rome having correct belief its turned into a belief in Papal supremacy.
ZP
You don’t say. Never heard that before. I don’t doubt it, but I always just assumed that the ancient Church used unleavened bread — a specialized type of Passover matzoh — and that somehow, leavened bread came into use by the East, for reasons unknown to me.HomeschoolDad:
Both East and West used leavened bread. About halfway through the first millennium the Latin Church began using un leavened bread.
Sometimes one does not know as much as one thinks one knows
Everyone forgive my being a raging idiot, please, but do the Oriental Orthodox have patriarchs? If not, did they ever have them?
Z
ziapueblo
Guest
They do, Pope of the Coptic Orthodox Church of Alexandria, Pope Tawadros II and others. I’m sure some on this forum could name them. I can’t off the top of my head.
ZP
Last edited:
So are you saying that one of the patriarchs of the Pentarchy is not Eastern Orthodox, but Oriental Orthodox?HomeschoolDad:
They do, Pope of the Coptic Orthodox Church of Alexandria, Pope Tawadros II and others. I’m sure some on this forum could name them. I can’t off the top of my head.
J
Jragzz123
Guest
A lot of people are saying lots of good things. I’m wondering if there is anything in the church fathers or early councils that say if you aren’t with the pope you’ll go to hell? That is more what my original post was about.
Z
ziapueblo
Guest
There are actually many. Here the breakdown:
Antioch: Greek Orthodox Patriarch of Antioch, Melkite Greek Catholic Patriarch of Antioch andAlexandria, Maronite Catholic Patriarch of Antioch, Syriac Orthodox Patriarch of Antioch (Oriental Orthodox) and Syriac Catholic Patriarch of Antioch and all the East
Alexandria: Greek Orthodox Patriarch of Alexandria, Melkite Greek Catholic Patriarch of Antioch andAlexandria, Coptic Patriarch of Alexandria
Anyone, if I missed a Patriarch please add to the list.
ZP
Antioch: Greek Orthodox Patriarch of Antioch, Melkite Greek Catholic Patriarch of Antioch andAlexandria, Maronite Catholic Patriarch of Antioch, Syriac Orthodox Patriarch of Antioch (Oriental Orthodox) and Syriac Catholic Patriarch of Antioch and all the East
Alexandria: Greek Orthodox Patriarch of Alexandria, Melkite Greek Catholic Patriarch of Antioch andAlexandria, Coptic Patriarch of Alexandria
Anyone, if I missed a Patriarch please add to the list.
ZP
That’s a lot of patriarchs.
I didn’t know any of the five ancient see-cities could even have more than one patriarch. I didn’t know that was allowed.
Z
ziapueblo
Guest
It’s been a while since I read this but I believe Bishop Nicholas Samra gives a brief history:
https://melkite.org/eparchy/bishop-nicholas/eastern-catholicism-in-the-middle-east
ZP
- Status