If the Eastern Orthodox Church and the Catholic Church were united how would you feel about it?

[Joab_Anias]

In other words, you’re saying that it is a mistake and not orthodox for our Church to refuse Holy Communion to those who are not practicing members of the Church.

Catholics are practicing members of the Church too.

Do you realize that you’ve just condemned nearly two millennia of Christian practice? Your Church innovated the Tradition by letting those who aren’t faithful members of the Church (even if in pious ignorance) to receive Holy Communion. If you condemn us for not following your innovation, you condemn the whole ancient Church in the process. If you are content in doing this, how can you honestly say that the early Church is the Roman Catholic Church?

No I didn’t realize I did that nor was that my intent. You see we also see our tradition as two millennia old and they are. My opinion is no condemnation and subject to change. I don’t see it as an us and you thing. I see it as righteous to remove stumbling blocks from our praxis if it keeps anyone from Christ and His word supports this.

Those who aren’t Orthodox aren’t fully our brothers. We respect the non-Orthodox, who call upon the name of Christ and see them as our brothers in a sense, but full unity of Faith is lacking and this precludes us from allowing non-Orthodox to commune in our Church.

I understand. We hold the same truth. However we do what we can to reach out to them. How do you reach out to non-Orthodox besides polemics? Where is the action. How is the faith put into practice by alienation? Isn’t that a tearing down of your brother rather than a building up?

To me it seems you deem equality with God something to be grasped at. After all do you not deny the validity of our sacraments and even the authenticity of the Pope himself? I think your to hard on those your separated from. (again my fallible opinion).

Current truth cannot contradict past truth. It was once the belief of your Church that those not visible members of your Church were ineligible for receive Holy Communion. This is no longer true in your Church. The Holy Spirit leads us to preserve the truth, not to replace it with other beliefs. Which spirit is leading your Church?

The truth hasn’t changed and the Church doesn’t contradict any more than Gods word does. The Holy Spirit only leads us to what IS true. His Mercy is true. Why would it not make a member he who wants to repent and be saved though he is by good cause unable to attend a year of RCIA. Perfection is not a prerequisite to membership is it? Repentance and faith is.

Act 2:21 “And it shall be that everyone who shall call on the name of the Lord will be saved.” Joel 2:28-32
Rom 10:13 For everyone, “whoever may call on the name of the Lord will be saved.” Joel 2:32

The problem is not that you won’t adopt our traditions, but that you rejected them. We didn’t invent our discipline on Holy Communion. Christ did and it has always been maintained in Holy Orthodoxy. What gives your Church the right to change this immemorial part of the Holy Tradition?

Please show me in scripture where Jesus denied anyone communion. The Church does have the right to remove stumbling blocks to honest people coming to the faith. Never does it reject your tradition, it’s the same as ours except where it has departed since the schism and failed to ascend to the teaching authority of the Church. It’s your claim that your Church hasn’t changed since the schism. That could be interpreted as that it hasn’t been led as fully by the Holy Spirit and our understanding of Christ’s revelation is complete. Shouldn’t that mean its time for Him to return? What is still missing? I see one thing as missing is Unity that Christ prays for. Do you see us reverting to look back and become pillars of salt like lots wife? Isn’t the divide just widening the longer you hold out? If what you claim is true (and I believe you’re sincere) why aren’t we unified? JW’s claim only 144000 will be saved at the second coming. If this were true which it isn’t wouldn’t you be saying the remnant mentioned in the Apocalypse will be only from your Church? Are you saying that you are in full communion with God here on Earth? I thought that didn’t occur until we were in heaven.

Cont …

 

[Joab_Anias]

You are fond of quoting Holy Scripture. However, divorced from the traditional interpretation of the Church, all your quotes are no better than those of Protestants, who likewise divorce Scripture from its traditional interpretation.

There are some differences. I receive the body of Christ and as such He lives in and transforms me from within. I respect and study the traditions of the Church and understand its method of hermeneutics. Even protestants can be led by the Holy Spirit and not everything they say is less than noteworthy wouldn’t you agree? If a protestant tells me:

2Ti 3:16 All scripture, inspired of God, is profitable to teach, to reprove, to correct, to instruct in justice:

I must agree as I cannot protest sacred scripture. Why don’t you give the scriptures I feel led to quote the same chance to effect you? Are you allowed only to hear scripture from your bishop?

Besides, if Orthodoxy came into union with Papal Rome, we would be conceding the principle that Tradition can change whenever the Popes want it too.

You know as well as I do that the Pope doesn’t assert this. You would have to concede no such thing. This is evidenced in the encouragement of Eastern Catholics to maintain their heritage, customs, praxis and cultures.

This would be an act of surrender to innovation, which would remove any safeguard against this happening in our own Churches.

It is true that removing stumbling blocks has caused us suffering but we do it gladly with joy for Christ’s sake and it hasn’t removed the safeguard of Christ’s promises. Even some of the Pharisees believe Christ’s innovations; after all He said “before Abraham I AM” which was blasphemy for the Jew. Many who did believe were afraid to show they believed though because of the “law”. Don’t we as Christians know that Jesus didn’t abolish the old covenant but fulfilled it. The Church acts the same. The Pharisees haven’t changed in over three millennia. Would you say they are then correct? It is our sins that crucify Jesus.

It would be the end of the patristic understanding of Holy Tradition in the Orthodox Church. Apparently, you want this of us. This reveals how far your Church is from the ancient and true Church of Christ.

That accusation shouldn’t be apparent at all. What should be apparent is the guidance of the Holy Spirit in Christ’s promise. The patristic understanding of the Church continues my friend. It didn’t end in the 9th century or with the schism.

Your Church’s innovations are perpetuating discord. We wouldn’t be having this discussion 50 years ago. Whose fault is the discord, again

That discussion is on going and began more than 500 years ago now. It culminated in Vat II. Sin and the deceiver are the authors of discord. Not the Church.

God’s will as revealed in the Holy Tradition of the Church is what is efficacious for the faithful. Arbitrary innovations only lead to ruin, for they aren’t based on immutable truth.

Sounds like what a Pharisee said to Jesus for forgiving sin and healing on the Sabbath. We wish to abolish nothing my friend. We are following Gods will within our souls with the actions of our human will. What the Church is doing is efficacious for more than just ourselves.

Peace.

 

[anthony022071]

Of course that is not what it says. The church, all who are saved according to scripture, is the pillar and foundation of truth for the world. It says nothing about the Catholic church being able to go beyond scripture to establish later traditions that do not originate from Christ.

The traditions that Christ established are the sacraments of the Church. If the Church is the pillar and foundation of truth,then there is no question of the Church establishing traditions which are contrary to Christ. The Church was never limited to what is said in scripture,and there is nothing in scripture which says that scripture is sufficient for the rule of faith. It was the Church that determined what writings were to be part of the canon. Whatever books of the Bible that protestants accept were chosen and canonized and preserved by the Roman Catholic Church.

ABSOLUTELY. Scripture is not of personal interpretation. You see, Catholics love to quote 20 and ignore 21 because it meets THEIR incorrect belief system

Paul was referring to the Jewish prophets,who were all bound to the same Jewish religion. The Spirit goes to whom it will,but the gift of prophecy is not a basis for a rule of faith.

*2Th 2:15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle. *
As you can clearly see in this verse, the tradition, I notice how your translation distorts the Bible to add a big T to suit your preconceived beliefs despite John’s warning.

The translations which say “word” or “word of mouth” refer to the same thing as “oral tradition”. The word is speech,whether or not it is scripture.

 

[anthony022071]

Yes, its true, Paul taught them when he saw them. Do you have some of Paul’s teaching not in scripture? Of course not. You do not.

Paul’s teaching is not the end of Christian doctrine,so it doesn’t matter. It was Peter who was the head apostle and the rock upon which the Church was built,and Paul went to visit Peter for verification of what he had been teaching.
The Trinitarian confession of faith is not to be found in Paul’s letters.

St. Basil:

“The day would fail me, if I went through the mysteries of the Church which are not in Scripture. I pass by the others, the very confession of faith, in Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, from what written document have we?” (On the Holy Spirit 67)

They happened in the past so of course they are traditions but now we have them in scripture.

A rule of faith which resides only in scripture is an inauthentic,archeological faith. The true rule of faith is a living tradition which is passed down by word of mouth and by example from the apostles. Not everything was written down in scripture.

St. Basil the Great (A.D. 329-379):

“Of the dogmas and kergymas preserved in the Church, some we possess from written teaching and others we receive from the tradition of the Apostles, handed on to us in mystery. In respect to piety both are of the same force. No one will contradict any of these, no one, at any rate, who is even moderately versed in manners ecclesiastical. Indeed, were we to try to reject the unwritten customs as having no great authority, we would unwittingly injure the Gospel in its vitals; or rather, we would reduce kergyma to a mere term” (Holy Spirit 27:66).

St. Athanasius:

“But beyond these (Scriptural) sayings, let us look at the very tradition, teaching and faith of the Catholic Church from the beginning, which the Lord gave, the Apostles preached, and the Fathers kept. Upon this the Church is founded, and he who should fall away from it should not be a Christian, and should no longer be so called.” (Four Letters to Serapion of Thmuis 1:28)

We do not go beyond those teachings, it is the Catholic church that does.

That is because the Church was never limited to the writings of the Bible in the first place.

 

[Philthy]

So far this exact argument is EXACTLY the reasoning when I tried to tear down the faith of Christians when I was an atheist. I smell a rat…and it stinks because I will never go back to that lifestyle and if you think you have the answers you are wrong. God will bring you joy and peace and atheism will only lead you down a dark depressing path.
I trust that you are here for a reason. God brought you here and posing as a Catholic, while smart, I give you credit for that,
The Lord be with you. I am and will remain a Christian!

You know, I have to apologize. Apparently I have done such a poor job of presenting my ideas that you (and another poster) think that I am somehow trying to lead you out of the faith! I am pretty stupid, but Im not so stupid as to not recognize that my contributions are counterproductive and I will bow out of this thread. I assure you that that is not the case - I actually am Catholic and I was definitely not trying to lead you out of faith in Christ… Sorry again, and you did a great job of standing up for yourself and your faith.
.