Orthodox and Catholic...

[Zundrah]

Yours in Christ
Joe

Let’s just say that it’s a good job that I’m not orthodox then!
My catholic church is like two blocks from my house!

 

[josephdaniel29]

Let’s just say that it’s a good job that I’m not orthodox then!
My catholic church is like two blocks from my house!

I wish I lived two blocks from my parish…

Yours in Christ
Joe

 

[Zundrah]

I wish I lived two blocks from my parish…

Yours in Christ
Joe

How far is it?

 

[AdrianP]

Anyhow the 2 Churches are very close .

I think any Church needs to have theologians able to speak with God, Jesus, St Mary, saints , and if this would be the case, Union would be very easy. If Orthodox Church has theologians speaking with God and Protestant Church has theologians using logic then no wonder they came to different conclusion. If both Churches would have theologians speaking with God, any issue would be easily sorted out and truth would come forward.

 

[Zundrah]

Anyhow the 2 Churches are very close .

I think any Church needs to have theologians able to speak with God, Jesus, St Mary, saints , and if this would be the case, Union would be very easy. If Orthodox Church has theologians speaking with God and Protestant Church has theologians using logic then no wonder they came to different conclusion. If both Churches would have theologians speaking with God, any issue would be easily sorted out and truth would come forward.

I still don’t really understand the difference between orthodox and Catholic…

 

[josephdaniel29]

How far is it?

Almost twenty miles.

Yours in Christ
Joe

 

[Zundrah]

Almost twenty miles.

Yours in Christ
Joe

Yikes Joe, that’s crazy! Why don’t you just become Catholic!

 

[josie_L]

I would like to point out the difference between what RC’s mean as Immaculate and what is right according to the fathers. RC’s attatche the word conception to the word Immaculate when they speak of the Most Holy Mother of God. It is not a stand alone doctrine. It has two parts. On both parts the Orthodox must disagree. I will summerize the two points in an oversimplified way here.
The first is the acceptance of orrigonal sin as understood by the Catholics: man recieves a nature from Adam that deprives him of the ability to chose any good and thus is deprived of the beatific vision ie. heaven.

The second is that God having seen that Mary would say yes to his asking her to bear the second person of the divinity did not allow her to be given Adam’s currupt nature. Thus turnning God to a predestinator as understood by Calvin and depriving Mary of her virtue by stripping her of the likeness of hummanity that are shared by the rest of us. St. John of Shanghi points this out in a way that I cannot.

Well Many of the western Saints seam to do the same. One of the things I like is how RC’s gloss over the Father who says, “Where the bishop is, there is the Catholic Church.” Katholikos cannot in this sense mean “universal” which bids the modern reader to come unto a new meaning (at least to him) of the word Catholic. Thus coming to the Orthodox meaning and eventually to reject the power grabs of the Roman Pontiff.

You take up the Catholic position quite well here. Yet it limmits two things that Orthodox hold dear. One is that Man has a free will through all of eternity. Thus even in hell is capable of being saved by God’s mercy which is limmited in that RC’s teach that God cannot save a person from hell, the second issue God’s free will. It also gets into speculative theology. Orthodoxy does not do speculative theology. She confines herself to what has been revealed and challenges her faithful to follow that path.

I am not engrained to rebel against these things. I was a protestant as a child. Twelve years ago I became Roman Catholic and had John Hardon S.J. as my spiritual father. It was not long before his death that I began to disagree with him. In 2006 I was Baptized into the Holy Orthodox Church. Obviously I feel that it is the Orthodox who have the better understanding.

Do you find it odd that one patriarch seperates himself from the rest and it is their proginy that must defend themselves against his foolishness.

Maybe you feel the Orthodox have the better understanding because you misunderstood the Catholic understanding, the Church does not believe like Calvin and the reformers that we inherited total depravity or corruption, this is what the Church states taken directly from the CCC:

404 How did the sin of Adam become the sin of all his descendants? The whole human race is in Adam “as one body of one man”.293 By this “unity of the human race” all men are implicated in Adam’s sin, as all are implicated in Christ’s justice. Still, the transmission of original sin is a mystery that we cannot fully understand. But we do know by Revelation that Adam had received original holiness and justice not for himself alone, but for all human nature. By yielding to the tempter, Adam and Eve committed a personal sin, but this sin affected the human nature that they would then transmit in a fallen state.294 It is a sin which will be transmitted by propagation to all mankind, that is, by the transmission of a human nature deprived of original holiness and justice. And that is why original sin is called “sin” only in an analogical sense: it is a sin “contracted” and not “committed” - a state and not an act.

405 Although it is proper to each individual,295 original sin does not have the character of a personal fault in any of Adam’s descendants.** It is a deprivation of original holiness and justice, but human nature has not been totally corrupted: it is wounded in the natural powers proper to it, subject to ignorance, suffering and the dominion of death, and inclined to sin - an inclination to evil that is called concupiscence". **Baptism, by imparting the life of Christ’s grace, erases original sin and turns a man back towards God, but the consequences for nature, weakened and inclined to evil, persist in man and summon him to spiritual battle.

406 The Church’s teaching on the transmission of original sin was articulated more precisely in the fifth century, especially under the impulse of St. Augustine’s reflections against Pelagianism, and in the sixteenth century, in opposition to the Protestant Reformation. Pelagius held that man could, by the natural power of free will and without the necessary help of God’s grace, lead a morally good life; he thus reduced the influence of Adam’s fault to bad example. **The first Protestant reformers, on the contrary, taught that original sin has radically perverted man and destroyed his freedom; they identified the sin inherited by each man with the tendency to evil (concupiscentia), which would be insurmountable. **The Church pronounced on the meaning of the data of Revelation on original sin especially at the second Council of Orange (529)296 and at the Council of Trent (1546).297

p.s. You say you were under the tutelage of a Catholic named John Hardon, how is it possible then that you do not even have a proper understanding of how we explain “original sin”?

 

[mardukm]

Dear sister josie,

p.s. You say you were under the tutelage of a Catholic named John Hardon, how is it possible then that you do not even have a proper understanding of how we explain “original sin”?

I believe many non-Catholics are not Catholics because they let the cow tell about the horse. That was certainly the case for me. It wasn’t until I learned from the horse itself that I found out what the horse was all about.

Those who leave the Catholic Church are in the same position. Aside from listening to the cow tell about the cow, they just as much listen to the cow tell about the horse. So it becomes all distorted. I have had many conversations with former Catholics, and it just amazes me how little they actually knew/know about Catholicism. But instead of being upset, the amazement is actually a blessing, because it simply reinforces my belief that I made the right choice about becoming Catholic.

Sadly, there are also Catholics who have a distorted view of Orthodoxy, and these Catholics do not really help the cause of unity or Truth.

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[josie_L]

Dear sister josie,

I believe many non-Catholics are not Catholics because they let the cow tell about the horse. That was certainly the case for me. It wasn’t until I learned from the horse itself that I found out what the horse was all about.

Those who leave the Catholic Church are in the same position. Aside from listening to the cow tell about the cow, they just as much listen to the cow tell about the horse. So it becomes all distorted. I have had many conversations with former Catholics, and it just amazes me how little they actually knew/know about Catholicism. But instead of being upset, the amazement is actually a blessing, because it simply reinforces my belief that I made the right choice about becoming Catholic.

Sadly, there are also Catholics who have a distorted view of Orthodoxy, and these Catholics do not really help the cause of unity or Truth.

Blessings,
Marduk

Our Church is trying it’s best to unite with the Orthodox, would you say the Orthodox are trying just as hard?

 

[josie_L]

Dear sister josie,

I believe many non-Catholics are not Catholics because they let the cow tell about the horse. That was certainly the case for me. It wasn’t until I learned from the horse itself that I found out what the horse was all about.

Those who leave the Catholic Church are in the same position. Aside from listening to the cow tell about the cow, they just as much listen to the cow tell about the horse. So it becomes all distorted. I have had many conversations with former Catholics, and it just amazes me how little they actually knew/know about Catholicism. But instead of being upset, the amazement is actually a blessing, because it simply reinforces my belief that I made the right choice about becoming Catholic.

Sadly, there are also Catholics who have a distorted view of Orthodoxy, and these Catholics do not really help the cause of unity or Truth.

Blessings,
Marduk

He says he was under the “tutelage” of a John Hardon, therefore, it doesn’t make sense that he would not understand the Catholic position on original sin? I would assume that he had a CCC book to study his faith.

 

[mardukm]

Dear sister Josie,

He says he was under the “tutelage” of a John Hardon, therefore, it doesn’t make sense that he would not understand the Catholic position on original sin? I would assume that he had a CCC book to study his faith.

I had a very orthodox Latin Catholic friend who read one of Fr. John Hardon books, and he came away disgusted and disappointed. That friend was a former Protestant who was on a journey to the Catholic Church about the same time as me. He found statements that he thought misrepresented Catholic teaching (my friend’s not a traditionalist, if that’s what you’re thinking) - my friend showed me the statements, and though I don’t remember what they were, I definitely remember coming away with the same impression as he did. So I gather if brother surgei was under Fr. Hardon’s “tutelage,” he might not have gotten the whole story.

But even if that were not the case, it is unfortunately not hard to listen to the cow tell about the horse. The fact is, there are distinctions between Eastern and Western theology. If one was not well-versed in Latin Catholic theology, it is rather easy to be misled to believe that Eastern and Western theologies are incompatible. Unfortunately, most Catholics don’t have an apologetic fervor for the faith. Catechetics and apologetics are two different things, and you only get the very basics with catechetics, certainly not enough to combat EO apologetics or polemics. Further, whereas Catholic catechetics is geared towards merely teaching the faith, Orthodox (and generally non-Catholic) catechetics inherently includes apologetics against Catholicism. So the average Catholic is at a disadvantage already. It is only by the Grace of the Holy Spirit that the Catholic Church remains the largest Church in the world, and growing.

Blessings

 

[josie_L]

Dear sister Josie,

I had a very orthodox Latin Catholic friend who read one of Fr. John Hardon books, and he came away disgusted and disappointed. That friend was a former Protestant who was on a journey to the Catholic Church about the same time as me. **He found statements that he thought misrepresented Catholic teaching **(my friend’s not a traditionalist, if that’s what you’re thinking) - my friend showed me the statements, and though I don’t remember what they were, I definitely remember coming away with the same impression as he did. So I gather if brother surgei was under Fr. Hardon’s “tutelage,” he might not have gotten the whole story.

Blessings

Oh great more misrepresentations, like we need it.

p.s. Although I still don’t understand how someone who converted to Catholicism didn’t have knowledge of this very important doctrine/teaching?

 

[mardukm]

Our Church is trying it’s best to unite with the Orthodox, would you say the Orthodox are trying just as hard?

Yes, and officially so. What you get on the internet does not accurately reflect real life. The Catholic Church has a yearly theological commission set up for and with all the ancient apostolic Christian Churches.

The most fruitful endeavor between ANY of the apostolic Churches on an official level is between the Catholic Church and Syriac Orthodox Church in India. The two Churches have official pastoral provisions for the sharing of Sacraments. It is even more comprehensive than the official pastoral provisions for intermarriage between the Coptic Orthodox Church and the Alexandrian Patriarchate of the EOC.

I am not certain, but the official pastoral provisions between the Assyrian Church of the East and the Catholic Church may be just as comprehensive as the one between the Catholic Church and the Syriac Orthodox Church.

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[surgei]

It is interesting how many of you skipped what I actually said. To answer what you think I said is not right. Please forgive me for oversimplification of the topics that were brought up. The unification attemps through the ages have spent volumes to try to explain these things.
Please don’t attack Fr. Hardon though. Considering he was the spiritual father of this little nun from Calcutta who was cannonized. His cause is oppen as well.

 

[surgei]

.294 It is a sin which will be transmitted by propagation to all mankind, that is, by the transmission of a human nature deprived of original holiness and justice. And that is why original sin is called “sin” only in an analogical sense: it is a sin “contracted” and not “committed” - a state and not an act.

I love being able to wait and let others make the argumentation for me. Now God in some perverted system of justice deprives the children of Adam of justice.

405 Although it is proper to each individual,295 original sin does not have the character of a personal fault in any of Adam’s descendants.** It is a deprivation of original holiness and justice, but human nature has not been totally corrupted: it is wounded in the natural powers proper to it, subject to ignorance, suffering and the dominion of death, and inclined to sin - an inclination to evil that is called concupiscence". **Baptism, by imparting the life of Christ’s grace, erases original sin and turns a man back towards God, but the consequences for nature, weakened and inclined to evil, persist in man and summon him to spiritual battle.

So a single non devine person in history, Mary, is deprived of concupiscence allowing her to chose Christ. The rest have to strougle against injustices perpetuated upon us by God depriving us of the grace of origonal holliness.
Either God is universally just or he is not. Or your a muslim and you can have it both ways.

 

[josie_L]

I love being able to wait and let others make the argumentation for me. Now God in some perverted system of justice deprives the children of Adam of justice.

So a single non devine person in history, Mary, is deprived of concupiscence allowing her to chose Christ. The rest have to strougle against injustices perpetuated upon us by God depriving us of the grace of origonal holliness.
Either God is universally just or he is not. Or your a muslim and you can have it both ways.

Did you or did you not misrepresent Catholic teaching (that was my point)?

p.s. What is your educational degree if you studied under the tutelage of Father John Hardon? Justice I would assume is or refers to eternal life (of course, this would change with Jesus, the new Adam) Mary is deprived of concupicsence because she is the new Eve (she like the first Eve was born into original holiness but was ever obedient to God’s will), not to mention she was to bear Jesus in her womb so she needed to be absolutely holy (like the arc of the covenant was extremely holy that bore the tablets or God’s word, the staff of Aaron, and the manna from Heaven).

 

[josie_L]

It is interesting how many of you skipped what I actually said. To answer what you think I said is not right. Please forgive me for oversimplification of the topics that were brought up. The unification attemps through the ages have spent volumes to try to explain these things.
Please don’t attack Fr. Hardon though. Considering he was the spiritual father of this little nun from Calcutta who was cannonized. His cause is oppen as well.

Surgei is English your first language?

 

[mardukm]

Dear brother surgei,

So a single non devine person in history, Mary, is deprived of concupiscence allowing her to chose Christ. The rest have to strougle against injustices perpetuated upon us by God depriving us of the grace of origonal holliness.
Either God is universally just or he is not. Or your a muslim and you can have it both ways.

Here’s a perfect example of how the cow tells about the horse.

To EO apologists and polemicsts, lack of concupiscence strangely means that there is no free will.

But to the Catholic understanding, concupiscence has nothing to do with free will. Free will is a natural condition of man - part of human nature created by God. The presence or lack of concupiscence does not affect the presence of free will in a human being. Lack of concupiscence does not mean one does not have to struggle against a fallen world. Mary was tempted, just as Jesus was tempted, and she had to use her free will to avoid evil all her life, and her very Fiat was made with free will.

Does lack of concupiscence mean one loses the free will to sin? Of course not. How do we know? Because Adam and Eve lacked concupiscence, yet they sinned. So concupiscence is not what makes us sin. What makes sin a sin by definition is free will, and every human being, including Mary, had free will.

If you want to criticize the Catholic Church, do it based on her actual teachings on concupiscence. Don’t impose your own deficient EO understanding of concupiscence on the matter (though, I find EO apologetics to not always properly reflect official EO teachings, so the “deficient EO understanding” should not be taken as a knock on the EOC herself).

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[Harpazo]

Dear brother surgei,

Here’s a perfect example of how the cow tells about the horse.

To EO apologists and polemicsts, lack of concupiscence strangely means that there is no free will.

But to the Catholic understanding, concupiscence has nothing to do with free will. Free will is a natural condition of man - part of human nature created by God. The presence or lack of concupiscence does not affect the presence of free will in a human being. Lack of concupiscence does not mean one does not have to struggle against a fallen world. Mary was tempted, just as Jesus was tempted, and she had to use her free will to avoid evil all her life, and her very Fiat was made with free will.

Does lack of concupiscence mean one loses the free will to sin? Of course not. How do we know? Because Adam and Eve lacked concupiscence, yet they sinned. So concupiscence is not what makes us sin. What makes sin a sin by definition is free will, and every human being, including Mary, had free will.

If you want to criticize the Catholic Church, do it based on her actual teachings on concupiscence. Don’t impose your own deficient EO understanding of concupiscence on the matter (though, I find EO apologetics to not always properly reflect official EO teachings, so the “deficient EO understanding” should not be taken as a knock on the EOC herself).

Blessings,
Marduk

Would you suppose that the converse could be applied as well? Should Catholics look at the Orthodox view instead of positing their views on the Orthodox view (as some ECs are wont to do in regards to reconciling doctrine w/Rome).

In Christ,
Andrew