Orthodox miracles?

[ConstantineTG]

Now this sounds more like the Orthodox position than friend Constantine’s understanding…which is Catholic…not Orthodox.

Friend Andrew’s view is confirmed in those Orthodox books I have read and with those Orthodox I have discussed belief with.

But some Orthodox priests and bishops do allow Catholics to receive Communion from them. Like I said, many hold this view, but many hold other views as well including the one Catholics have.

 

[ComeHome2Rome]

Hi,

Sorry I just start wondering about things like that sometimes because I was baptized Eastern Orthodox and later became Catholic and at times I still can’t make up my mind forgive me for my weakness of faith

thank you

Monica,

Setting aside miracles, something which may deepen your conviction of faith is a book by John Salza called The Biblical Basis for the Papacy.

It dives Way Beyond the Biblical arguements typically heard in favor of the Catholic Church and really helped me when I had a little confusion between Orthodox and Catholic.

I’d bet that by the time you get a 1/4 of the way through the book, your faith will be back on solid ground.

www.scripturecatholic.com

Come Home 2 Rome

 

[Nine_Two]

LOL…the writer of “Matthew” has Jesus stating that an “evil generation looks for miracles and signs”…no “sign” would be given but the “sign” of what happened to Jonah"…perhaps that is the passage friend Nine Two had in mind.

In addition to a few more verses which make negative reference to seeking miracles (such as 1 Cor 1:22-23)

 

[Nine_Two]

The Catholic Church doesn’t see the Orthodox as an “either/or” in terms of being the True Church. We both are the True Church, the two lungs of the one body of Christ.

Can you explain to me how the two lung thing is any different than the Branch theory of the Anglican Church, other than the obvious fact that the two lung theory gets to reject Anglicans.

 

[Nine_Two]

I can’t speak for them directly but I would say that many of them do accept it, and many don’t as well. See, there have been a lot of ill feelings between the East and West the last 1000 years for many reasons and sometiems even if something is legit and reasonable, it is dismissed just because of the ill feelings.

The Orthodox do not deny the Roman Church and those in communion with her as a false Church.

I’ve never heard anyone outside the laity agree with it.

We neither affirm or deny what Rome is, that is the place of Christ alone when he comes in his glory.

 

[ConstantineTG]

Can you explain to me how the two lung thing is any different than the Branch theory of the Anglican Church, other than the obvious fact that the two lung theory gets to reject Anglicans.

Other than the fact that the Church of Rome was established by Peter himself and thus has a direct lineage to an Apostle? Whereas the Anglicans cannot claim the same, they came out of the Roman Church.

 

[gmcbroom]

The branch theory would work for the Anglican’s, Catholic, and Orthodox if it wasn’t for the changes done to the Rite of Ordaination or the head of the church being King Henry instead of Christ through The Pope of Rome on the Anglican side. Or the Reformation occuring thus giving the Orthdox the excuse that their right and the Catholic Church is wrong as that didn’t happen to them I’ll side with the Pope on this issue against the Orthodox view as I’m a Maronite Catholic. I hope that one day we can all reunite though it may be far in coming.
Peace be with you.
gmcbroom

 

[Nine_Two]

Other than the fact that the Church of Rome was established by Peter himself and thus has a direct lineage to an Apostle? Whereas the Anglicans cannot claim the same, they came out of the Roman Church.

That didn’t answer the question. I didn’t ask how the Papacy derives legitimacy as opposed to Anglicans, I asked how does the Branch theory differ from the Two lung theory?

 

[ConstantineTG]

That didn’t answer the question. I didn’t ask how the Papacy derives legitimacy as opposed to Anglicans, I asked how does the Branch theory differ from the Two lung theory?

Its not legitimacy of the papacy, its legitimacy of the Church. Take the papacy out of the picture for a while, the Church of Rome was established as a Church by itself by Peter. The Anglican Church is not a separate Church, never was. It was part of the Roman Church, they were Roman Catholics before the separation.

 

[UniversalistGuy]

Publisher;7512257:

LOL…the writer of “Matthew” has Jesus stating that an “evil generation looks for miracles and signs”…no “sign” would be given but the “sign” of what happened to Jonah"…perhaps that is the passage friend Nine Two had in mind.

In addition to a few more verses which make negative reference to seeking miracles (such as 1 Cor 1:22-23)

Where do Orthodox miracles fit in to Orthodoxy? Do you have a patriarch putting pressure on you telling you that they are “worthy of belief” like the pope apparently tells Catholics about Catholic miracles?

 

[Harpazo]

Where do Orthodox miracles fit in to Orthodoxy? Do you have a patriarch putting pressure on you telling you that they are “worthy of belief” like the pope apparently tells Catholics about Catholic miracles?

From my experience, it’s usually just an organic consensus of clergy and faithful. Nothing formal or systematic, just a consensus. Now, if it is not a miracle our hierarchs will condemn it.

In Christ,
Andrew

 

[Nine_Two]

Its not legitimacy of the papacy, its legitimacy of the Church. Take the papacy out of the picture for a while, the Church of Rome was established as a Church by itself by Peter. The Anglican Church is not a separate Church, never was. It was part of the Roman Church, they were Roman Catholics before the separation.

Except the Anglican Church was once, and it is now. Once it was Autocephalous, now it forms its own Communion. Likewise the Orthodox and Catholics each form their own communions.

So how is branch theory different from “two lungs” theory (forgetting of course that there are 15 Eastern Orthodox Churches and another 6 Oriental Orthodox Churches, which this apparently applies to)?

 

[Nine_Two]

Where do Orthodox miracles fit in to Orthodoxy? Do you have a patriarch putting pressure on you telling you that they are “worthy of belief” like the pope apparently tells Catholics about Catholic miracles?

Miracles happen, quite commonly, but they aren’t a centerpiece of the faith.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

There was a Church presence in the British Isles before Rome took it over according to Anglican history.

Other than the fact that the Church of Rome was established by Peter himself and thus has a direct lineage to an Apostle? Whereas the Anglicans cannot claim the same, they came out of the Roman Church.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Sounds like there are like ten lungs with a serious air supply!

Except the Anglican Church was once, and it is now. Once it was Autocephalous, now it forms its own Communion. Likewise the Orthodox and Catholics each form their own communions.

So how is branch theory different from “two lungs” theory (forgetting of course that there are 15 Eastern Orthodox Churches and another 6 Oriental Orthodox Churches, which this apparently applies to)?

 

[Harpazo]

Sounds like there are like ten lungs with a serious air supply!

One Body with many parts. And if we have a few extra lobes, breathing quality and air quality are probably in tip top shape.

In Christ,
Andrew

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

With the lungs the church has from these theories, it’s like a Vortec engine from Ford!

One Body with many parts. And if we have a few extra lobes, breathing quality and air quality are probably in tip top shape.

In Christ,
Andrew

 

[UniversalistGuy]

UniversalistGuy;7513308:

Where do Orthodox miracles fit in to Orthodoxy? Do you have a patriarch putting pressure on you telling you that they are “worthy of belief” like the pope apparently tells Catholics about Catholic miracles?

Miracles happen, quite commonly, but they aren’t a centerpiece of the faith.

Thank you for answering. What about when the Orthodox Church makes somebody a saint? Do they have to have nine miracles happen like the Catholics do?

 

[UniversalistGuy]

UniversalistGuy;7513308:

Where do Orthodox miracles fit in to Orthodoxy? Do you have a patriarch putting pressure on you telling you that they are “worthy of belief” like the pope apparently tells Catholics about Catholic miracles?

From my experience, it’s usually just an organic consensus of clergy and faithful. Nothing formal or systematic, just a consensus. Now, if it is not a miracle our hierarchs will condemn it.

In Christ,
Andrew

Thank you for posting. The Orthodox way sounds the opposite of the Catholic way. Would you mind giving a few examples of miracles that have been condemned and how they have been condemned? Does the patriarch issue an instruction to say that such and such a miracle is fake or something like that?

 

[GaryTaylor]

From my experience, it’s usually just an organic consensus of clergy and faithful. Nothing formal or systematic, just a consensus. Now, if it is not a miracle our hierarchs will condemn it.

In Christ,
Andrew

Are you sure about this, or is this speculation? How is it possible to have “just an organic consensus, nothing formal or systematic” and then make a judgement on if in fact a Supernatural event occured? How would you know if mental heath issues were not part of individuals history? How would you know what a witness had to say, or if their testimony was consistant to the event? Or even if there was a witness or many who are ashamed to come foward due to ridicule?

Has to be a bit more than that I would think?