S
SedesDomi
Guest
An apostate has voluntarily left a faith. Catholics who are alive today, as a whole, are not apostates, since – in general – they have never been Orthodox.
- Status
W
wynd
Guest
Like Volodymyr said, I couldn’t find the one to the Holy Spirit online. But here is one to Sts. Peter and Paul: saintspap.org/peterpaulakathist.html
P
Peter_J
Guest
That’s very interesting. Do you happen to recall where in the encyclical he says that? I was under the impression that, for all his many uses of the “two lungs” terminology, he had never made a specific statement like “the Eastern lung is the Eastern Orthodox” or “the Eastern lung is the Eastern Catholics”.
S
sambos671
Guest
Thank you. The first part looks like a liturgy of sorts. I don’t know what Kondak means or the other word. Then there is a list of prayers. Are you suggesting I pray each of these?
As far as not being apostate ok. But what about the Catholics who at the time separated from Orthodox. I hate putting like that because the schism didn’t happen over night and there were a couple of times that both churches excommunicated each other. But for the sake of consistancy with the argument I’ll ask.
S
SedesDomi
Guest
It’s not clear that the average Catholic in 1054 or the 15th-century consciously and voluntarily simply decided to depart from Orthodoxy. Certainly some of their hierarchy did, and perhaps decided for them.
S
sambos671
Guest
So then the Pope at that time was apostate? And many of the Catholic Bishops as well? So were does that leave the average Catholic (unknowingly?) following a heretical leader. Is their salvation in danger?
S
SedesDomi
Guest
The Catholic Church also teaches that leaving the Church puts one’s salvation in danger. The Orthodox would not differ in that regard.
S
sambos671
Guest
So ultimately the Orthodox don’t reciprocate the Catholic view that the Orthodox are the other “lung” of christianity?
S
SedesDomi
Guest
Some, or many, Orthodox might, but it is not the dominant view by any means.
But, to be fair, it’s not clear that the Catholic “two-lung” theory includes the Orthodox-Not-In-Communion-with-Rome.
S
sambos671
Guest
So would the dominant view then be that Orthodox and Catholics are both Apostolic successors and faithful carriers of the deposit of faith not in communion with each other? I’m trying to pin this down. I’m not trying to be difficult.
S
SedesDomi
Guest
The Orthodox would not agree that the Catholic Church is a *fully *faithful carrier of the deposit of faith – because, in that case, the Catholics would simply be Orthodox. But many Orthodox do believe that the Catholic Church does have some degree of God’s grace nonetheless.
One test of apostolic succession would be to see if a Catholic priest, if converted to Orthodoxy, would have to be re-ordained. Some Orthodox believe that re-ordination is necessary; but some Orthodox do not believe it is necessary.
P
Peter_J
Guest
Just when I thought I was up on all the modern terminology …
S
SedesDomi
Guest
I wouldn’t recommend using it in Orthodox circles.
S
sambos671
Guest
Thanks for the link. It seems that there is no unified view on Catholism. I didn’t know that about Orthodox not believing in the Immaculate Conception. Though they do beleive in the asumption (under a different name possibly) of her? How about her purpetual virginity?
S
SedesDomi
Guest
The Orthodox have a different concept of original sin, which eliminates the need for an Immaculate Conception.
The Dormition “Sleep”, that is, “Death”] of the Theotokos is how the Orthodox understand this doctrine:
]: the Holy Virgin underwent, as did her Son, a physical death, but her body — like His — was afterwards raised from the dead and she was taken up into heaven, in her body as well as in her soul. She has passed beyond death and judgement, and lives wholly in the Age to Come. The Resurrection of the Body … has in her case been anticipated and is already an accomplished fact. That does not mean, however, that she is dissociated from the rest of humanity and placed in a wholly different category: for we all hope to share one day in that same glory of the Resurrection of the Body which she enjoys even now.[2]
Roman Catholic teaching holds that Mary was “assumed” into heaven in bodily form. Some Catholics agree with the Orthodox that this happened after Mary’s death, while some hold that she did not experience death. Pope Pius XII, in his Apostolic constitution, Munificentissimus Deus (1950), which dogmatically defined the Assumption, appears to have left open the question of whether or not Mary actually underwent death in connection with her departure, but alludes to the fact of her death at least five times.
.
Perpetual Virginity: definitely Orthodox.
M
Milliardo
Guest
Not in exact terms, though he did use it to imply that the Church is composed of two lungs, Orthodox and Catholic: “In this perspective an expression which I have frequently employed finds its deepest meaning: the Church must breathe with her two lungs!” (Ut Unum Sint, 54) Incidentally, this chapter is part of his reflection on the Dialogue with the Churches of the East, beginning in chapter 50 of the Encyclical. That the lungs refer to both the Eastern and Western parts isn’t much in doubt.
B
bpbasilphx
Guest
**From my understanding the King of England wanted a divorce from his wife and couldn’t get it from the church. So he decided to make his own church that was essentially catholic, but would allow him to get a divorce. And this was known as the church of England. Later it became the Angelican or Orthodox church.
Later protestant ideas creaped into the Orthodox church and the church became a middle ground between christianity and catholicism.**
**Speaking as a former Anglican, I can assure you that the Orthodox church did NOT come from Anglicanism, but was functioning for centuries before Henry VIII.
Please be precise and tell us WHAT Protestant ideas crept into Orthodoxy.**
Later protestant ideas creaped into the Orthodox church and the church became a middle ground between christianity and catholicism.**
**Speaking as a former Anglican, I can assure you that the Orthodox church did NOT come from Anglicanism, but was functioning for centuries before Henry VIII.
Please be precise and tell us WHAT Protestant ideas crept into Orthodoxy.**
P
Peter_J
Guest
But that can be interpreted in difference ways: some see the Eastern lung as the Eastern Orthodox, some see it as the Eastern Catholics.
Personally, I disagree with both of those interpretations. I see the Eastern lung not as a group of people or a group of churches, but as the Eastern heritage of the Church.
S
sambos671
Guest
I think the confusion lies here: there is a group of Anglicans that call themselves Orthodox Anglican. That means that they are a more traditional form of the church of England. Henry the VIII was a devoute Catholic until it stood between him and divorse. So it reasonable to assume that there were many Catholic carryovers into the Church of England. The more catholic the Anglican the more orthodox. Yet this has nothing to do with actual Orthodoxy which has an eastern roman empire tradition primarily from the Turkish churches to Antioch down to Alexandrian churches. Orthodox is more Comparable to Catholic and Coptic churches.
M
Milliardo
Guest
If you’ve read his Encyclical, Pope John Paul II is clearly referring to the Orthodox Church, not the Eastern Catholics.
So you do not agree with Pope John Paul II’s view regarding this?
- Status