Orthodoxy and Catholicism

[Mickey]

I’ve just never fully understood the Orthodox claim

As StMarina says: prayer and fasting will help you to undersatnd better.

 

[Peter_J]

Let me ask you: If the Pope wanted to proclaim a new doctrine apart from a council, would he have the authority to do so?

Well sir, Pastor Aeternus (1870) speaks of "when the Roman Pontiff … defines a doctrine concerning faith or morals to be held by the whole Church … ". It seems clear that it is, at least implicitly, saying that he can do so.

Or perhaps a better way to put that would be: it implicitly rejects the statement “The Roman Pontiff cannot define a new dogma”.

On the other hand, if your claim is something like “The Roman Pontiff cannot define a new dogma without the approval of the universal Church”, well that’s a whole other ball of wax.

 

[Mickey]

Do you celebrate Nativity on Dec 25 (New Calendar) or Jan 7 (Old Calendar)?

Oh boy, here we go. Someone wants to attack Holy Orthodoxy again using the calendar. Please do not begin throwing stones in a glass house. If you care to talk about the issue of some Orthodox (mostly in America) adopting the papal calendar, then start a thread.

Of course, I would similarly appreciate if our Orthodox brethren would take a second look at the apparition of Theotokos and her message of Fatima (Portugal), 1917: that Russia will spread her errors around the world

Another oldie but goodie! You know why this is false? Because the old babushka babas in Russia have more faith in their pinky fingers than you or I have in our entire beings.

Is it required for you to believe Fatima as part of your Roman Catholic faith?

 

[Mickey]

This Mary of fatima didn’t know that russia was under the protecting mantel of the theotokos…

Amen, my brother in Christ.

 

[Mickey]

Why did the other 11 not tell him to let them speak for a change?

Ah, let me guess. Humility? Respect?

He was the face of the group.

Wha?

If we left you in the 11th century, than what has happened since should not prove anything.

True. But Rome continued Her innovations afterward.

Either we were wrong then or not.

Yes. I always pray that Rome will return.

 

[ralphinal]

Ah, let me guess. Humility? Respect?
Wha?
True. But Rome continued Her innovations afterward.
Yes. I always pray that Rome will return.

What did the rest of the 12 respect?

 

[pr_catholic]

St Peter was not “the Rock”. His confession of faith was “Rock”. And Christ is the Cornerstone.

Your arguments are the same as the protestants/reformers it is nothing new. The Catholic Church has always explained & admitted that Christ is the chief cornerstone (which by the way, he is) but then how would you explain the fact in the gospel of John, in their first meeting its recorded of Jesus saying to Simon as “Kephas”? (Jn 1,42). What is the meaning of this?

Another is that all the time that the gospels record the list of apostles they always start with Peter ? Also their is a part on Isaiah Ch. 22, vrs 20-21 that gives a example of God conferring the “keys of authority” to Eliakim over the house of David. It’s an analogy to the event where Jesus hands them over to Simon Peter (first of all, no less) but I guess that’s not a valid interpretation of Scripture as the holy Orthodox church sees it. Can not the Church of the Lord grow in its understanding of the faith very much like the Jews did before the times of Christ?

This thread should be a place of mutual respect (which I do hold for the Eastern Orthodox & Oriental Orthodox communion. After all we share the scriptures & traditions of our forefathers in the faith. ) Let us contribute to this discussion with understanding of all parties stance on these issues. God Bless.

 

[Mickey]

What did the rest of the 12 respect?

Jesus Christ, eachother, and all who confess that Jesus Christ is the Messiah, the Son of the living God.

 

[ralphinal]

Jesus Christ, eachother, and all who confess that Jesus Christ is the Messiah, the Son of the living God.

Agreed, but if one of the twelve had overstepped his bounds, would the rest be too respectful to correct him?

 

[Mickey]

Your arguments are the same as the protestants/reformers it is nothing new.

No they are not. The protestants are the wayward children of Rome. They are most closely associated with your theology.

But they are not incorrect on everything.

The Catholic Church has always explained & admitted that Christ is the chief cornerstone (which by the way, he is)

Amen.

but then how would you explain the fact in the gospel of John, in their first meeting its recorded of Jesus saying to Simon as “Kephas”? (Jn 1,42). What is the meaning of this?

Did he not refer to him as Simon Peter after the denial? Let us see what St Peter says:

*If it be so that you have tasted that the Lord is gracious, to whom coming as a living stone, disallowed indeed of men but chosen of God and precious, you also as living stones are built up into a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God by Jesus Christ Wherefore also it is contained in Scripture, Behold, I lay in Zion a chief cornerstone, elect, precious, and he that believes on Him shall not be confounded. *(1Pet 2:3-6)

Another is that all the time that the gospels record the list of apostles they always start with Peter?

Yes. The Holy Orthodox Chruch has a great veneration for the glorious Apostle St Peter. But it does not mean that Christ was calling St Peter the first supreme infallible pontiff of Rome.

Also their is a part on Isaiah Ch. 22, vrs 20-21 that gives a example of God conferring the “keys of authority” to Eliakim over the house of David. It’s an analogy to the event where Jesus hands them over to Simon Peter

I hear that often on this forum. Is there anything from Sacred Tradition or the Church Fathers that speaks to this odd interpretation (analogy). I think that Scott Hahn talks about it, but I have never heard it from elsewhere.

Can not the Church of the Lord grow in its understanding of the faith very much like the Jews did before the times of Christ?

What do you mean by “grow in undersatanding”?

This thread should be a place of mutual respect (which I do hold for the Eastern Orthodox & Oriental Orthodox communion.

And I love my Catholic brothers and sisters. I was Latin Catholic most of my life and then Eastern Catholic for about eight years before I found my way to Holy Orthodoxy. Please forgive me if I have offended you. I only mean to potray the Apostolic truth as it has been handed to Christ’s Church. We have many similarities and we share a common history. But we also have many differences, and these differences are not trivial. As St Mark of Ephesus once said: “There can be no compromise”.

Peace and blessings,
Mickey

 

[Mickey]

Agreed, but if one of the twelve had overstepped his bounds, would the rest be too respectful to correct him?

Of couse not. Truth is truth. St Paul corrected St Peter.

 

[ralphinal]

Of couse not. Truth is truth. St Paul corrected St Peter.

So Peter must have had a reason to be the one out front, right?

 

[Mickey]

So Peter must have had a reason to be the one out front, right?

St Peter had a reason to be out front??? Are you suggesting a vast right wing conspiracy???

 

[pr_catholic]

No they are not. The protestants are the wayward children of Rome. They are most closely associated with your theology.

But they are not incorrect on everything.
Amen.
Did he not refer to him as Simon Peter after the denial? Let us see what St Peter says:

If it be so that you have tasted that the Lord is gracious, to whom coming as a living stone, disallowed indeed of men but chosen of God and precious, you also as living stones are built up into a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God by Jesus Christ Wherefore also it is contained in Scripture, Behold, I lay in Zion a chief cornerstone, elect, precious, and he that believes on Him shall not be confounded. (1Pet 2:3-6)
Yes. The Holy Orthodox Chruch has a great veneration for the glorious Apostle St Peter. But it does not mean that Christ was calling St Peter the first supreme infallible pontiff of Rome.

I hear that often on this forum. Is there anything from Sacred Tradition or the Church Fathers that speaks to this odd interpretation (analogy). I think that Scott Hahn talks about it, but I have never heard it from elsewhere.
What do you mean by “grow in undersatanding”?
And I love my Catholic brothers and sisters. I was Latin Catholic most of my life and then Eastern Catholic for about eight years before I found my way to Holy Orthodoxy. Please forgive me if I have offended you. I only mean to potray the Apostolic truth as it has been handed to Christ’s Church. We have many similarities and we share a common history. But we also have many differences, and these differences are not trivial. As St Mark of Ephesus once said: “There can be no compromise”.

Peace and blessings,
Mickey

For he first part of your post; 1) They are heretics sadly so how can they be closer to the theology of the Church when it is that very theology the one they protest agaisnt?

2)For the analogy just because it doesn’t appear referenced in Tradition doesn’t mean its false. That’s bad scholarship and since it does invoke the same idea (since both are Sacred Scripture) as peter why it cant be true if you simply dont accept it? Dont you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord & Christ yet the Jews beleive otherwise?

I would like you to refine a little the way you write your views on your posts please (to avoid the unpleasent thing of provoking misinterpretation). I know I"m modifing mine.

PS: How can you call the protestants to be closer to my theology if you were once a Latin Catholic by your own claims and yet now act as if you never were? As far as I know the apostles & disiples always admitted to being Jews even though they did no longer practice that religion ( for more info on that you may want to get aqcuainted with the problem of “Who is a Jew”? since it varies from person to person & it is an analogy by the way)

 

[cazayoux]

Is it required for you to believe Fatima as part of your Roman Catholic faith?

No.
No belief in any private revelation of anyone’s is required.

michel

 

[Mickey]

For he first part of your post; 1) They are heretics sadly so how can they be closer to the theology of the Church when it is that very theology the one they protest agaisnt?

Think about it. Martin Luther was an Augustinian priestmonk. Calvin was a priest. Protestants usually use St Augustine against you. They came from the Roman Catholic Church.

For the analogy just because it doesn’t appear referenced in Tradition doesn’t mean its false.

The Sacred Tradition interprets the Sacred Scripture. If you see nothing in Sacred Tradition, and the majority of Fathers are silent about it, then there is no reason to believe it.

I would like you to refine a little the way you write your views on your posts please

In what way? I am not insulting you or violating any of the forum rules.

PS: How can you call the protestants to be closer to my theology if you were once a Latin Catholic by your own claims and yet now act as if you never were?

Please do not put words in my mouth. I do not act as if I never were Roman Catholic. I always talk about my roots. The Roman/Eastern Catholic Church taught me much (especially the Eastern Catholic Church) and I will always cherish that experience–but it was time to go deeper. I love my Roman Catholic family and friends.

Please stop with your uncharitable projections.

 

[Mickey]

No.
No belief in any private revelation of anyone’s is required.

Thank you.

 

[StMarina303ad]

How do you know Fatima was a satanic deception and the Holy Fire is not? Because the Miracle of Holy Fire is completely in line with Sacred Tradition, confirming Orthodox Pascha (Easter) which was determined by the Early Church - before the split of Rome from the rest of Orthodoxy. How do you know the holy icons streaming myrh in your churches are not satanic deceptions? Because they are tested - first by the spiritual father of the owner of the Icon and then by the Bishop and people have been cured (medically verified) from various diseases from the Miracles Myrrh. That the incorrupt body of St. John Maximovitch in the Russian Orthodox Cathedral of San Francisco is not satanic deception? Because he lived his life consistant with Sacred Tradition as have other true incorruptible Saints. Plus there have been miracles associated with St. John. I will give you an answer but won’t try to persuade you beyond that, because I have better things to do.

Fatima was believed by every Pope - Pius 12, John 23, Paul 6, John Paul 2, Benedict 16. Unless you consider JP-2, who was fluent in 8 languages, or B-16, one of the most accomplished scholarly theologians of our time, as uneducated country bumkins… And the 3 children… Do you feel vastly superior to them? Nope don’t feel vastly superior to them at all. But what you need to realize is that the Church of Rome has been separated from Holy Orthodoxy for nearly a thousands years - devoid of the Holy Spirit which means that unfortunately, these Popes you are refering to (some of whom are likely very good and as holy as they could be people) simply lacked the proper discernment about these apparitions. Two of them have already been beatified, and I bet all 3 will be declared saints in due time. If this happens, it is done through the RC Church, which again, has been devoid of the Holy Spirit for so long… They happily gave up their lunches to the poor children and subsisted on acorns and berries, they imposed heavy penances on themselves such as going without water all day long while tending the sheep, and they beared the ridicule of their own families and the threats of atheist authorities while they were 10, 9, and 7 years old. Do you feel like you are more humble, more heroic, and closer to God than these 3 children? Giving their lunches to the poor was a great thing and God will surely remember that for them at their judgement. They were little children and were easily deceived by the devil - they had never been taught discernment as they’d never had a holy spiritual father. They’re complete acceptance at what they were told by these apparations remind me a great deal of Joseph Smith who based on false apparations created the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints aka Mormon Church.

They indeed didn’t know that Russia was a country, they thought that the Lady from Heaven (Holy Mary) was talking about an evil woman named Russia. Heaven chose such uneducated children on purpose - so that they would convey a prophetic message that they didn’t understand and couldn’t have possibly invented, but nevertheless that prophecy became fulfilled later on. God in His Mercy never uses little children as his targets for valid Heavenly apparations because they do not have discernment and can easily be confused.

But only God can give true prophecies that will be fulfilled, because only God knows the future. Satan cannot do this. Several prophecies were given at Fatima, which were fulfilled: that the war (WWI) will soon end, but a greater war (WWII) will erupt if people do not amend their ways, and this greater war will be announced by a strange light in the sky (which did happen in 1938). Portugal did amend its ways, and miraculously escaped involvement in WWII. The prophecy about Russia spreading her errors around the world and provoking persecutions of the faithful was also fulfilled. Personal prophecies given to Francisco and Jacinta were also fulfilled - they both knew beforehand the exact day and manner of their death. This shows your personal lack of discernment because Satan, an angel of light, is outside of time and space - he can certainly accurately predict future events…it is not the predictions coming true or failing to come true (did not Jonah’s prediction fail to come true, yet it was from God) which determines whether or not an apparation is really from God or not, what makes that determination is whether or not the message given is in line with Sacred Tradition…sorry, but the message of Fatima is not in line with Sacred Tradition.

The spiritual fruits of Fatima have been repentance and conversion to God - did Satan appear to call for this?? Yes Satan did appear to call for this, because it was a call to a false repentence, to repentent (run away from) Jesus’ One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church aka the Holy Orthodox Church.

The Catholic Church has carefully examined the apparitions of Fatima and has deemed them worthy of belief. This was only done because of the Catholic Church’s lack of the Holy Spirit and lack of His gift of discernment. It’s not like you “have to” or “must” believe them. You also don’t “have to” sell your belongings and buy the field with the hidden treasure. It is just smart to do so, and you will never regret that you did.

 

[StMarina303ad]

That’s even stricter than most Russian’s fast - they use (olive) oil, fish, and on weekends also wine, during the Nativity Fast. There are very few days in which wine, oil and fish can be taken during lents in the Orthodox Church.

Do you celebrate Nativity on Dec 25 (New Calendar) or Jan 7 (Old Calendar)? December 25th is the date both on the Julian and the Gregorian Calendar that Christmas is celebrated on; however, on the modern day American Calendar, Dec. 25th falls on different dates - on the Gregorian Dec. 25th falls on Dec. 25 and on the Julian Dec. 25th falls later due to the fact that the Gregorian Calendar observes “Leap Year” which throws off the calendars a little further the more time goes on. If you celebrate according to NC, what would you say to those OC Churches (primarily Russian but also some Greek, etc) that regard the NC as not truly Orthodox? May God continue to bless you and I love visiting and receiving Confession and Holy Eucharist in your Churches especially if I have, due to illness or whatever, missed a feast day in my own Church, I get to come to your Church to celebrate it when I am well! And if you celebrate according to OC, what would you say about the decision of the Patriarch of Constantinople to transition to the NC in the early 20th century - do you accuse him of heresy? No. Both Old and New Calendar Churches are in union with one another. I am a Greek Orthodox Christian who uses the Gregorian Calendar and my spiritual father is Russian Orthodox who uses the Julian Calendar - we celebrate Pascha (both of us who use Julian and Gregorian Calendars) on the the same day every year - the only people who don’t are Catholics and their children the Protestants who have separated themselves from the True Church: Holy Orthodoxy.

I believe the Holy Fire is a prime example of something happening in the Orthodox Church that we Catholics should take a second look at, and ask: why did we accept it first, and reject it later? And if the miracle is true and still happening every year, why don’t we pay attention to it? What is God telling/teaching us with this miracle? It’s trying to teach you Catholics is to celebrate the most sacred feast of the year on the correct date. It’s trying to teach Catholics to go back to their roots in Holy Orthodoxy.

Why did Theotokos appear in Catholic Portugal with this message, to Catholic children, causing the devotion of “5 First Saturdays of Reparation” to spread throughout the Catholic World, so that we have millions of Catholics praying for the conversion of a historically Orthodox country that is Russia? Because it wasn’t the Theotokos! Why didn’t Theotokos appear in an Orthodox country such as Greece or Romania, causing this devotion to spread among the world’s Orthodox population? The Theotokos has appeared to various Saints within Orthodox Countries as well as Mount Athos. The Theotokos has never and would never ask other Orthodox Christians to pray and sacrifice so that other Orthodox Christians would leave their true Faith for a Heretical Church.

 

[Peter_J]

Think about it. Martin Luther was an Augustinian priestmonk. Calvin was a priest. Protestants usually use St Augustine against you. They came from the Roman Catholic Church.

True Protestants are very Western. Should we therefore categorize Catholics and Protestants together because of shared “Westernness”?

That would be like categorizing the Eastern Orthodox with the Assyrian Church of the East because of their shared “Easternness”.

And do you know who else were very Western? The Carolingians. And yet they inserted the “filioque” into the Creed against the explicit instructions of the Pope (also Western). And when I look at the Protestants of today, I see (among other things) a group of people who accept the insertion of the “filioque” into the Creed, while completely rejecting the authority of the Pope to authorize such that insertion. Sounds to me like Protestants have inherited the legacy of the Carolingians.