Orthodoxy makes the most sence. protestantism is just man made division. the question is latin or eastern Church?

[Hesychios]

Declaring saints was never something which all the Patriarchs had to do together, and it has never been a criticism of Rome that its Bishop unilaterally recognized some saints, that has been how things have been done all along, an individual Church would recognize a saint, and then the rest would follow suit. That’s still how it’s done in the Orthodox Communion.

Right.

This was true in the western church as well as the eastern church, each diocese had it’s own calendar. The procedure was that a diocese or synod would recognize one of their own as a saint, and announce the joyful news to the other dioceses and synods across the church. Many of these others would also desire to venerate the holy one, and ask for relics. Thus the cult of that saint would spread.

An interesting example of this is Saint John Cassian, highly regarded among the Orthodox, yet he was canonized by the church at Marseilles!

As far as I know, he still does not have a place on the Roman calendar, his cult in the west is ‘restricted’ to Marseilles (probably because he and Saint Augustine did not agree on some things).

He was canonized before the Popes claimed a monopoly on the function of canonizing saints.

It appears (I have asked, but have not received a definite answer) that Eastern Catholic churches lost their right to canonize their own saints once they fell under the control of the bishops of Rome. The recent EC saints were announced by Rome, not by their own churches.

Additionally blaming St. Photius for everything is incorrect, and you should keep in mind that he is venerated as a saint by your fellow Catholics in the Eastern Churches.

As you correctly pointed out, he was in communion with the Pope (in other words, a Catholic by their own reckoning) yet he seems to be the favorite Orthodox bogeyman to beat up on. Most Catholics know as little about him as they do the origins of their own church. This just goes to demonstrate far adrift these persons are from their own Orthodox roots.

Saint Photios is credited with evangelizing half of Europe! It was he who selected, funded, prepared and launched the missionary work of Ss Cyril and Methodios. Many Catholic countries were evangelized through this work (including Poland, Slovakia, Czech Republic, Slovenia and Croatia) Some sources have even attested that he was the father of a Pope.

But he was also very intelligent, and right about the filioque. So I guess that justifies the animus.

 

[Louscef]

SATANISM!!!

joyofsatan.org/

 

[Louscef]

joyofsatan.org/

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Hi Michael,

Despite not always agreeing with your points of view, I usually enjoy your posts and find them charitable. It’s why I’ve always considered you a friend on here and a great guy in general. Why did you make the statement highlighted in red below? It seems pretty insulting to Catholics, doesn’t it?

Right.

As you correctly pointed out, he was in communion with the Pope (in other words, a Catholic by their own reckoning) yet he seems to be the favorite Orthodox bogeyman to beat up on. Most Catholics know as little about him as they do the origins of their own church. This just goes to demonstrate far adrift these persons are from their own Orthodox roots.

Saint Photios is credited with evangelizing half of Europe! It was he who selected, funded, prepared and launched the missionary work of Ss Cyril and Methodios. Many Catholic countries were evangelized through this work (including Poland, Slovakia, Czech Republic, Slovenia and Croatia) Some sources have even attested that he was the father of a Pope.

But he was also very intelligent, and right about the filioque. So I guess that justifies the animus.

 

[Hesychios]

Hi Michael,

Despite not always agreeing with your points of view, I usually enjoy your posts and find them charitable. It’s why I’ve always considered you a friend on here and a great guy in general. Why did you make the statement highlighted in red below? It seems pretty insulting to Catholics, doesn’t it?

Yes, after rereading my post I think you are right. I should have not said that.

I wish I had crafted my thoughts a bit better, I guess I was reacting to the blasts against Saint Photios. That doesn’t make it excusable.

I am sorry to everyone for that.

 

[AMDGtoo]

I guess I was reacting to the blasts against Saint Photios.

Blasts? I hope you were not speaking of the post where I posted information about Photius. My gosh, it was only information because someone criticized the Pope for naming Saints.

And then there was another post that accused different Popes of having followers who defended him. That was just like Photius did. He managed to mobilize quite a few to defend him! Seemed a bit “pot calling the kettle black”. Didn’t you people read the link provided (or search for the Britannica Encyclopedia article concerning him?) It’s gotta be remembered that Photius started all the hate and animosity that led to the schism that Jesus prayed against.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Not a problem, Michael. We all have those days. In some of my arguments in this same thread I got pretty hot-headed and blasty myself!

Hope you’re hangin’ in there in China! You’ll have to IM me and update me on it all! I’d love to hear how you’re doing and what a typical day is like there, your plans, etc.

God bless you my friend.

Yes, after rereading my post I think you are right. I should have not said that.

I wish I had crafted my thoughts a bit better, I guess I was reacting to the blasts against Saint Photios. That doesn’t make it excusable.

I am sorry to everyone for that.

 

[josie_L]

Perhaps not for you. But I think it has been dealt with aptly. But then you are accusing me of mocking your faith. That is a terrible thing to say. I have done no such thing. I am simply pointing out areas in which I disagree with the Latin Church. I will summarize the contraception issue one more time–and then I am going to limit my conversations with you. Charity level has dropped drastically and you have been no exception.

I will refrain from making commentaries as it is the season of Lent.

As a Roman Catholic, my wife and I took the NFP classes. They definitely teach how to avoid preganancy–that is contraception. NFP is more effective in preventing conception than condom use–which means condom use is more open to conception than NFP!

Yes, NFP is used to avoid pregnancy (no sex) but unlike other forms of contraceptives (such as artificial contraceptives) there is no “spilling of the seed” (recall Onan in the Bible spilling his seed and dying as a result of his sin), thus it is an acceptable form of contraceptive. Moreover, Catholics are not meant to use NFP for superficial reasons, i.e., it is inappropriate to use NFP for reasons which are not serious. Here is the excerpt I originally posted for you (I guess you didn’t read it):

WHAT METHODS OF BIRTH REGULATION ARE MORALLY ACCEPTABLE?

"If there are serious reasons to space out births, reasons which derive
from the physical or psychological conditions of husband and wife, or from
external conditions, the Church teaches that it is morally permissible to
take into account the natural rhythms of human fertility and to have
coitus only during the infertile times in order to regulate conception
without offending the moral principles which have been recalled earlier"(Humanae Vitae, 16).

Thus, the same teaching of the Church which condemns the use of the
unnatural methods of birth control explicitly approves of the use of
Natural Family Planning when there is a sufficient reason to avoid or
postpone pregnancy. With its emphasis on the necessity of a serious reason
to use even the natural methods, the Church is warning against selfishness
in family planning.

And if NFP is more efficient than condoms and does not violate God’s laws (morally permissible), then why use articificial contraceptives (which require you to waste your seed)?

The Holy Orthodox Church may permit condom use for extra-ordinary circumstances (as per your spiritual father). But She **never **condones any abortifacient methods (of course NFP is permitted also).

I never said Orthodoxy condones abortificient methods, I said she allows the use of artificial contraceptives (I never specified which) for reasons which are not “extraordinary”:

3.The possible exception to the above affirmation of continuity of teaching is the view of the Orthodox Church on the issue of contraception. Because of the lack of a full understanding of the implications of the biology of reproduction, earlier writers tended to identify abortion with contraception. However, of late a new view has taken hold among Orthodox writers and thinkers on this topic, which permits the use of certain contraceptive practices within marriage for the purpose of spacing children, enhancing the expression of marital love, and protecting health.

goarch.org/ourfaith/ourfaith7101

Interestingly, I have recently read where Pope Benedict has commissioned a study on whether to permit condom use between married couples if one of the partners has AIDS.

I have not heard of such a study (can you provide the source), moreover, the Pope has gotten a lot of slack because of his stance in Africa, i.e., he is aware that condom use is not 100% safe (according to the U.N. study it is 90% effective) and thus would endanger the partner who does not have AIDS.

 

[Nine_Two]

Blasts? I hope you were not speaking of the post where I posted information about Photius. My gosh, it was only information because someone criticized the Pope for naming Saints.

And then there was another post that accused different Popes of having followers who defended him. That was just like Photius did. He managed to mobilize quite a few to defend him! Seemed a bit “pot calling the kettle black”. Didn’t you people read the link provided (or search for the Britannica Encyclopedia article concerning him?) It’s gotta be remembered that Photius started all the hate and animosity that led to the schism that Jesus prayed against.

I can’t speak for anyone else here, but as I’ve said numerous times I ignore New Advent links, as they are always quite polemical and extremist, teaching Latin Supremacy, even going so far as to call the “Greeks” (a term which would include Greek Catholics) heretics.

Which is why I asked you, how can you decry St. Photios as such an evil man, yet remain in communion with those who venerate him as a saint?

 

[josie_L]

Yes. That is a difficulty I always had with the annulment process. It retroactively negates the sacrament of marriage for a variety of reasons.

But Orthodoxy has an annulment process as well, moreover, the annulment process does not negate the sacrament of marriage because in order for it to be a valid marriage, it must be participated by willing partners of honest demeanor with full faculty of mind. For example, if the person whom I love does not tell me that he has a huge debt to pay because of a gambling problem he has prior to our marriage, and I only find out after the fact, then I have a right to annul the marriage which took place because of his dishonesty, i.e. he invalidates his wedding vows.

 

[prodromos]

It’s gotta be remembered that Photius started all the hate and animosity that led to the schism that Jesus prayed against.

Actually it was the Pope sending Latin missionaries into Bulgaria which had recently been evangelised by the Greeks. Though it was at the request of the Bulgarians, it was in violation of numerous canons and the Pope should have known better. As has already been made clear by your fellow Catholics, the “filioque” clause is omitted in Greek Catholic churches because in Greek it is flatout heresy. When Latin bishops introduced the filioque to the Bulgarian Christians, Photius rightly spoke out against the introduction of heresy in parishes under his jurisdiction.

John

 

[prodromos]

But Orthodoxy has an annulment process as well,

Which is very rarely used.

John

 

[AMDGtoo]

the “filioque” clause is omitted in Greek Catholic churches because in Greek it is flatout heresy.

Look at it again, but not with an Orthodox lens. It is not heresy. Jesus Himself said that if He didn’t go back to the Father, the Comforter (Holy Spirit) would not come. Seems to me that the fact the Church teaches that the Trinity includes the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit; the Holy Spirit is equal to the Father and the Son; and that the Trinity is one; should stand for something. As a matter of fact, when I asked the Byzantine Catholic chaplain about it, he indicated that it wasn’t such a big problem. He said that it was more like when there is a “divorce” in the family and people say things. I think they probably just omit the line–you know there are other Creeds (the Apostles’ Creed comes to mind).

When Latin bishops introduced the filioque to the Bulgarian Christians, Photius rightly spoke out against the introduction of heresy in parishes under his jurisdiction.

Um, from what I understand, the filoque wasn’t added to the Nicene Creed until the 1000s and Photius was Bishop when ? Seems to be a problem with dates.

Oh, for nine_two, I wasn’t aware of your dislike of New Advent. In the future I will link to a secular source for you.

 

[Nine_Two]

Oh, for nine_two, I wasn’t aware of your dislike of New Advent. In the future I will link to a secular source for you.

How do you get from New Advent is a bad source to secular sources only?

Also you still haven’t answered my question. How do you justify such animosity against someone your fellow Catholics consider a saint?

 

[AMDGtoo]

How do you get from New Advent is a bad source to secular sources only?

You were the one who said you didn’t like New Advent because of its bias. Secular sources should be okay with you then.

 

[Nine_Two]

You were the one who said you didn’t like New Advent because of its bias. Secular sources should be okay with you then.

Not bias, I expect it to hold a Catholic bias. It’s the extremist angle it applies to that bias. Like when it calls Eastern Catholics heretics.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

Look at it again, but not with an Orthodox lens. It is not heresy. Jesus Himself said that if He didn’t go back to the Father, the Comforter (Holy Spirit) would not come. Seems to me that the fact the Church teaches that the Trinity includes the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit; the Holy Spirit is equal to the Father and the Son; and that the Trinity is one; should stand for something. As a matter of fact, when I asked the Byzantine Catholic chaplain about it, he indicated that it wasn’t such a big problem. He said that it was more like when there is a “divorce” in the family and people say things. I think they probably just omit the line–you know there are other Creeds (the Apostles’ Creed comes to mind).

 

[Hesychios]

Um, from what I understand, the filoque wasn’t added to the Nicene Creed until the 1000s and Photius was Bishop when ? Seems to be a problem with dates.

The Latin missionaries were teaching it in Bulgaria/Romania.

 

[the_typist]

To Hesychios & gurneyhalleck1,

Hesychios - you seem to be comfortable with the Orhtodox faith and Gurney - you seem to have the same feeling about the RCC. I am thinking about converting to the RCC and I have already began emailing back and forth with my local Catholic Priest.

I am a Protestant (strange how whenever I mention “Protestant” on Catholic.com. I get the feeling like I am saying “bomb” at an airport…).

Since I am neither Orthodox nor Catholic and I don’t believe that you need to be a member in order to know the history of either church, (history is my favorite subject) why should a person convert to either or? With my knowledge over the few years I have lived I have read about and read many problems about the Catholic church enough to NOT want to convert, and I have also heard a good share of negative about Protestants too. I just can not make up my mind and I need some good help/advice.

I am not attacking anyone or any church. I would just like some more answers.

I am ordering the Catechism of the Catholic Church and I own The Way: What Every Protestant Should Know about the Orthodox Church" but I have some problems with the latter.

btw~ I am not a baptist or an evangelical. There are so many different Protestants out there, just don’t think of me as “crazy” …and my brother in law is Orthodox and I have thought about going down that route…

t_t

 

[prodromos]

Look at it again, but not with an Orthodox lens. It is not heresy.

This isn’t looking at it through an Orthodox lens, it is looking through a Greek lens. The word “ekporeuetai” is specific in meaning unlike its Latin counterpart, thus to say that the Holy Spirit ekporeuetai from the Father and the Son is indeed heretical. This is why when the Pope recites the creed in Greek, he does not include the “filioque”.

John