I think there’s a pretty clear consensus among Catholics on this forum, across many threads where this exact same thing has come up and people other than me have responded, that “worship” is the wrong English word to use when we talk about Mary and the saints.
Well firstly, that is an exception allowed for good of souls not necessarily a rule… and even then by communing at Catholic Church they acknowledge Catholic Church and Her teachings by replying “Amen” when receiving Body of Christ. To even attempt this from Orthodox perspective means to acknowledge Catholic Church.
That is exactly what I said above. If Protestants were relativist, They could all be Lutheran, for example,and just reject the parts of the Augsburg Confession they don’t like, or be Catholic and ignore parts of the Catechism.
It doesn’t change the fact that the invitation is open to someone not in communion with the Bishop of Rome.
Amen. If one confesses the creeds, one confesses One Church.
…and because they don’t as in denominational Churches. Some prefer to not be bound by doctrines.
Fair enough, but then if Orthodox Christian in his heart accepts Papal teachings he is in peace with Catholic Church through informal communion. Receiving Eucharist in Catholic Church basically means doing so.
I see. That is what we would call Branch Theory and therefore Relativism, but I understand that it is not Protestant view.
You should hear some of the derision aimed at Lutherans at times, and you would find that many do care. More than once I’ve been called a “Romanist”, “Catholic light”, etc.
I understand that. Some are hard-line anti-Catholic and also denounce all Protestants that have any resemblance to Catholic Church. I am quite sure about Calvinist-Lutheran polemics.
I did not mean to be uncharitable. I am just stating that from Catholic viewpoint where everything is organized and in communion with the Church or not in communion at various degrees, Protestant idea of “One” as mark of the Church does sound relativistic. It is simply in comparison to what we are used to. What did you mean by Creeds if I may ask? I just now realized you wrote “creeds” not “Creed” (plural vs singular).
You weren’t. And I don’t the @Maximian meant to be either. It just comes across that way. Non-Catholics sometimes fo the same to Catholics.
Apostles, Nicene, Athanasian.
I see. I guess Orthodoxy might have problem with Athanasian Creed, and our profession of Nicene Creed differs by Filioque clause too. Well then again, if the essence stays the same, I guess that is what matters.
My pleasure. I often enjoy reading your posts. They provide an enjoyable perspective.JonNC:
I see. I guess Orthodoxy might have problem with Athanasian Creed, and our profession of Nicene Creed differs by Filioque clause too. Well then again, if the essence stays the same, I guess that is what matters.
Interestingly enough, Armenian Orthodox Church has completely different Creed than any other Church on the planet. It’s quite interesting how development of Creeds went. I wasn’t aware Lutherans profess Athanasian Creed (then again, no reason not to I guess). Thank you for information.
I have read about some Protestant groups removing Filioque (and perhaps also Old Catholics? I am not sure) for this very reason. Interesting concept if you ask me, but quite logical if indeed Pope does not have authority to change the Creed (less logical if you realize local change was permitted, but still).
I see. It does make perfect sense since beliefs encompassed by those Creeds are not what we would disagree at (especially considering Filioque indeed is accepted). As I said, some within Orthodoxy would probably have a problem with Athanasian Creed though… though for no other reason than opposing Filioque theology (again, not as valid position because theology was what Church Fathers professed). Athanasian Creed actually contains nothing against Orthodoxy if we do realize that their objection is against Filioque being added without a Council and not as a theological opinion… but as of today one can hardly find which is really the position of Orthodoxy on this matter.
Thank you, I am flattered. I also enjoy reading your posts. I used to disregard more traditional forms of Protestantism such as Lutheranism before, but I think your posts have cleared some stuff up for me and now I understand your position better. I don’t necessarily agree with it, but it doesn’t seem as illogical as it used to before I knew some things about Lutheran views (I was under impression that Protestantism is itself akin to being non-denominational which is quite far from Truth).
Yet the Catechism does not avoid it:Vico:
I think there’s a pretty clear consensus among Catholics on this forum, across many threads where this exact same thing has come up and people other than me have responded, that “worship” is the wrong English word to use when we talk about Mary and the saints.
What we give to God is called adoration and what we give to the saints is called veneration. Both are forms of worship. This is just a fact.
The second worship is how it is used for the saints and you can see it here from Modern Catholic Dictionary:
Action | God | Saints |
|---|---|---|
Worship | Yes | Yes |
Adore | Yes | No |
Venerate | No | Yes |
This seems to be a confusion of definition as @Vico states vs. connotation which @Tis_Bearself contends against.
The English language edition of the CCC uses the word ‘worship’ (both noun and verb) to translate three distinct Latin words: the nouns cultus and adoratio and the verb adorare.