Question for Catholics

[Nine_Two]

Ahh… is it an indictment of the use of other text or a simply a claim that there is an abandonment of the Bible?

(I’m just finding this whole thing interesting because I would have assumed the CC would have used it like an orchestra uses many instruments. Likewise, I wouldn’t have thought someone listening to the orchestra to say, “MORE TRUMPET! I can’t hear any!”)

The Bible is very much a central theme of the Catholic mindset, but there are people who come on from time to time and assume that because they don’t believe in Sola Scriptura, they must be against the bible.

 

[Xavierlives]

The Bible is very much a central theme of the Catholic mindset, but there are people who come on from time to time and assume that because they don’t believe in Sola Scriptura, they must be against the bible.

Well, as long as the non-Bible text does not contradict the Bible, I’m not sure why they would try to head that direction. I wouldn’t ask a Sola Scripturian to use only the book of James to defend their faith, nor would I have a problem if they only used James. It would seem more of a preference than a requirement.

(I think what is more likely is they don’t have access to that text or are not willing to do any outside reading).

 

[Justy90]

Both put different emphasis on different traditions. For instance, in the Catholic Church, we deny that Mary died but was assumed into heaven, body and soul. In the Orthodox Church, their Tradition holds that Mary did die, and so was not assumed. Because of this accepted Tradition, they must likewise deny the Immaculate Conception because “the wages of sin is death.” Mary died, vis-a-vis, she was still born with original sin.

I could point to a couple of noncanonical gospels that illustrate the death of Mary if you wanted, but these gospels were deemed invalid and heretical prior to the schism, so you shouldn’t rely on them as authoritative sources for the Orthodox position.

My point being that the Tradition of Apostolic Succession does not necessarily affect other doctrines. Most of the doctrines held by Catholics and Orthodox Christians weren’t defined by Apostolic Succession, but rather defined by inheritors of said succession who were interpreting Church Fathers and early Church writings. The one affects the other but the latter does not define the former.

Your question isn’t a valid question because you are trying to establish causality where none exists, and if any does exist, you have the causal relationship backwards.

Edit: Actually, what I should have said is your question doesn’t have a valid answer instead of saying your question wasn’t valid period. Sorry!

Oh I disagree. I think that there is no valid answer that can be given it because it showcases a grave error in truth. If both churches follow tradition exactly, which they both claim that they do, then how can Mary be assumed into heaven body and soul by one and not by the beliefs of the other? You can’t have it both ways. It has nothing to do with focusing upon some traditions while the other church focuses upon others. It’s purely and soley a conflict of truth. You both cannot be right.

 

[Justy90]

The Eastern Orthodox and Catholic Churches are not that far apart at all on matters of doctrine. They are in schism primarily because of a dispute over the primacy of the See of Peter in Rome. The Catholic Church fully accepts the sacraments of the Eastern Orthodox Chrches as valid, and their tradition as apostolic. That is one of the tragedies of the split… there’s really not much that separates us from a doctrinal point of view. The main stumbling block is the authority of the Pope.

Peace,
Robert

What about the Immaculate Conception?

 

[Justy90]

No, it shows no such thing.

A Catholic bishop that goes into schism or heresy is excommunicated and replaced. The See at Ephesus did not *become *Orthodox with a schismatic bishop. The Catholic Church still has a See at Ephesus. Right now it is a titular see and is vacant. However, it didn’t “go” anywhere, certainly not with a schismatic bishop. Through succession the See of Ephesus is still Catholic and can never be anything other than Catholic.

The fact that the Orthodox set up their own struture and hierarchy that competes with the Catholic Church, and that has valid succession by the laying on of hands, does not in any way disprove apostolic succession or show that the Catholic Church isn’t part of that succession.

Your reasoning is very strange.

Very political answer. Conveluded as all get out, but political nonetheless.

 

[Belloc_Fan]

What about the Immaculate Conception?

There are lots of Eastern Fathers who seem to hold to this position, and no modern EO church has, to my knowledge, officially denied it (the fact that there are doubters and it isn’t dogmatically defined isn’t dispositive). So if the Catholic Church says “yes,” and the Eastern Orthodox say “we don’t know,” that’s not a contradiction. In fact, if memory serves, it was a lot of Eastern theologians who criticized Thomas Aquinas for his views on this very issue – and it was they who defended the classic (Catholic) position.

My memory may well be faulty on this, though. Is there something I’m missing?

 

[Belloc_Fan]

Very political answer. Conveluded as all get out, but political nonetheless.

Political? How so? It seems technical and accurate to me. What’s convoluted about it - just its lack of simplicity? By that standard, the Trinity is “political” and convoluted.

 

[Nine_Two]

Very political answer. Conveluded as all get out, but political nonetheless.

Actually it is not a conveluted answer. I disagree with the answer, but it certainly isn’t conveluted. And of course it’s political, your question was about the political organization of the Church.

 

[MACHIU]

This it the problem trying to explain to a non-Catholic. The OP has jumped from one topic to another and although everything is connected, this thread could be well over 100 pages until the OP satisfied.

It started with apostolic succession which has been addressed. Both Roman Catholic Church and Eastern Orthodox Church HAS valid apostolic succession.

Then OP jumped to apostolic tradition. This also has been addressed. Different apostles from different place has retained certain local traditions that in no way contradicting the universal (Catholic) accepted doctrines.

Jumping again, this time to the sacraments. I stand by my list of example of administration of sacrament between Roman-Orthodox. Please read here. This is one of many document available. Maybe a further note that RCC has done more than merely accommodating the EOC sacraments. RCC yearns for communion of both Churches. What I wrote is the position of the Catholic Church as I know it. It may be different from what of the EOC position.

A bolder jump to RCC dogma. The RCC dogma is made by the Pope in unison the with bishops in communion with him. This in no way mean that EOC accepts this as part of the schism was the refusal of Pope’s authority. That’s why I said previously when the EOC accepts the supremacy of the pope, doctrinal differences will be reconciled.

I wonder how the OP going to keep skipping until he is satisfied (which is probably never or until he submits to the authority of the RCC).

God Bless

 

[Reuben_J]

Well, as long as the non-Bible text does not contradict the Bible, I’m not sure why they would try to head that direction. I wouldn’t ask a Sola Scripturian to use only the book of James to defend their faith, nor would I have a problem if they only used James. It would seem more of a preference than a requirement.

(I think what is more likely is they don’t have access to that text or are not willing to do any outside reading).

The three major sources of CC doctrines come from Scripture and Sacred Tradition, and the Magisterium. And yes, they do not contradict each other.

Christianity has never been solely Scripture, it came much later. And when it was written it explicitly mentioned that not all were written in there. Thus we have Sacred Tradition. The Magisterium interprets the former two to ensure the result understandings are free from error. You will have problem if you do not have the three to complement each other.

Scriptures are written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Scared Traditions are practiced by the apostles who were filled with the Holy Spirit and the Magisterium is prepared by the Church led by the Holy Spirit.

God bless.

 

[Justy90]

There are lots of Eastern Fathers who seem to hold to this position, and no modern EO church has, to my knowledge, officially denied it (the fact that there are doubters and it isn’t dogmatically defined isn’t dispositive). So if the Catholic Church says “yes,” and the Eastern Orthodox say “we don’t know,” that’s not a contradiction. In fact, if memory serves, it was a lot of Eastern theologians who criticized Thomas Aquinas for his views on this very issue – and it was they who defended the classic (Catholic) position.

My memory may well be faulty on this, though. Is there something I’m missing?

The point here is that Rome say Mary was immaculately conceived and the Orthodox hold to beliefs about Mary that would not in any way lend themselves to it ever being possible for her to be immaculately conceived. In truth, the two positions cannot exist. The two churches profess to follow tradition exactly, so how can this be?

 

[MACHIU]

The point here is that Rome say Mary was immaculately conceived and the Orthodox hold to beliefs about Mary that would not in any way lend themselves to it ever being possible for her to be immaculately conceived. In truth, the two positions cannot exist. The two churches profess to follow tradition exactly, so how can this be?

The EOC denied the DOGMA of immaculate conception because EOC has a different view of the concept of original sin from the RRC. Saying that, EOC never denies that Mary was free from sin. In fact, EOC also honor Mary with the title Our All-holy, immaculate, most blessed and glorified Lady, the Theotokos and Ever-Virgin Mary.

EOC also believe that assumption of Mary or what they call dormition of Mary

So in summary, EOC and RRC firmly believes that Mary is free from all sins, a fitting condition for the Mother of God.

I would say that both Churches points to the same truth.

God Bless