The Catholic Church: East and West

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deacon_Ed
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
Maccabees:
Father I understand you may be living in 1909 but the Catholic Church is not her ecunemical stance and her outlook on the Orthodox Church and the Eastern Catholic Churches has changed a lot for the better since then.
Click to expand...
The reference to the 1909 events was to reassure Father Deacon that Orthodoxy has proven itself capable of warmly welcoming home the Eastern Catholics.

As for the Catholic Church changing its ecumenical stance – yes, we are seeing more changes than anyone would have thought possible. Look at what is happening now with the Traditional Anglican Communion which is being received by Rome. Such major changes would have been unimaginable even a few years ago.
 
Fr Ambrose:
Absolutely not. As we are learning, the Traditional Anglican Communion with 500,000 members under Archbishop Hepworth will come into Rome with married bishops and priests, with the right to deny papal infallibility, the Immaculate Conception and the Asumption.

We have not been told as yet if they will retain the right to allow divorce and remarriage and the use of contraceptive devices.

GAssisi has assured the worried Catholics in the thread where this is being discussed that this denial of infallibly defined dogma can be allowed when they are received into the Catholic Church because of the invincible ignorance of these Anglicans.

I find it hard to believe that there will be 1/2 million Catholics who deny papal infallibility and who won’t be having any feast of the Assumption on 15th August. If Rome has truly approved this, it will set off major alarm bells in the Orthodox world

.__________________
God is the one loveable who is always rejoicing without end in infinite happiness. ~St.Gregory, Bishop of Nyssa, died 395
Click to expand...
I had assumed that anything so earthshaking would be listed on the Vatican web site, at least in the news section. Not a word of it.

On the other hand, perhaps instead of the Asumption they’ll celebrate the Feast of the Dormition and, instead of the Immaculate Conception they’ll enjoy the Feast of the Conception of Anne. The real question is they will associated with the new or the old calendar!

Deacon Ed
 
Deacon Ed:
On the other hand, perhaps instead of the Asumption they’ll celebrate the Feast of the Dormition and, instead of the Immaculate Conception they’ll enjoy the Feast of the Conception of Anne.
Click to expand...
And perhaps they’'ll create a special day to celebrate the feast of the Papal Fallibility, and hold their own sui juris Council to undo both Trent and Vatican I 😃
 
I am surprised that it has been reported on this thread that The Anglican Church is almost accepted into the Church of Rome without them (the Anglicans) accepting true Catholic teaching. It seems to me from this brief reading that all that will happen is the Anglicans will add the word “Catholic” to their name, thats all.

Now for a simple question. Several people have writen, "call ourselves “Orthodox in communion with Rome”.

In communion with. Is there a partial communion? WHAT DOES THIS WORD MEAN? THIS WORD COMMUNION? It may be that there is a 30% communion, a 70% communion and a 99% communion. If it is not 100% then there IS NOT UNITY.
 
40.png
Exporter:
Now for a simple question. Several people have writen, "call ourselves “Orthodox in communion with Rome”.

In communion with. Is there a partial communion? WHAT DOES THIS WORD MEAN? THIS WORD COMMUNION? It may be that there is a 30% communion, a 70% communion and a 99% communion. If it is not 100% then there IS NOT UNITY.
Click to expand...
It means that we share the sacraments with each other. A Melkite can go to a Coptic Catholic Church or a Roman Catholic Church and receive the sacraments; a Roman Catholic can go to a Maronite or Armenian Catholic Church and receive the sacraments. It means we profess the same faith.

What do you mean when you use the term “unity”?

Deacon Ed
 
Father

I am against any compromise of the faith and teachings of the church, I have mixed feelings about the changes that have taken place since the 60’s and if we allow Anglican into the Catholic church who deny infallibility and are married, it wont be long until we are doing the same. Popes in the past were totally against this kind of thing, and I dont like the sound of it. Why are we as Catholics, doing this to ourselves? We have already seen a great falling away from the faith in the past 40 years, with liturgical abuses, scandals, and a desecration of the Priesthood, that no one could have dreamed of when I was growing up. The sad part about this is being that it is being facilitated from within the Church itself. I was reading a very good article by a conservative Priest, who said that unlike any great heresy the church has ever had, we were usually able, as a church, to fight the heretics or enemies off. But this time, it is from within the very church, where you have the Hans Kungs and the like who are bringing the church down and getting into the thought processes of very young seminarians. I feel it is to late for many of the older Priests and Bishops who were ordained in the 60’s and 70’s and they were fed a steady diet of this garbage. We can only pray for the future.
Fr Ambrose:
Absolutely not. As we are learning, the Traditional Anglican Communion with 500,000 members under Archbishop Hepworth will come into Rome with married bishops and priests, with the right to deny papal infallibility, the Immaculate Conception and the Asumption.

We have not been told as yet if they will retain the right to allow divorce and remarriage and the use of contraceptive devices.

GAssisi has assured the worried Catholics in the thread where this is being discussed that this denial of infallibly defined dogma can be allowed when they are received into the Catholic Church because of the invincible ignorance of these Anglicans.

I find it hard to believe that there will be 1/2 million Catholics who deny papal infallibility and who won’t be having any feast of the Assumption on 15th August. If Rome has truly approved this, it will set off major alarm bells in the Orthodox world

.__________________
God is the one loveable who is always rejoicing without end in infinite happiness. ~St.Gregory, Bishop of Nyssa, died 395
Click to expand...
 
40.png
Lisa4Catholics:
Father, Hagia was reponding to Oudave who belives You and I and everybody here are going straight to hell;) He is a member of the church of Christ cult that was started a little over a hundred years ago.They believe they are the only ones going to heaven, musical instruments aren’t allowed in worship,miracles ceased after the death of the last apostle,among other things.God Bless
Click to expand...
Hi Lisa
I will try and tell you again, I am not the Judge. I have never said in any thread that Catholics are going to Hell.
We are NOT part of the Church of Christ denomination.
We have instruments in our service and God performs miracles every day. If you want to know more about us go to
www.abouthimministries.org.
We are putting on a youth rally and all churches are invited, and yes two Catholic churches are bringing there youth groups to hear Bruce speak.
In Him and Him Only, Dave.
 
oudave wrote:“We are putting on a youth rally and all churches are invited, and yes two Catholic churches are bringing there youth groups to hear Bruce speak.
In Him and Him Only, Dave”
So, two Catholic Churches are bringing THEIR ( not there) youth to hear “BRUCE” speak. Do you really believe that the Cathjolic Church would endorse sending thEIR own youth to hear a Fundamentalist preacher? You must be dreaming. The Church wouldn’t endorse that. Tell it like it is.
 
40.png
oudave:
Hi Lisa
I will try and tell you again, I am not the Judge. I have never said in any thread that Catholics are going to Hell.
We are NOT part of the Church of Christ denomination.
We have instruments in our service and God performs miracles every day. If you want to know more about us go to
www.abouthimministries.org.
We are putting on a youth rally and all churches are invited, and yes two Catholic churches are bringing there youth groups to hear Bruce speak.
In Him and Him Only, Dave.
Click to expand...
Dave you are a denomination you are a different flaver of the same heresy.I answered the question you PM’d to me I never heard back and you responded on another thread and acted like you heard nothing I said.You have accused Catholics of everything in the book,blasphemy,Idioltry and anything else you can muster up.If you have a cd burner go to ewtn archives and find Father Corapi’s shows of the catechism,and spiritual warfare. Listen to it! I am sure you will try to twist something into your own preconcieved ideas,but listen anyway.Burn it on a cd and listen often, mean while I will pray for you.God Bless
PS You can PM me anytime,but try to read and understand my responses instead of assuming I am an idiot that is like a blind lamb being mislead by the big bad Catholic Church:banghead: In a dialog you have to have some degree of respect for the position of the other party.
 
Dear Father,

Please don’t misrepresent what I said in the other post. I NEVER said that it would be acceptable to allow people who DENY those dogmas to become Catholic. My point is the very opposite of what you suggest – in fact if these Christians are in a state of invincible ignorance, it is not the case that they have ever willfully DENIED these dogmas, simply because they were never exposed to or properly taught them. You cannot deny something you have never known. Comprende?

God bless,

Greg
 
40.png
Exporter:
oudave wrote:“We are putting on a youth rally and all churches are invited, and yes two Catholic churches are bringing there youth groups to hear Bruce speak.
In Him and Him Only, Dave”
So, two Catholic Churches are bringing THEIR ( not there) youth to hear “BRUCE” speak. Do you really believe that the Cathjolic Church would endorse sending thEIR own youth to hear a Fundamentalist preacher? You must be dreaming. The Church wouldn’t endorse that. Tell it like it is.
Click to expand...
Hi
Sorry I used the wrong Their, I’m fallable because I’m a man. You don’t have to believe me in order for them to come. I hope they come like they have said because this is about Jesus and my church or your church.
abouthimministries.org
In Him and Him Only, Dave.
 
So according to Ed, the Church that Jesus founded has now turned into 22 Churches?

And the European Church is called the “Roman Catholic Church” --:hmmm: so a phrase that began as an Anglican slur…now identifies our Church (the European branch), but not the Churches from the East.

I guess we all do learn something new every day.
Is the Pope the head of all the many Churches that make up the Catholic Confederation of Churches…or only the Roman branch?
 
Tom of Assisi:
So according to Ed, the Church that Jesus founded has now turned into 22 Churches?

And the European Church is called the “Roman Catholic Church” --:hmmm: so a phrase that began as an Anglican slur…now identifies our Church (the European branch), but not the Churches from the East.

I guess we all do learn something new every day.
Is the Pope the head of all the many Churches that make up the Catholic Confederation of Churches…or only the Roman branch?
Click to expand...
Yes, the Pope is the Head of them all. As for the “confederation of Churches”, someone posted an explanation that made alot of sense. Think of it in a scriptural sense (especially from the Pauline letters): there was the church at Corinth, the Church at Ephesus, the Church at Collosae, the Church at Rome. All of these Churches comprised the Catholic Church and were under the authority of the Pope. It’s the same thing today. If you go to a Byzantine Catholic liturgy, for example, you will hear “let us pray for our holy ecumenical Pontiff John Paul II, Pope of Rome…” 4 times.
 
Tom of Assisi:
So according to Ed, the Church that Jesus founded has now turned into 22 Churches?
Click to expand...
It’s “Deacon Ed” if you don’t mind – even if you don’t respect me respect the office the Church has entrusted to me. And, no, it’s 23 Churches, the Latin or Roman Church and the 22 Eastern Catholic Churches.
And the European Church is called the “Roman Catholic Church” --:hmmm: so a phrase that began as an Anglican slur…now identifies our Church (the European branch), but not the Churches from the East.
Click to expand...
Actually, it’s the “Latin Rite” or the “Latin Church” – the term “Roman Catholic” is simply convenient since it’s the one in front of 90% of the Catholic Churches in the United States. It’s also not a “European branch” – the Anglicans subscribe to the branch theory of Christianity, Catholics do not. It is the Church of the West. But there are Eastern Catholic Churches in Europe just as the Church of the West is in the United States, and so are Eastern Catholic Churches.
I guess we all do learn something new every day.
Is the Pope the head of all the many Churches that make up the Catholic Confederation of Churches…or only the Roman branch?
Click to expand...
Any day we don’t learn something is a wasted day. No, the pope is not the head of all those Churches. He is, however, the head of the Catholic Church which is comprised of those 23 Churches. He is the head of the Church of the West (as the Patriarch of the West). The head of the Melkite Church, for example, is Patriarch Gregory III who, upon his election, petitioned Rome to have his Church remain in communion with Rome, and the Holy Father immediately granted that. Thus, by virtue of entering into communion with Rome the Melkite Church remained a part of the Catholic Church.

Think of it as the United States – 50 states, 50 governors, 1 president. One country.

The Catholic Church is one Church comprised of 23 Churches who profess the same faith and have the same sacraments.

Deacon Ed
 
Thanks for a much clearer response than mine, Deacon Ed. I wasn’t sure was was meant by “head of the Churches” in the original question. I particularly like your Governor/President and analogy for the Patriarch/Pontiff relationship, and the state/U.S. analogy for the Churches/Church. Of course, the Pope is both a “governor” (Patriarch of the West) and president “Ecumenical/Supreme Pontiff”.
 
40.png
mtr01:
Thanks for a much clearer response than mine, Deacon Ed. I wasn’t sure was was meant by “head of the Churches” in the original question. I particularly like your Governor/President and analogy for the Patriarch/Pontiff relationship, and the state/U.S. analogy for the Churches/Church. Of course, the Pope is both a “governor” (Patriarch of the West) and president “Ecumenical/Supreme Pontiff”.
Click to expand...
You are precisely correct! Where the breakdown in this analogy occurs is in the authority that the Pope has over the other Churches. The President of the US cannot issue orders in a given state (the old issue of states rights still comes up from time to time) whereas the pope, in theory, could do just that. We have had Curial Congregations give orders to the Eastern Catholic Churches, however, and they do so under the authority of the pope.

Deacon Ed
 
40.png
oudave:
Catholics keep telling me that there is only 1 Catholic church, and that the Protestants can’t agree on anything thats why there are so many different churches.
Click to expand...
All of the local particular churches of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church confess the same faith. The same cannot be said about the thousands of different sects of Protestantism which comprise a Babel of contradictory faiths. The doctrines confessed by an Episcopalian are hardly those of a Southern Baptist.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church summarizes the faith confessed by all Catholics. (BTW, the phrase “Roman Catholic” never appears in the CCC).
 
Deacon ED, thank you. I have been wondering for years why the Pope didn’t give certain US Bishops a phone call or a Registered Letter for thet Bishop to get over to Rome - post haste. I wondered why the Pope didn’t “spank” certain US Bishops for actions they have taken. But you explained it. You said the President of the US of A cannot call a govenor up on the carpet. I hope I understood that.

OUdave. Yes, I agree that what I believe about a Catholic group of Youths does not make it so. You named the Preacher by his first name. That is a big Red flag to me. What would you think if I were to say, Hey, come listen to Frank. Our Pastor’s first name is Frank, but we call him Father or Father Augustino,out of respect.

I suppose Bruce ( the Preacher) will look at the attendance of even three Catholics as a “one-shot chance” to put seeds of doubt into their minds about the Catholic Church.

Since Oklahoma has been for a long time a hot bed of Baptist operations, it is not surprising that you are a solid Baptist.
Bill
 
Deacon Ed:
It’s “Deacon Ed” if you don’t mind – even if you don’t respect me respect the office the Church has entrusted to me. And, no, it’s 23 Churches, the Latin or Roman Church and the 22 Eastern Catholic Churches.

Actually, it’s the “Latin Rite” or the “Latin Church” – the term “Roman Catholic” is simply convenient since it’s the one in front of 90% of the Catholic Churches in the United States. It’s also not a “European branch” – the Anglicans subscribe to the branch theory of Christianity, Catholics do not. It is the Church of the West. But there are Eastern Catholic Churches in Europe just as the Church of the West is in the United States, and so are Eastern Catholic Churches.

Any day we don’t learn something is a wasted day. No, the pope is not the head of all those Churches. He is, however, the head of the Catholic Church which is comprised of those 23 Churches. He is the head of the Church of the West (as the Patriarch of the West). The head of the Melkite Church, for example, is Patriarch Gregory III who, upon his election, petitioned Rome to have his Church remain in communion with Rome, and the Holy Father immediately granted that. Thus, by virtue of entering into communion with Rome the Melkite Church remained a part of the Catholic Church.

Think of it as the United States – 50 states, 50 governors, 1 president. One country.

The Catholic Church is one Church comprised of 23 Churches who profess the same faith and have the same sacraments.

Deacon Ed
Click to expand...
Don’t get offended, Ed. Just the answers to my questions about your interesting post would be perfect–thanks.

You might want to call our “Church” the “Latin Rite” rather than the Roman Catholic Church since that phrase did originate as a slur. Even if many (Latin Rite) Catholics call themselves Roman Catholics–you, in your position as an example and teacher, should not be using it or encouraging others to use it–even if it is convenient for you. I’m sure we agree that accuracy should not be sacrificed for convenience.

More questions:

So the other Catholic Churches are in communion with Rome, but do they recognize John Paul II’s ability to bind and loose aspects of their Church discipline? If the Pope (or Vatican III) decided to insist on celabacy for the priests of the Eastern Catholic Churches–would they be mindful of that decision–would they have to be?

The president of the U.S. is not the govenor of any state–so your analogy does not seem to fit the situation with the many (23) Churches you are explaining here. In your first post you wrote that there are “22 (or 23)…Churches.” Sorry if I said 22 in my question. I now see from your response that there are indeed 23.

Ed, if I were an Eastern Catholic, how would I view the Pope…how would his authority and relationship to me differ than it does to me as a Latin Rite Catholic?

Thanks for the time and trouble. This is a very informative thread.

–Tom (you don’t have to call me mister–even though I own a lot of property). 😉
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top