The error of traditionalism is the same as the Pharasees.

[Joab_Anias]

Mat 15:3 But he answering, said to them: Why do you also transgress the commandment of God for your tradition?

Mar 7:9 And he said to them: Well do you make void the commandment of God, that you may keep your own tradition.

Col 2:8 Beware lest any man cheat you by philosophy and vain deceit: according to the tradition of men according to the elements of the world and not according to Christ.

1Pe 1:18 Knowing that you were not redeemed with corruptible things, as gold or silver, from your vain conversation of the tradition of your fathers:

 

[Genesis315]

It depends what you mean by traditionalism. In France a couple centuries ago there was philosophical system called Traditionalism which was akin to Fideism, essentially ruling out reason and anything but faith in terms of man’s knowledge of truth. It is in error.

There is also the kind that an Orthodox theologian put nicely: Tradition is the living faith of the dead. Traditionalism is the dead faith of the living. This is essentially the Pharisaical one–an obsession with outward traditions to exclusion of charity, compassion, etc. (clean on the outside, filthy on the inside).

Then there is the kind that simply means a lawful desire to use certain liturgical rites. This is perfectly fine.

 

[pnewton]

Yes, if this discussion is to have any meaning it would be best to define your terms. The four verses you quoted are not together, so plugging and pasting them one after another is meaningless unless you can explain what you mean by it.

 

[Joab_Anias]

Yes, if this discussion is to have any meaning it would be best to define your terms. The four verses you quoted are not together, so plugging and pasting them one after another is meaningless unless you can explain what you mean by it.

It is simply to speak to those who place their traditions before charity.

The scriptures meanings are clear if your open and have an ear to hear.

They could apply to very many Christians.

Virtue must be pursued and the truth will set you free.

 

[ForeverAdam]

Joab,

In the Orthodox Church we make a distinction between the “traditions of men”, which keep us from fulfilling the commandments of God, and the traditions of the Church, which are from God and help us live the commandments of the Gospel faithfully. These latter traditions must be maintained because they are established by the Body of Christ, the Church, and give a worthy expression to the truths of our Faith. Certainly, we should hold to these traditions in humility and charity. However, we cannot dismiss these traditions as optional without hindering the Gospel, itself. This is what the ancient Church taught and what we are still taught in Holy Orthodoxy.

God bless,

Adam

 

[Joab_Anias]

Joab,

In the Orthodox Church we make a distinction between the “traditions of men”, which keep us from fulfilling the commandments of God, and the traditions of the Church, which are from God and help us live the commandments of the Gospel faithfully. These latter traditions must be maintained because they are established by the Body of Christ, the Church, and give a worthy expression to the truths of our Faith. Certainly, we should hold to these traditions in humility and charity. However, we cannot dismiss these traditions as optional without hindering the Gospel, itself. This is what the ancient Church taught and what we are still taught in Holy Orthodoxy.

God bless,

Adam

What do you suppose Christ prayed for, Christian Unity or Tradtions to the point of no longer being Catholic?

Mar 7:9 And he said to them: Well do you make void the commandment of God, that you may keep your own tradition.

Col 2:8 Beware lest any man cheat you by philosophy and vain deceit: according to the tradition of men according to the elements of the world and not according to Christ.

1Pe 1:18 Knowing that you were not redeemed with corruptible things, as gold or silver, from your vain conversation of the tradition of your fathers:

See that last sentance, I mean to adhere to it.

Peace and may the fullness of Christ be upon the Orthodox.

 

[ForeverAdam]

What do you suppose Christ prayed for, Christian Unity or Tradtions to the point of no longer being Catholic?

I don’t think Christ envisioned the two to be separated from each other. Christian unity is unity in the true Faith, a mark of which has always been fidelity to Tradition in all its forms.

See that last sentance, I mean to adhere to it.

I hope you do adhere to it. However, you need to understand that St. Peter was referring to the traditions that keep one from embracing the Gospel, not the traditions that keep the Gospel strong and vibrant. May God bless and guide you, Joab.

God bless,

Adam

 

[pnewton]

It is simply to speak to those who place their traditions before charity.

The scriptures meanings are clear if your open and have an ear to hear.
.

The two are not mutualy exclusive. Scriptures do have meaning in context, but it is poor exegesis to cut and paste scriptures from different areas and assume they are related. It tends to make the Bible more of a magic book than the Word of God.

I do think there are some that put their own doctrine ahead of charity, be they traditionalist, Pharisees or Calvinists. I added the last one because that was the ones that used to have this problem back when I was a Baptist. Now I find that a few traditional Catholics do the same thing. However, the two are not tied in any sense. Even among the pharisees Jesus had disciples.

 

[Joab_Anias]

The two are not mutually exclusive. Scriptures do have meaning in context, but it is poor exegesis to cut and paste scriptures from different areas and assume they are related. It tends to make the Bible more of a magic book than the Word of God.

Without making polemical exegesis the scriptures speak for themselves and the mind is open to the Holy Spirit to inspire or convict what He will. That is why I don’t impugn them with my opinions in an exegesis directed toward anyone as that would leave a door open to descend from peace.

I do think there are some that put their own doctrine ahead of charity, be they traditionalist, Pharisees or Calvinists. I added the last one because that was the ones that used to have this problem back when I was a Baptist. Now I find that a few traditional Catholics do the same thing. However, the two are not tied in any sense. Even among the pharisees Jesus had disciples.

As I said, I am not accusing. One must read the scripture and make of it what he will then differ to Prayer and the apostolic Church for guidance in correct hermeneutics.

Peace.

 

[Joab_Anias]

I don’t think Christ envisioned the two to be separated from each other. Christian unity is unity in the true Faith, a mark of which has always been fidelity to Tradition in all its forms.

Christ envisioned all things. Not only did He envision it but He prophesized it saying we would be attacked by Satan as soon as He left.

I hope you do adhere to it. However, you need to understand that St. Peter was referring to the traditions that keep one from embracing the Gospel, not the traditions that keep the Gospel strong and vibrant.

The Gospel keeps the traditions strong. Not the other way around my friend. Traditions are our creation just as they were of the Pharisees and subject to change by us but the word of God and the dogma revealed to His Church are not. Also our traditions must change if they keep us from embracing the Holy Spirit as they have in the past. To do otherwise is to be deceived by pride that our Church of men is perfect and never needs reform. One thing traditions are doing is causing disunity among Christians. I would say that’s a serious problem to consider. I do not blame the traditions, cultures or customs but the failure to not let them do so.

May God bless and guide you too Adam.

 

[Semper_Fi_1]

Traditionalism is simply assent to the magisterium, it is no error. Dissent and Modernism are errors.

 

[ForeverAdam]

Christ envisioned all things. Not only did He envision it but He prophesized it saying we would be attacked by Satan as soon as He left.

Point taken. Christ did envision that some Christians would believe that traditional doctrine could be divorced from traditional expressions of doctrine. However, I’m sure he doesn’t support such dualism.

The Gospel keeps the traditions strong. Not the other way around my friend.

This is true, as is what I said. The Gospel is the motivation and power of the traditions, and the traditions give the Gospel power in people’s life. It’s both/and and not either/or.

Traditions are our creation just as they were of the Pharisees and subject to change by us but the word of God and the dogma revealed to His Church are not.

You’re forgetting that the Church speaks with the authority of God. The traditions established by the ancient Church are not mere traditions of men; they were established by the God-bearing Fathers and Mothers of the Church and have been sanctioned for use by the Body of Christ. These traditions truly come from God, have been approved by God and must be respected as such.

Also our traditions must change if they keep us from embracing the Holy Spirit as they have in the past.

What kind of spirit would want us to change the ancient boundaries of our Fathers?

To do otherwise is to be deceived by pride that our Church of men is perfect and never needs reform.

In Orthodoxy, we think more about reforming our own lives through repentance than in reforming the traditions of our Faith.

One thing traditions are doing is causing disunity among Christians. I would say that’s a serious problem to consider. I do not blame the traditions, cultures or customs but the failure to not let them do so.

Doctrine is dividing Christians too. Must we sacrifice it in order to have unity? It’s not our fault that non-Orthodox have lost fidelity to ancient traditions, just as it isn’t our fault that they have lost sight of ancient doctrine. Our duty is to remain constant in the Faith and practice of the Holy Fathers and labor for the return of others to the Church.

God bless,

Adam

 

[AgnosTheist]

In the Orthodox Church we make a distinction between the “traditions of men”, which keep us from fulfilling the commandments of God, and the traditions of the Church, which are from God and help us live the commandments of the Gospel faithfully.

how do you know if a tradition is from God? Do you have your own version of ‘papal infallibility’?

 

[ForeverAdam]

how do you know if a tradition is from God? Do you have your own version of ‘papal infallibility’?

A tradition is from God if it received by the whole Church. In Orthodoxy, we believe that God speaks through all the Church, not just the Pope. Therefore, we value the traditions of the Church in every era, and not only those traditions that the Pope wants to maintain. This is a key difference between the Roman Catholic and Orthodox Churches.

God bless,

Adam

 

[AgnosTheist]

^ thanks man. I think that makes more sense.

 

[pnewton]

Traditionalism is simply assent to the magisterium, it is no error. Dissent and Modernism are errors.

That is why I am curious as the the definition of traditionalism. Not all traditionalist assent to the magesterium and I see no reason to think they are less prone to errors than anyone else. If you see this differently, perhaps you prove the ladies point.

I have noticed that a traditional Catholic on these forums seem far more critical of those who are not traditional than visa versa.

 

[jam070406]

The biggest Tradition that Orthodoxy have abandoned was the honor given to the Pope of Rome. They admit he had a place of primacy and later refused to honor that primacy. As a result came later abandonments of the Tradtional teachings of… authority, ABC, divorce, rebaptism. If you define Tradition as outside pomp such as beards, leavened bread, ritual practice etc. then Orthodox have done well. If Tradition is understood as adhering to the deposit of Faith in the protection of the Holy Spirit then the Orthodox are slipping down a slippery slope.

 

[bogoljub]

The biggest Tradition that Orthodoxy have abandoned was the honor given to the Pope of Rome. They admit he had a place of primacy and later refused to honor that primacy. As a result came later abandonments of the Tradtional teachings of… authority, ABC, divorce, rebaptism. If you define Tradition as outside pomp such as beards, leavened bread, ritual practice etc. then Orthodox have done well. If Tradition is understood as adhering to the deposit of Faith in the protection of the Holy Spirit then the Orthodox are slipping down a slippery slope.

God bless!

We have abandoned nothing - that’s a fairy tale !!
Woul u know how we honor the old popes of Rome, often their icons are near the Altar like St. Gregory the great Pope of rome…
We are going in circles…I think we have often enaugh tole u that the Pope had a Primacy - no one denied ever- but he was not ifallable or could not err or was the personification of the church.

I have told u that some Popes were heretics like Honorius and when u study the Church history and the Synods u will see that the Pope of Rome of course was an important Patriarch ( the first) but he was not infallable…and many things were done without him.

Do u read my post with the quote of the live of st. Maximus - did he search for truth or did he search for the confession of the Pope ? If the Pope would be believed infallable he would answered I stay to that church where the Pope is -but he did not !

The same with all the other writings of the early church and your incorrect understanding; Peter has spoken through Leo–yes great but that mean not that he is infallable…I have told u we also say Paul has spoken through Chrysostom…

Please I beg do not accuse others - that they have abandoned anything when you abandoned everything ! You even try to excuse Clown masses and blasphemie !!

In CHRIST

 

[Mannyfit75]

God bless!

We have abandoned nothing - that’s a fairy tale !!
Woul u know how we honor the old popes of Rome, often their icons are near the Altar like St. Gregory the great Pope of rome…
We are going in circles…I think we have often enaugh tole u that the Pope had a Primacy - no one denied ever- but he was not ifallable or could not err or was the personification of the church.

I have told u that some Popes were heretics like Honorius and when u study the Church history and the Synods u will see that the Pope of Rome of course was an important Patriarch ( the first) but he was not infallable…and many things were done without him.

Do u read my post with the quote of the live of st. Maximus - did he search for truth or did he search for the confession of the Pope ? If the Pope would be believed infallable he would answered I stay to that church where the Pope is -but he did not !

The same with all the other writings of the early church and your incorrect understanding; Peter has spoken through Leo–yes great but that mean not that he is infallable…I have told u we also say Paul has spoken through Chrysostom…

Please I beg do not accuse others - that they have abandoned anything when you abandoned everything ! You even try to excuse Clown masses and blasphemie !!

In CHRIST

I see nothing but proselytizing in your points and lack any form of charity at all. Why are so hostile against Our Church? We don’t even insult yours, yet you have the nerve to insult ours.

 

[jam070406]

God bless!

We have abandoned nothing - that’s a fairy tale !!
Woul u know how we honor the old popes of Rome, often their icons are near the Altar like St. Gregory the great Pope of rome…
We are going in circles…I think we have often enaugh tole u that the Pope had a Primacy - no one denied ever- but he was not ifallable or could not err or was the personification of the church.

I have told u that some Popes were heretics like Honorius and when u study the Church history and the Synods u will see that the Pope of Rome of course was an important Patriarch ( the first) but he was not infallable…and many things were done without him.

Do u read my post with the quote of the live of st. Maximus - did he search for truth or did he search for the confession of the Pope ? If the Pope would be believed infallable he would answered I stay to that church where the Pope is -but he did not !

The same with all the other writings of the early church and your incorrect understanding; Peter has spoken through Leo–yes great but that mean not that he is infallable…I have told u we also say Paul has spoken through Chrysostom…

Please I beg do not accuse others - that they have abandoned anything when you abandoned everything ! You even try to excuse Clown masses and blasphemie !!

In CHRIST

So Jesus taught divorce is ok? Your Church teaches that ABC is ok, does it not? There are those that believe rebaptism is necessary, true?

Again, you say you honored the Pope and yet, it stopped. He held primacy and even the declaration between the Orthodox and Vatican sites that he held primacy over the universal Church. You rejected the Pope BEFORE infallibilty was defined. This wasn’t the issue and it doesn’t benefit your argument. You reject an authority set up by Christ himself that many Fathers verify. Whether you want to call it a primacy of honor or not. Your church rejected the honor due to him and it became dishonor.

No matter how many times you bring up clown masses it has nothing to do with the topic. It’s just another strawman argument.