The Holy Fire Miracle

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ioana
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
They participate because it is a Holy and Ecumenical celebration of the Resurrection. The fact that there is no miracle occurring is irrelevant; there is no miracle occurring at most Pascha celebrations, after all, yet we celebrate every year.

As for the video, absolutely nothing miraculous nor unusual occurs in it. Waving candles near your face won’t produce enough energy to burn even without a miracle. I do the same thing in a camp fire with my bare hands to amuse the kids, and at a slower speed as well. Anyone that has ever roasted marshmallows knows that if you continue to move the marshmallow within the fire it will brown very, very slowly and perhaps not at all. This is how people control the heat to reach their ideal level of browning and melting in order to create s’mores. This is all you’re seeing in the video you posted.

Here is a video showing the same type of action with candles that are not from the Holy Fire.

 
Last edited:
They participate by standing on the Doors of the Lord’s Tomb, and waiting for the Patriarch to come out with the Holy Fire. If they want to celebrate Easter, they can serve their own Liturgy, not take part in Orthodox Holy Fire ceremony that they consider fake as you say.

We can debate here forever, everyone that went there, said Fire is not hot as regular fire. That has more credibility than your little tricks you play for children. Holy Fire is even carried to Moscow, Belgrade and other Orthodox Patriarchal sees, where Patriarch receives it before the Paschal Divine Liturgy.
 
Believe what you want. There is absolutely no evidence supporting it, and mounds debunking it.
 
Last edited:
I can accept that it is a real miracle. Is it true that once Catholics have tried to obtian it and failed though? I’ve read several sources. Some never mention that, some say we tried and suceeded others that only the Orthodox can have it.
 
Why are people so anxious to get an explanation for the fire?
If it is a miracle, fine.
If it is just a symbolic ritual with fire, also fine.

I don’t think anyone’s belief in Jesus is based on whether magic fire flies out of his tomb to a certain patriarch on a certain date. Or to put it another way, if that is the main reason you’d choose to believe, that’s pretty sad.

It seems like a nice ritual, miracle or no.
I’d like to see it some day.
The Western Church doesn’t have to corner the market on every ritual or miracle out there.
 
+catholic1seeks

This is a complete and total lie from both the Orthodox perspective and the Catholic perspective.

“Essentially, everything they believe in practice is at one with Catholicism – except that they are not in communion with the Successor of Peter!”

The Orthodox and Catholic Church do not profess the same beliefs - you should do your own research on the fact. We Orthodox deny Papal Infallibility, we deny the Immaculate Conception, we deny inherited guilt, we deny Purgatory, we deny there are only 7 Sacraments, we deny the idea of indulgences, we deny the idea of “created grace,” and we deny there are Sacraments outside the Church.

“But why shouldn’t the Orthodox have miracles? They are genuine apostolic churches. In one sense, they are part of the Catholic Church, just not in full union, since they lack communion with the See of Peter, the visible source of the church’s oneness.
Remember East and West gradually grew apart, but were once the same church. It’s not as if there was some point that God was like “Well, the division is too strong, so now I will cut the Orthodox completely off from the Church.””

That’s exactly what the Roman Catholic Church believes in. As soon as you deny one element of the Roman Catholic Church, you are a heretic and outside the Roman Catholic Church.

Heresy in the Catholic Church - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

This is an infallible statement by the Council of Florence:

“It firmly believes, professes and preaches that all those who are outside the catholic church, not only pagans but also Jews or heretics and schismatics, cannot share in eternal life and will go into the everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless they are joined to the catholic church before the end of their lives; that the unity of the ecclesiastical body is of such importance that only for those who abide in it do the church’s sacraments contribute to salvation and do fasts, almsgiving and other works of piety and practices of the Christian militia produce eternal rewards; and that nobody can be saved, no matter how much he has given away in alms and even if he has shed his blood in the name of Christ, unless he has persevered in the bosom and the unity of the catholic church.”

Go to confession, and stop believing what you want to believe - because your heretical views of ecclesiology offends the ears of Orthodox such as myself.
 
Livenotonevil said:
We Orthodox deny Papal Infallibility, we deny the Immaculate Conception, we deny inherited guilt, we deny Purgatory, we deny there are only 7 Sacraments, we deny the idea of indulgences, we deny the idea of “created grace,” and we deny there are Sacraments outside the Church.
Click to expand...
Just a few questions:
  1. Do the Orthodox believe Mary was sinless?
  2. Do you pray for the dead? Do your prayers help the dead?
  3. What are the sacraments in your church? Are there more than seven?
  4. Are you saying the Catholic Church recognized sacraments outside of the Church?
 
  1. Yes, but the way which we understand it is far more different than Roman Catholicism due to a fundamental difference in our understanding of Original Sin - we believe that Saint Augustine was in error when it comes to “inherited guilt.” The purpose of Baptism - although cleaning sins - doesn’t exist for the purpose of washing away the inherited guilt from Adam. We have an understanding of Original Sin which we term as “Ancestral Sin,” in which the consequences of the Original Sin fundamentally transformed our human nature and made us beast like - but we aren’t, from conception, born with the guilt that Adam had. According to Roman Catholicism, from my understanding, the inherited guilt we all receive fundamentally transforms our human nature and changes us - but this is what the Orthodox deny. The whole idea of the Immaculate Conception was that the Virgin Mary was conceived without this original guilt, and was clean in that she couldn’t even be easily tempted into sin - and this is rejected, because we don’t believe in inherited guilt. We believe she was sinless, but she wasn’t fundamentally different from us. We have writings of Saint Gregory Palamas which suggest that her nature was purified before she was born, but most Orthodox reject this and believe that she was like us and never sinned, which is why she was so chosen by God and why she is the ultimate Saint.
  2. We pray for the dead, and our prayers help the dead - but these prayers are for the forgiveness of sins before Judgment, the possible escape from Hades before the Last Judgment (Hades and Hell are two different things), and not to “reduce time” in the “flames of Purgatory.” One of the Orthodox Saints, Saint Mark of Ephesus, in debates at the Council of Florence, brought this topic up.
    http://nftu.net/first-homily-of-st-...ead-and-against-the-roman-catholic-purgatory/
  3. We do label the 7 Sacraments primarily from the influence of Roman Catholicism, but we believe that everything in the Church is Sacramental - that Christ is the ultimate Sacrament, from which an infinity of Sacraments flow.
    The Sacraments - Questions & Answers - Orthodox Church in America
  4. Yes, they do - even Pre-Vatican II, Sacraments do exist outside the Roman Catholic Church, just illegally and without the Roman Church’s permission, and to partake in them is to engage in mortal sin. For example, the Roman Catholic Church recognizes the Validity of the Orthodox Church’s Sacraments - the Eucharist is literally present in the Orthodox Church; and if a Protestant baptizes a baby in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, that baby will be baptized. However, it exists illegally, and it is gravely sinful for it to happen knowingly. The Eastern Orthodox Church rejects such a concept, believing that - while Grace can exist outside the Church - there are no Sacraments outside the Church. There is no “valid” Baptism outside of the Church.
 
Last edited:
We don’t believe in inherited guilt in the way that you think we do. Are you aware that the Catechism of the Catholic Church explicitly states that NO personal guilt is inherited from Adam’s sin? Original sin is primarily the absence of original holiness. Babies are not born with personal guilt, but they are not in full communion with the Trinity until baptism. Our Lady was fully sanctified, in communion with the Trinity from the first moment of her conception.

Regarding Purgatory, you’re just playing with semantics. You pray to release souls from Hades? How is that fundamentally different than a Catholic praying that a soul be released from Purgatory? The Catholic Church has not definitively defined how Purgatory works- just that there is a state of purification. Perhaps that purification is in Hades (by which you mean the abode of the dead, the limbo of the Fathers, not eternal damnation).

Created grace is another example of West and East talking past each other. We use different terminology, different theological constructs and as such Orthodox Christians often misunderstand what we really believe. Sanctifying grace is the divine life of the Trinity. As such of course it cannot be created. Created grace simply refers to the synergy, the sharing of divine life by a creature… which begins at a moment in time.

Regarding sacraments outside of the Church, there is no single Orthodox answer. I have spoken to Orthodox Christians, including a priest, who recognize Catholic sacraments as true sacraments. Yet Catholics, like the Orthodox, do not believe that sacraments can exist apart from Christ’s Church. Rather, the Orthodox, by virtue of both apostolic succession (for your bishops) and baptism, are still joined to the Catholic Church - just imperfectly. The same is true of Protestants. They don’t have their own baptism… they receive the Church’s one baptism and are mystically incorporated into her…just imperfectly.
 
Last edited:
  1. Read 404 and 405 carefully of the Roman Catholic Catechism of the Church.
    We don’t believe in the transmission of sin “staining people,” Only the human nature, or the consequences of the sin.
  2. No, I’m not. The state after death for the condemned isn’t with “literal fire” or for “purification,” it’s a taste of the eternal pain of Hell which will occur after the Last Judgement. Hades is essentially hell before the Last Judgment, and we don’t even know for certain if any souls can be freed from Hades. Hades doesn’t exist to purify souls before they get into Heaven.
  3. That’s a lie. Grace is understood to be God Himself according to Palamas, and it is uncreated - according to Thomas Aquinas, Grace is a creation of God that He makes.
This ain’t no miaphysitism and dyophysitism “one nature” versus “one hypostasis” where a case of reconciliation is possible ; the way in which how the Essence of God interacts with the world is understood is fundamentally different.
  1. Saying there are Sacraments outside the Church for Orthodox definitively is a foolish endeavor, because the Orthodox profess there aren’t Sacraments outside the Church - this is from modernism from my own experience.
 
Last edited:
  1. You still misunderstand the Catholic teaching. The stain of original sin is not a personal guilt. It is the tainted human nature that resulted from man’s fall. It is the deprivation of sanctifying grace which is remedied by baptism. If man is totally fine without baptism, why do the Orthodox baptize infants at all? This is not the big gulf you and some Orthodox make it out to be.
  2. Purgatorial flames are a popular Western image but I am not aware of any dogma that defines such. Some Orthodox believe in toll houses. If there’s no purification after death, why do you speak of sins being forgiven after death? How is that not a form of purification ?
  3. What’s a lie? I am lying to you about what I believe? You don’t understand the Catholic doctrine. Sanctifying grace is a sharing in the divine life of the Trinity. Clearly that is uncreated. What is created is the synergy or the union between God and man. Again…just using different language.
  4. How do You define the boundaries of the Orthodox Church? Do the Orientals have sacraments?
    Again, you misrepresented the Catholic teaching. There are absolutely no sacraments outside the Church. To say otherwise is heresy. NO sacraments and NO salvation. Period. Yet there are those who are imperfectly joined to the Church who thus benefit from that imperfect communion… especially the Orthodox with whom that imperfect communion is most profound.
Why are you so determined to maximize the differences between us? Catholics have been extended olive branches for decades and some (certainly not all) Orthodox respond with hostility.
 
Council of Trent, doctrine of Original Sin:

“If any one asserts, that the prevarication of Adam injured himself alone, and not his
posterity; and that the holiness and justice, received of God, which he lost, he lost for
himself alone, and not for us also; or that he, being defiled by the sin of disobedience, has
only transfused death, and pains of the body, into the whole human race, but not sin also,
which is the death of the soul; let him be anathema:”

“If any one denies, that infants, newly born from their mothers’ wombs, even though
they be sprung from baptized parents, are to be baptized; or says that they are baptized
indeed for the remission of sins, but that they derive nothing of original sin from Adam,
which has need of being expiated by the laver of regeneration for the obtaining life
everlasting,–whence it follows as a consequence, that in them the form of baptism, for the
remission of sins, is understood to be not true, but false, --let him be anathema.”

"If any one denies, that, by the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, which is conferred in
baptism, the guilt of original sin is remitted; or even asserts that the whole of that which
has the true and proper nature of sin is not taken away; but says that it is only raised, or not
imputed; let him be anathema."

It doesn’t matter if you say the guilt is personal or not - the Orthodox reject the inheritance of the guilt of the Original Sin and we reject that Baptism exists to clean the guilt of the Original Sin.
  1. We don’t know if sins will be forgiven after death - it’s a debate. Even the Aerial Toll House Theory is a debate. And it isn’t through some form of physical punishment that sins are cleansed, which is what Purgatory is described as.
  2. Okay…
  3. There is one visible Church of Orthodoxy - period. From the Orthodox perspective, no - the Orientals don’t have Sacraments, as they are outside the Communion of the Church. On a personal level, one may believe that it is possible for such churches to have Sacraments, but dogmatically - absolutely not. It’s like how we can personally have hope that Judas Iscariot isn’t in hell, or how we can pray to non-canonized people (if we believe them representative of Christian living), or have a hope nobody is in hell. But the Roman Catholic Church dogmatically says that certain sects have valid but illicit Sacraments; i.e., actual effective Sacraments outside the Church, which is against the Orthodox understanding of it.

Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Canada | Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople

www.gometropolis.org www.gometropolis.org

Interesting point nonetheless - however, the way you understand “imperfect communion” is heretical from both a Roman Catholic and Orthodox perspective. You can’t partially be a part of Christ, or select and choose.

Christ said:
“Whoever is not with me is against me, and whoever gathers not with me scatters.”

You are either with Him or against Him.

Let me explain why you are wrong from both a Roman perspective and an Orthodox perspective.
 
Let’s assume that through the Roman Catholic Church, an Orthodox baptizes a child. According to Roman Catholicism, that child is a part of the Roman Catholic Church. If that child prays to Saint Mark of Ephesus,
he would be outside the Roman Catholic Church, de facto excommunicated, especially if he knows about Roman Catholicism. Thus, there cannot be an “imperfect communion”, and it is through the Roman Catholic Church alone through extraordinary jurisdiction that the child receives membership to the Roman Catholic Church. You are either in the Church or out of the Church. And it’s not through some mysterious imperfect communion, it is through the Roman Catholic Church only. “Imperfect communion,” when you get down to it, means no actual communion - and understood like that, yes. But “imperfect communion” I think has been misrepresented as you are suggesting.

Such a concept of extraordinary jurisdiction in Orthodoxy does not occur with valid Sacraments, as valid Sacraments - unless by the Grace of God which we won’t know till judgment day - do not happen outside the Orthodox Church. A Trinitarian baptism in the Roman Catholic Church, for example, does not make him a member of the Orthodox Church - only in the context of the Orthodox Church will this be allowed. However, we can hope there are Sacraments, but dogmatically, no - there are no Sacraments outside the Church.
  1. The differences SHOULD be maximized lest heresy - especially in the case of dialogue - is permitted. The Orthodox Church proclaims the Words of Christ, that “I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life - nobody enters through to the Father except through Me.” and “Whoever doesn’t gather with me scatters.” and "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
    We have a moral obligation to protect this Truth at all costs. And considering that historically that failed reunion attempts have led to persecution by Crusaders (Lyons) and governments (Florence), the Orthodox are indeed completely hesitant for a union, especially a union which tries to pretend that we don’t have differences; that we ought allow differences in Who Christ was and what we believe about Him to exist.
Faith is like a gasoline tank in a car - as soon as you have one small hole, the entire tank is useless. Depart on one dogma of Faith, and you are outside the Church. Period. So, we are very hesitant when someone - rather than trying to fix the problems - pretends and hides, saying they don’t exist.
 
Ok I’ll use the example you give. The kiddo would not be automatically Roman Catholic. Please don’t use the term Roman cause that is just a rite. And if the kiddo were to pray to that saint he wouldn’t be excommunicated ipso facto for several reasons a) he is under 16 and b) he probably doesn’t know it is an offense to do so and c) I’m pretty sure it might not be an excommunicable offense at al. According to Catholic doctrine as far as I get it the kid would certainly be part of the Body of believers and of the universal Church and thus catholic with small c. As for valid sacrements outside the Orthodox Church views do differ (not just amongst lay people but also among clergy). For original sin no offense mate but I don’t understand what you want to say. I am from a majority Orthodox country and was taught religion in school by an Orthodox priest. What you describe as Catholic doctrine sounds like what he taught us. As for Purgatory I guess you could argue that one is somewhat of a legitimate difference but in your view can people destined for Heaven be outside the presence of God? If so doesn’t that imply pain? As for making our differences seem bigger and heresy and one disagreement in faith meaning total disagreement you made me smile because that sounds exactly, word for word like Orthodox perspective. It isn’t Catholic perspective though mate. Orthodox means “by the book” or “dreapta credinta” as we’d say home whilst Catholic means “universal”. Also do the Orthodox not think that other denominations have miracles?
 
Livenotonevil said:
Let’s assume that through the Roman Catholic Church, an Orthodox baptizes a child. According to Roman Catholicism, that child is a part of the Roman Catholic Church. If that child prays to Saint Mark of Ephesus, he would be outside the Roman Catholic Church, de facto excommunicated, especially if he knows about Roman Catholicism.
Click to expand...
What exactly is your basis for this claim? Even setting aside the points that the other person made about the child’s possible age and level of knowledge/ intent being an issue, I cannot see how this would rise to the level of an excommunicable offense.

It’s my understanding that a Roman Catholic may privately pray to anyone who he thinks can help him. If I thought St. Mark of Ephesus was currently in heaven, I could pray privately to him, just like I could pray privately to my late Uncle Joe or my deceased parish pastor. Public prayers in a church, or the placing of statues or icons in a church, or the representation of somebody with a halo on their head, is restricted to canonized saints, so the kid would not be able to lead a public prayer service in a Roman Catholic Church invoking St. Mark of Ephesus, but that’s not your hypothetical.
 
Last edited:
I say “Roman Catholic” because the Orthodox Church is also called the “Catholic Church,” and it is to distinguish between the two.

You can be excommunicated under 16 - if I had sex outside of marriage at 16, I would be excommunicated; any Mortal Sin causes de facto excommunication, which can only be resolved in Confession.

Although some believe there are Sacraments outside the Orthodox Church, they aren’t efficacious - which is different than how Catholics understand it.

Original sin’s difference is pretty simple. When Adam committed the Original Sin, he received Guilt (being responsible for the sin) and Consequences (corrupted human nature, irrational leanings towards sin, death, etc.) for his actions. Sin is inherited to us in the sense that only the Consequences are inherited, as the Orthodox doesn’t inherit the Guilt. The Catholics defined that the purpose of Baptism is to clean this Original Guilt which occurs in all humans from conception onwards, and this is different than what the Orthodox believe.

Well, this is a difference from particularly the ROMAN understanding (as Byzantine Catholics have a different understanding) of what is the cause of pain in Hell. For ROMAN Catholics, the Separation from God is what causes eternal pain, while for Byzantine Catholics, Hell is experiencing God’s Glory when one chooses to reject Him. Neither have been dogmatically defined.

From what I understand, both Roman and Byzantine Catholics agree that
  1. God is omnipresent, and thus, must somehow be present in Hell.
  2. To be in Hell is to cut off Communion with God.
Romans understand that the Second Premise is what causes the eternal pain, being the extreme deprivation of anything good from God. The First Premise is what Byzantine Catholics understand to be the cause of the pain of Hell, believing that God’s presence in Hell is more defined.

You’re wrong for it not being the Catholic perspective; you should familiarize yourself with Catholic theology and Catholic Canon Law. You may have been misinformed with “the spirit of Vatican II”

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07256b.htm#REF_II

As for other miracles outside the Church, we don’t know if miracles can occur- but it’s not of our concern, because anything outside the Church has the potential for harm.

However, I will say that such “miracles” like Medjurgorje and Our Lady of the Roses are blasphemous, Satanic, and heretical “apparitions” which only have legitimacy from sensual emotionalism rather than any idea of truth. These “miracles,” the first of which condemns converting people, as a fundamental heresy, and the latter which states that test-tube babies aren’t humans, both of these things - whether you are a Catholic or Orthodox - are disgusting things that I can spit in the face of.
 
Last edited:
So there would be nothing wrong with me venerating this icon?


For Roman Catholics, venerating an icon of Mark of Ephesus would be disrespectful to the Roman Catholic Church.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top