Well no smaller schisms happened as far back as the 200’s even Eastern schism started in the 300’s and progressed thru the 800 and then the final break in 1054. Yes they still have valid succession and valid Sacraments. They can trace their Bishops back to an Apostle through the Catholic Church. No they do not have their own Pope each Church is independent of the others. There is no central point unity between them. Because they are missing that major piece about Peter. It’s like they have all the pieces of the puzzle except the ones around the edge that hold it all together.The first schism of the Church was when the Orthodox broke in 1054, correct? Do they still have valid Apostolic Succession? If yes, how is this so? They can trace their bishops back to Peter? Do they have their own pope? How do we as Catholics know 100% that the Orthodox do not hold the fullness of truth? In other words, how do we know they are not the One True Church or the true Catholic Church? I just need a little reassurance. Thanks a bunch!
Thank you so much!Well no smaller schisms happened as far back as the 200’s even Eastern schism started in the 300’s and progressed thru the 800 and then the final break in 1054. Yes they still have valid succession and valid Sacraments. They can trace their Bishops back to an Apostle through the Catholic Church. No they do not have their own Pope each Church is independent of the others. There is no central point unity between them. Because they are missing that major piece about Peter. It’s like they have all the pieces of the puzzle except the ones around the edge that hold it all together.
Yes and no. It depends on perspective. From an Orthodox point of view there was the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church and that was going along…then in 1054 the Roman Catholic Church went into schism from the Church founded by Jesus Christ. It developed innovative (ie new) doctrines, etc that were at great variance with the faith established by Christ and attested to in the Ecumenical Councils (you can read them on line). The schismatic Latin Rite Church then gave birth to other schismatic groups (ie Protestants). This is why a 19th Century Russian Theologian refered to the Pope as the first Protestant.The first schism of the Church was when the Orthodox broke in 1054, correct? Do they still have valid Apostolic Succession? If yes, how is this so? They can trace their bishops back to Peter? Do they have their own pope? How do we as Catholics know 100% that the Orthodox do not hold the fullness of truth? In other words, how do we know they are not the One True Church or the true Catholic Church? I just need a little reassurance. Thanks a bunch!
Father Alexey Young (Orthodox Priest):To quote from the pamphlet What is the Orthodox Church (Conciliar Press)…“Today her Apostolic doctrine, worship and structure remain intact, and as it was in the beginning. The Orthodox Church is the living Body of Jesus Christ”. “The Orthodox Church is the first Christian Church, the Church founded by the Lord Jesus Christ, and described in the pages of the New Testament”.
Rev North
The author says that ‘the Orthodox Church has faithfully maintained the apostolic faith once delivered to the saints (Jude 3), neither adding to nor subtracting from it.’ A fine statement, but one which is, in this context, at best an optimistic generalization, for some Orthodox jurisdictions have in fact departed significantly from the Faith ‘once delivered to the saints,’ as even a cursory study will reveal.” (Orthodox America, 1997)
You can safely ignore that.Father Alexey Young (Orthodox Priest):
The author says that ‘the Orthodox Church has faithfully maintained the apostolic faith once delivered to the saints (Jude 3), neither adding to nor subtracting from it.’ A fine statement, but one which is, in this context, at best an optimistic generalization, for some Orthodox jurisdictions have in fact departed significantly from the Faith ‘once delivered to the saints,’ as even a cursory study will reveal.” (Orthodox America, 1997)
Check out the thread “Disunity in the Orthodox Church”Well no smaller schisms happened as far back as the 200’s even Eastern schism started in the 300’s and progressed thru the 800 and then the final break in 1054. Yes they still have valid succession and valid Sacraments. They can trace their Bishops back to an Apostle through the Catholic Church. No they do not have their own Pope each Church is independent of the others. There is no central point unity between them. Because they are missing that major piece about Peter. It’s like they have all the pieces of the puzzle except the ones around the edge that hold it all together.
We have held it together, for 2000 years. We place our trust for our “central point of unity” in the Holy Spirit whom the Lord promised to send us to maintain the teachings which He gave. This promise has never failed. We do not feel the need of a “Vatican Central” when we have the Spirit. It seems superfluous to us. The proof of this is in history. We are today what we have always been - no additions, no subtractions, no alterations to the faith. And no need of any institution like the papacy to protect our unity.There is no central point unity between them. Because they are missing that major piece about Peter. It’s like they have all the pieces of the puzzle except the ones around the edge that hold it all together.
We have held it together, for 2000 years. We place our trust for our “central point of unity” in the Holy Spirit whom the Lord promised to send us to maintain the teachings which He gave. This promise has never failed. We do not feel the need of a “Vatican Central” when we have the Spirit. It seems superfluous to us. The proof of this is in history. We are today what we have always been - no additions, no subtractions, no alterations to the faith. And no need of any institution like the papacy to protect our unity.
Amen…
Rev North
Pope Benedict (Cardinal Ratzinger):**“The West may point to the absence of the office of Peter in the East—it must, nevertheless, admit that, in the Eastern Church, the form and content of the Church of the Fathers is present in unbroken continuity” **~Principles of Catholic Theology, Ignatius, 1987.And from Cardinal Kasper, the President of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity:
"They [the Orthodox] are the one Church in different liturgical, theological, spiritual and canonical forms. These differences are legitimate.”
The full text is here, message #1
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=76268
Good catch Father:thumbsup:You can safely ignore that.
The words appear in a 1997 edition of the magazine Orthodox America. This was run by a combination of HOOM (Holy Order of MANS) and Christ the Saviour Brotherhood (run by the defrocked abbot Herman Podmoshensky.) These people believed that all of Orthodoxy had gone astray. They repudiated bishops as having been unfaithful to Christ and advocated what they called “independent Orthodox workers.” The movement did not last long but it makes a fascinating study of the rapid birth and death of a sect on the fringes of Orthodoxy.
So I suppose, in turn, we can safely ignore individuals and sects on the fringes of Catholicism that do not represent official Church doctrine, correct?You can safely ignore that.
The words appear in a 1997 edition of the magazine Orthodox America. This was run by a combination of HOOM (Holy Order of MANS) and Christ the Saviour Brotherhood (run by the defrocked abbot Herman Podmoshensky.) These people believed that all of Orthodoxy had gone astray. They repudiated bishops as having been unfaithful to Christ and advocated what they called “independent Orthodox workers.” The movement did not last long but it makes a fascinating study of the rapid birth and death of a sect on the fringes of Orthodoxy.
We desire at the present time to express our deepest concern and sadness for all that is taking place for years now, in our Holy Orthodoxy, the deconstruction of the teaching of the Holy Apostles and of the Holy Fathers and the antithesis to all the sacred canons enacted by the ecumenical and local synods. We wonder if some ecumenical synod has been assembled and abolished the canons which forbid the joint prayer with heretics, or if the Pope repented and renounced the heresies of the Filioque, of primacy, of infallibility, of unleavened bread, of the purifying fire [purgatory], of created grace, of the immaculate conception of the Most Holy Theotokos, and so many others, most of which he has been condemned and anathematized numerous times by Orthodox Synods and by the entirety of the Holy Fathers.
Heaven was angered and the Holy Fathers exceedingly saddened by the spectacle and by hearing about all that took place at the Phanar (neighborhood in which the Ecumenical Patriarch resides in Istanbul-Ed. note) during the feast of the Holy Apostle Andrew on the 30th of November of the current year.
Unprecedented and unheard of things in the two thousand year history of the Church. “The scornful marginalization of the dogmas of the Fathers, the annihilation of the Apostolic traditions, the introduction of novelties into the churches by contemporary personalities,” as St. Basil the Great says, regarding comparable events during his own time.
Perhaps the phrase “on the fringes of the Church” was too polite. These people were outside the Church. Those who were eventually received into the Church from this sect were received by ChrismationSo I suppose, in turn, we can safely ignore individuals and sects on the fringes of Catholicism that do not represent official Church doctrine, correct?
This is a different matter. These monks are *inside the Church. *Do we also ignore the monks of Mount Athos who complained that the heresy of phyletism has resulted in utter chaos and caused Orthodoxy to stray. The same monks who said