What official infallible declaration of any Pope on morals would you as a non-Catholic Christian object to and why?

[KathleenGee]

About the ethnicity…and the fact that the Roman Catholic Church recognizes Orthodox Eucharist is saying quite a bit about its openness, and its vision, and its recognition of so much of Orthodoxy, whereas the latter is not.

My comment probably can only be understood by people who have some degree of understanding between ‘the two lungs’…and note that is the term John Paul II called the two churches, both based on the Apostles…and such a schism this is.

I met a Greek Orthodox in SLC, Utah. Our family came in, and the owner asked right off if we were LDS…I had on idea then what he meant…and asked him to clarify…Latter Day Saints???..but questioned because I am in an interracial marriage. I don’t think there are too many Mormons who are in interracial marriages, and we got the eye from a young white couple in the city the night before.

So I said back, we are RC, never using the term before. He then told me how he went to Catholic school. He got in trouble and got his hand slapped with a ruler by the Jesuit priest…so his dad took him back in to school to speak with the priest. When the father found out what his son did with his hand, he told the priest to slap it again.

We then opened up and had a good talk…he said he was Greek Orthodox and if there was anything he did not like about Roman Catholics is that when they say they are but do not believe in its teachings. I thought that was great.

Then I asked him, ‘please please…why can’t we all just be one at the Banquet Table…you know, a big family…we have so much in common…we just be one.’…

The Greek Orthodox said “NO!” I responded, you don’t want us to be a big communion, a real united Christian brotherhood, 'NO!"…“NO”…I just shook my head…he didn’t say why…but that is how it ended and we took off to go back home.

I could give you the name of his restaurant…and they had a really good wine and olive and garlic bread dip for an appetizer…I liked the guy…felt one in heart with him…but although my stomach was full from Greek food—I think it is the best tasting food in the world,…my heart was empty…

 

[KathleenGee]

Now there were some remarks with disdain how the Roman Catholics have had it so good while all the Eastern Orthodox were being massacred by the Nazis and Communists.

There have been references here to Our Lady of Fatima that was really put down…

I grew up hearing about communism…I made reference here at CAF about the films we saw on the Russian Orthodox children who were paraded in the streets for handing their parents over to the government because they had Bibles in their homes…and i assume their icons as well.

We were told to pray and do penance for the conversion of Russia because she would spread her errors throughout the world…but in the end, Russia would be converted.

Mary is not talking about the Orthodox in this. We already know that…She was referring to the communists.

Right now EWTN is showing a small documentary on the Ukrainian Catholics who stayed with Peter, and clips of their icons and crosses being taken out, the bell and steeples and then the whole churches destroyed…I saw film clips…after reading about them…how they would go out into the woods to go to confession and Mass.

I have prayed for those Christian people practically my whole life. And so have many other Roman Catholics…And why it happened to Russia, I don’t know.

I am also referring to the Greek Church when John Paul II went there to ask for forgiveness after all the destruction done by the Norman crusaders a long time ago.

We Catholics who lived under the threat of communism, which has been active in our country all these years…and my native city had the most KGB of any city in America next to Washington, DC…and my native city having an article after the fall of Communism…

…that 30 million Orthodox/Roman Catholics would be set up for liquidation if Communism had overtaken our country…along with the intelligencia…and probably the rich…

My uncle was an encyrptologist, spoke Russian and Chinese, and interpreted their satellites…

And right around the birth of my first son, the Soviet Union was mobilizing on the Polish border…preparing for war, the downing of the Korean jetliner August 31, 1983…and the Soviet dictators dropping one by one …and Pope John Paul II, on March 24 or 25, 1984 consecrating Russia with all the bishops throughout the world for the conversion of Russia…and then Gorbachev coming to power…

All this was our prayers for the Orthodox, their communist masters, and the prevention of World War III. There are alot of things I have read about the Soviets…and we suffered very much for what happened to them, and to many other innocent people…the communists liquidate Christians and people with the ability to make business, people who are independent and intelligent.

It is alleged it was the Communists who set up the play, ‘The Deputy’, to create this impression of Pope Pius XII doing nothing for the Jews. The Soviets were masters at disinformation. The young know nothing of this, but that religion caused more wars and deaths than any other social institution, which is a lie, but it comes from Marxism.

Neo Marxism is at work right now in our country, and we must continue to pray the rosary and do penance…and the same for militant Islam.

Thank you.

 

[KathleenGee]

The Roman Catholics as a believing people have a more charitable and accepting of true faith in the Orthodox than it seems the other way around…just my take…

Correct me here…

And is this a sign or fruit of having the grace of faith in the Rock of Peter, whose work is communion and representation of the faith we all hold dear in Jesus Christ, His Word and Sacraments???

I am beginning to wonder if this is a grace of faith on the Catholic part of our openness to the Orthodox Eucharist…and our vision of them as our other lung…

 

[dvdjs]

So then you would say that the communists also did not outlaw Eastern Orthodoxy? They did in some nations and did not in others, which is why I said basically, because they did not totally outlaw Orthodoxy. If people want to get more of a grasp on it, they can easily read the history behind it. You’re the one who’s playing the semantic game by trying to equate “basically” with “not”. Clearly, “basically” represents a state between “absolutely” and “not at all”. At any rate, I’m not going to continue playing this ridiculous game with you.

The point is that by substituting “not” for “basically” one obtains a true sentence. It is a very standard ploy to add a vague qualifier when one wants to turn things upside down. The worst part is the that the complicity of some EOs under the Communists in the persecution of Eastern is Christians is basically unacknowledged. Certainly there is a deafening silence on its complicity in the liquidation of Greek Catholic churches, even as it wants to call attention to greater magnitude of its suffering.

 

[KathleenGee]

Some how in regards to the Communists killing only Orthodox or Slavs…the Communists liquidated millions in China, Cambodia, Vietnam, as well as providing their own malignment and infiltration of Catholicism in the West, bringing spiritual death to many of our young…

It is better to die a Christian martyr in the Eastern countries than to die in America or Canada without faith.

 

[Cavaradossi]

The point is that by substituting “not” for “basically” one obtains a true sentence. It is a very standard ploy to add a vague qualifier when one wants to turn things upside down. The worst part is the that the complicity of some EOs under the Communists in the persecution of Eastern is Christians is basically unacknowledged. Certainly there is a deafening silence on its complicity in the liquidation of Greek Catholic churches, even as it wants to call attention to greater magnitude of its suffering.

No, by substituting “not” for “basically” one obtains a sentence which is untrue, just as one would obtain an untrue sentence by substituting “absolutely” for “basically”. Real history is complicated and not in black and white. At any rate, you seem to have an odd bone to pick with me today. I’m not going to legitimize you any further today.

 

[dvdjs]

No, by substituting “not” for “basically” one obtains a sentence which is untrue, just as one would obtain an untrue sentence by substituting “absolutely” for “basically”. Real history is complicated and not in black and white.

Of course, and those shades of grey can be accounted for by choosing words carefully. I remain interested in learning of the banning of Orthodoxy in Warsaw pact nations. Perhaps there was a brief interlude with the Living Church at the outset of the revolution. Aside from that, I don’t think so. Persecuted - absolutely; banned - as was the case with Eastern Catholics - I don’t think so. I could be wrong, but I haven’t found anything to back up your ideas.

 

[Mickey]

Well, as far as Orthodox are concerned the Pope does not have the right to unilaterally declare a dogma. Only heretics can do that for their own churches, the Pope should not be following a bad example and return to the ancient practice of leaving dogmatic pronouncements for the gathered bishops in Council.

Indeed!

 

[Mickey]

My point remains that we lack a certainty from scripture and, yes, Tradition as to when God chose to fill her with His grace. We also lack a truly ecumenical council that defines it.

Yes. That is the whole point, Jon. Let us review:

1. There is no evidence of the IC from Scripture.
2. No evidence from Holy Tradition.
3. No evidence from patristics.
4. Roman Catholic post schism saints and doctors rejected it.
5. Orthodox post schism saints rejected.

It is very clear that this was an innovation. There was theological speculation which Pius IX embraced and penned into doctrine in the 19th century…and as far as reunion of the Churches…it was another brick in the wall.

 

[rinnie]

Why? Rinnie, why couldn’t God erase that stain of original sin?

You’re one of my favorites, too.

Jon

Hi Jon, Its not that he couln’t have. But let me ask you this if she were your Mother how would you created her.

With that said lets see what you are missing and the Church see’s and has always seen.

Everything of the Immaculate Conception is foreshadowed in Genesis.

First Adam was created IMMACULATE from the wormb of the Earth.

Now we have Jesus was created from the IMMACULATE womb that took on a human substance.

What Eve spoiled in disobedience Mary set right by obedience. Same as Christ did.

Look at what God said, FIrst lets go back to biology Normal biology is the seed of Man.
SEED OF WOMAN. She is the ONLY WOMAN to give brith w/o a human father. ITs prophesied in Isa. 7:14

Now GOd would want the ark of Covenant to be perfect and unblemshed carrying the WORD MADE FLESH would he not. Go back to the O.T. Ex. 410: 34-38 compare it to luke 1:35

Talk about fore shadows. This one is unreal.

Go to 2 Sam:6 IT foreshadow Mary as the Ark.
1 Sam Who am I that the ARk should come to ME. Sound familliar How about what Elizabeth said, and how the Baby leaped when the New Covenant came in her presence. Because of what it contained.

Go back to 2 Sam David ordered the ark to be diverted up into the country for 3 MONTHS, Mary stayed for 3 MONTHS. Come on.

THE SAVING EFFECTS we see were applied to Mary UNLIKE US at the moment of her conception simply because GOD HATES SIN. It is not much more fitting that he would save his Mother and make her an exception also.

He did it for others. Mickey said ALL MEN HAVE SINNED. Not true, and how CAN you be free from sin and not be God. Where does the bible say only God is sinless. It does not.

When Paul said all men have sinned he was talking to Adults in our state of life.

Look at Adam and Eve they were conceived IMMACULATE. Without sin, Kids can’t sin. also infants. What about retarted people? THey are sinless in God’s eyes and they are not God.

Look at the Angels in heaven they are’t gods and are created sinless and remain that way.

What about the Saints in heaven they aren’t gods and are sinless.

All exceptions to the rule. WHY CAN"T MARY THE MOTHER OF GOD BE AN EXCEPTION then? SO the question to me is WHY NOT. Why would GOD not make the Mother of Jesus sinless? Why would he not create her BLESSED AMONG WOMEN? Plus the obvious he not only would he did, scripture tells us.

My question is why WOULD he created her tainted with Sin?

Now back to the Catholic answer.

The Angel saw that Mary was sinless she said in Luke, Full of Grace. SHe caught it right of the bat.

Elizabeth saw it, Blessed among women, Means Holiest among ALL women.

The Church sees it, The understand Mary to be the fulfillment of the O.T.

Eve= failed us. Blessed Mother did not fail.

Adam was a type of Christ in Rom. 5:4
Noah foreshadowed baptism, the flood, the church and baptism.
Moses was also a type of Christ saving us from slavery.

Its all about foreshadowing.

Now go to the end of the book. Rev.11:19 Mary/Ark/ Mary is the Mother of all.

IT all POINTS to the I.C. Why would God make our human Mother with sin? Why would he save others and not his Mother. Besides the obvious again she found favor with God, Of course she did, SHe was his Mother and created pure and perfect and unblemished because she was to carry the Son of God.

Now back to the answer God did create his Mother sinless and by his saving Grace kept her that way.

Col. 1:16
Heb 1:2 And in his MERCY KEPT HER THAT WAY.

 

[rinnie]

Yes. That is the whole point, Jon. Let us review:

1. There is no evidence of the IC from Scripture.
2. No evidence from Holy Tradition.
3. No evidence from patristics.
4. Roman Catholic post schism saints and doctors rejected it.
5. Orthodox post schism saints rejected.

It is very clear that this was an innovation. There was theological speculation which Pius IX embraced and penned into doctrine in the 19th century…and as far as reunion of the Churches…it was another brick in the wall.

Okay Mickey lets see certainlty then. Show me where everything has to be shown exact in scripture…

SHow me with certaintly the Trinity.

 

[Mickey]

Okay Mickey lets see certainlty then. Show me where everything has to be shown exact in scripture…

Not only Scripture my dear…but Tradition patristics…Great Councils…etc…etc…

SHow me with certaintly the Trinity.

Matthew 3:16-17
And Jesus being baptized, forthwith came out of the water: and lo, the heavens were opened to him: and he saw the Spirit of God descending as a dove, and coming upon him. And behold a voice from heaven, saying: This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

Father speaks, Son is baptized, Holy Spirit descends.

 

[Mickey]

IT all POINTS to the I.C.

No. It does not.

 

[GaryTaylor]

Ignorance doesn’t reduce fact with the IC. Points have been clearly established here already. Failure to comprehend them is the only issue.

Persecution isn’t limited to EO Christians either. How quickly we overlook the Worlds Largest Religion being persecuted TODAY in Russia. A moratorium on the Catholic Faith futher incouraged by the EO fear of converstion. Good looking out by Chirstians. And you wonder “why” you are persecuted. You chose to stand in your own ignorance.

Where does any Patriarch mention Marion Doctrine as in issue in the on-going ecumenical meetings? Its also amazing how communion is vaguely referred to as invalid. Especially in light the EO has already conceded the Council of Nicaea as the Pope being the “proto”. Maybe its time to seperate nonsense promoted here with the real facts in the on-going ecumenism. The only points which are not patristic are those mentioned in loose referrence to Christ and SIn which has nothing to do with Mary.

Lets see the defination of patristic. And in fact if its “patristic” in the IC relating to Irenaeus form 2-AD.

Referrence is…

BIBLE/GENESIS/MARY/EVE by the Saint, geez what is the IC talking about.

BIBLE/GENESIS/MARY/EVE

Definition of PATRISTIC…
: of or relating to the church fathers or their writings

We can put that to rest since the statement is false and there is supporting evidence to show this.

So here we have not only early church father but Scripture in Genesis. And this is without even going any deeper into the New Eve aspect of the IC, never mind Original Sin.

 

[Mickey]

Failure to comprehend them is the only issue.

Indeed! But it should not be difficult to comprehend that this novel “doctrine” is not supported by Councils, patristics, Scripture or Tradition.

Lets see the defination of patristic. And in fact if its “patristic” in the IC relating to Irenaeus form 2-AD.

We have already been through this. St Irenaeus says nothing about the IC.

So here we have not only early church father but Scripture in Genesis.

Gensis says nothing about the IC…you are trying to retroactively twist Scripture to fit a 19th century Roman Catholic doctrine.

 

[GaryTaylor]

The fact the IC isn’t mentioned by Irenaeus has nothing to do with anything but in YOUR mind.

Definition of PATRISTIC…
: of or “relating” to the church fathers or their writings

Did you see “RELATING To” in the defination Mickey? Doesn’t make any difference if the Imaculate Conception is mentioned. The referrence isn’t a total definition of the IC so that wouldn’t matter, why would it be mentioned. What does matter is the definition of Patristic and how it applys to this specific aspect of the IC and Irenaeus, which it so obviously does. Surprized you don’t see it. I would assume all else do.

Lets see Genesis/Eve/Mary is mentioned as part of the IC being defined.

Ireneaus speaks on Genesis/Eve/Mary in this context. The New Eve:shrug:

 

[Mickey]

The fact the IC isn’t mentioned by Irenaeus has nothing to do with anything but in YOUR mind.

Such a bizarre thing to say. You are trying to show that St Irenaeus was patristic evidence of the IC doctrine…yet you say that the fact that he says nothing…is irrelevant.

PS–You should refer to the saints of the Church by using the prefix “St” in front of their names…ie: St Irenaeus. It shows respect.

Did you see “RELATING To” in the defination Mickey?

St Irenaeus says nothing “relating” to the IC.

Doesn’t make any difference if the Imaculate Conception is mentioned.

Not only is it not mentioned…their is nothing that even remotely relates to it.

The referrence isn’t a total definition of the IC so that wouldn’t matter, why would it be mentioned.

Exactly! Why would something be mentioned that did not exist.

Lets see Genesis/Eve/Mary is mentioned as part of the IC being defined.

If there was something about “being spared from original sin at the moment of conception”…it would do wonders for your argument.

 

[GaryTaylor]

Your circular argument is lacking so was your word choice in “patristic”. Also whats apparent is your lack of understanding of the IC in its total context…LOL . The case is made, your the only one NOT getting this. But we understand all will not comprehend the relationship so clearly drawn in the IC.

Bottom line is the Doctrine is based on Scripture and the early church fathers. Blantantly obvious when read. Your personal “denial” is noted though.

 

[rinnie]

Not only Scripture my dear…but Tradition patristics…Great Councils…etc…etc…

Matthew 3:16-17
And Jesus being baptized, forthwith came out of the water: and lo, the heavens were opened to him: and he saw the Spirit of God descending as a dove, and coming upon him. And behold a voice from heaven, saying: This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

Father speaks, Son is baptized, Holy Spirit descends.

Trinity Mick where does it say the word Trinity?

Again please read what I said, Are you not seeing the foreshadowing of this.

Go back and read scripture and then the pieces come together.

Foreshadow, look Mickey!

Jesus asked Abrahan to give up his only son. Abraham was willling to give up his only son his ONLY SON TO DEATH, God stopped him.

God did not stop in giving up HIS only SON. his son was given up to death.

Do you not see the connection.

 

[rinnie]

No. It does not.

Okay lets have it your way.

Blessed are you among women, you have found favor with God. A VIRGIN gives birth to a son. The seed of a WOMEN. What do you call this if it is not a foreshadow of what is to come. ANd how do you deny this is the Immaculate Conception.

All generations will call YOU BLESSED!! I am a handmaid of the Lord. Come on Mickey she was HAND MADE by the Lord.

Tell me this Mickey if I am wrong you can explain this quite easily, IF I am wrong you will have no answer.

In Luke the Angel appear to Mary and says Hail favored one, the LORD is with you. Then says be not afraid Mary you have found favor with God.

Now then the angels says the HOLY SPRIIT will come upon you.

Okay now the Holy SPirit did not come upon Mary yet, but the angel said THE LORD IS WITH YOU! WHen then Mickey did this happen if the CHurch is wrong.

ANd remember is the CHurch is wrong and she was no saved from SIN then why do you agree that she is sinless also? You need to show me this.