D
dvdjs
Guest
Well you might consider testing the waters.
Or not.
- Status
Or not.
C
ConstantineTG
Guest
There are no new revelations. Public revelation ended at the death of St. John the Apostle. There are no new revelations a Pope can put forward, there are no new dogmas, no new doctrines.
D
dvdjs
Guest
There are no new revelations - true. New dogmas, new doctrines? Of course - as defined, for example, at ecumenical councils
C
ConstantineTG
Guest
No, they are not new. The Ecumenical councils made canon of what the belief is. Did the belief in the divinity of Christ begin in Nicaea? Or course not. It only made that position firm and said we won’t be accepting any other position on that matter. Even in the Catholic Church, Apostolic Constitutions only define dogma, it does not create dogma. It only formalizes a belief that has been long held. It spells out what the true belief is among differing theological opinions on the matter in the case that there is a disagreement.
F
Fone_Bone_2001
Guest
Credo ergo sum mentioned St. Jerome… I was thinking St. Irenaeus and St. Cyprian. Again, I’m sure you know the quotes, and I don’t want to get in a prooftexting battle, so I’ll stop here.
The Roman liturgical calendar, used throughout the Latin Church, would be a good place to start. It includes lots of saints, post-schism as well as pre-schism.
Well said. I’m glad somebody pointed this out; I wouldn’t want this thread’s non-Catholic participants to think the Catholic Church believes we can add new revelation. That would make us some kind of weirdo post-Christian offshoot, not a church that adheres to the orthodox and apostolic faith.
People like Mormons believe in new public revelation. True (Nicene) Christians do not.
I like the way you explained that, Constantine.
Too often in these discussions, people - sometimes especially Orthodox - give or get the mistaken impression that Catholics believe we can add new truths, new revelations, to the faith when we cannot.
Even controversial dogmas like, say, those taught by Vatican I are, from the Catholic point of view, not additions or changes to the faith any more than the beliefs dogmatized by first millennium councils are.
C
ConstantineTG
Guest
Well, it depends on point of views. For example the dogma on the Papacy, from the Roman Catholic viewpoint, what the Pope is is something that has been there since Biblical Times, since the time when Scripture described as Christ handing over the keys to St. Peter. Others do not see it that way. I think this is the biggest issue against the Catholic Church. Is it really something that was there all along but not clearly understood? Or did they really make it up and just justified it with Scripture?
B
ByzCathCantor
Guest
Thanks for the useful tip, but that was clearly not the point …Of course, the Eucharist is a sacrifice, so yes
Who said anything about Eastern Catholics?Please consider reading the mail before putting it through the shredder …
C
Cavaradossi
Guest
I’m stealing that line for use in real life.
T
Trebor135
Guest
I ended up at a Novus Ordo Catholic Mass this morning at the last minute, despite planning to attend a Greek Orthodox Divine Liturgy (my dad isn’t keen on going to church where a lot of the service isn’t in English, and I understand where he’s coming from). At any rate, I reacted with the same level of disgust (let’s be honest) today as when I attended that Catholic parish a few times during May and June. Most of the Mass had a concert feel to it because of the style of the music. If I wanted that kind of atmosphere, I’d go to a Pentecostal church, where it’s actually pulled off much better.
To any Latin Catholic hierarches and clerics reading: please fix your liturgies in as rapid and thorough a manner as possible.
A
adrift
Guest
Perhaps I am misreading this so please clarify.
Is your position that only if the Pope humbles himself by admiting that his position is wrong that reconciliation is possible?
B
ByzCathCantor
Guest
You are misreading. That is not at all what I said.
D
dvdjs
Guest
This is not really an accurate summary of the results of ecumenical councils. But if that is what you see, then fine. There is no new dogma just definitions that make certain positions firm and rule out others. But that is what catholics call the develpment of doctrine.
A
adrift
Guest
I am sorry that I misread you. I would have appreciated a better response than I misread you and that is not what I said.
What did you mean by the bolded sentence?
B
ByzCathCantor
Guest
Just as in the secular world, in order to truly heal a rift, it is necessary to see that such a rift is likely the result of actions of all parties involved. Humility allows one to admit their faults without necessarily compromising ones principles, in order to seek true reconciliation and mutual foregiveness. Pride, on the other hand, creates the entrenchement and hardening of the heart that derails many such attempts.
G
GaryTaylor
Guest
Without a doubt,
C
ComeHome2Rome
Guest
A quotation taken from St. Cyprian’s letter to Antonianus has been taken completely out of context to try to make the claim that St. Cyprian believed/taught that being in communion with Rome was equated with being in communion with the Catholic Church. The letter was written to clarify which of the two contestants for the see of Rome was the true Bishop: Novation or Cornelius. The actual quote is: “To be in communion with Cornelius is to be in communion with the Catholic Church.” Other quotes from the same letter which is not used much, but helps to clarify the opinion held by St. Cyprian in regards to whether the bishop of Rome was above other bishops: “Cornelius our colleague” and “while the bond of concord remains, and the undivided sacrament of the Catholic Church endures, every bishop disposes and directs his own acts, and will have to give an account of his purposes to the Lord.” And when read in the context of St. Cyprian’s other sayings/writings: “For neither does any of us set himself up as a bishop of bishops” & from Cyprian to the Lapsed Epistle 26 “the Church is founded upon the bishops, and every act of the Church is controlled by these same rulers. Since this, then, is founded on divine law, I marvel that some, with daring temerity, have chosen to write to me as if they wrote in the name of the Church.”
It’s one thing to cite Saints to support the Papacy as it has developed from the original seed, but it’s quite another to cite a Saint who via a reading in context says the opposite. It takes away from the validity of what we believe and hurts our Church’s position.
Doesn’t Dr. Scott Hahn say something like: a text not in context is a pretext?
Let’s just be careful
G
gus
Guest
What Pope?
What mass?
G
GaryTaylor
Guest
Content/Context misunderstood is pretext, right I remember something to the affect of one or the other.
He also asked his professor what the basis of Bible authenticity is, who then stated “the quasi unanimous testimony of the Early Chruch Fathers”
T
Trebor135
Guest
Pope Paul VI made the Novus Ordo into the regular Latin rite liturgy. A very unfortunate decision, in my view. This form of the Mass, in practice, far too often seems to pander to Protestant sensibilities as a service toned down in its “formality” and fails to offer those in attendance an edifying context in which to worship God with devotion and reverence.
T
Trebor135
Guest
Damn, there goes TULIP…!He also asked his professor what the basis of Bible authenticity is, who then stated “the quasi unanimous testimony of the Early Chruch Fathers”
- Status