Why Catholic and not Orthodox?

[Abu]

The results of denying the primacy and infallibility given by Christ to His Church

"…many Orthodox theologians and bishops have now severely qualified or even surrendered any serious claim to infallibility on the part of their Church. Also, there is no longer any unity, any identifiable “official” position of Orthodoxy as such, in regard to unnatural methods of birth control. Some authorities continue to reprobate these practices, while others – probably the majority by now – condone them. Increasingly, Orthodox married couples are advised just to follow their own conscience on this issue

“…in recent decades, with more extensive cultural and ecumenical contacts, and with an increasingly large and active Eastern diaspora in Western countries, Orthodoxy’s underlying vulnerability to the same liberal and secularizing tendencies in faith, morals and worship that have devastated the West is becoming more apparent. That virus – **an inevitable result of breaking communion with the visible ‘Rock’ of truth and unity constituted by the See of Peter **– is now inexorably prodding Orthodoxy toward doctrinal pluralism and disintegration.” [My emphasis].
[LT133 - Regarding Father Raymond Brown's form-critical approach to the Virginal Conception of Jesus / From Constantinople to Rome: Why I did not join the Eastern Orthodox Church]](LT133 - Regarding Father Raymond Brown's form-critical approach to the Virginal Conception of Jesus / From Constantinople to Rome: Why I did not join the Eastern Orthodox Church])

 

[Madaglan]

The results of denying the primacy and infallibility given by Christ to His Church

"…many Orthodox theologians and bishops have now severely qualified or even surrendered any serious claim to infallibility on the part of their Church. Also, there is no longer any unity, any identifiable “official” position of Orthodoxy as such, in regard to unnatural methods of birth control. Some authorities continue to reprobate these practices, while others – probably the majority by now – condone them. Increasingly, Orthodox married couples are advised just to follow their own conscience on this issue

“…in recent decades, with more extensive cultural and ecumenical contacts, and with an increasingly large and active Eastern diaspora in Western countries, Orthodoxy’s underlying vulnerability to the same liberal and secularizing tendencies in faith, morals and worship that have devastated the West is becoming more apparent. That virus – **an inevitable result of breaking communion with the visible ‘Rock’ of truth and unity constituted by the See of Peter **– is now inexorably prodding Orthodoxy toward doctrinal pluralism and disintegration.” [My emphasis].
[LT133 - Regarding Father Raymond Brown's form-critical approach to the Virginal Conception of Jesus / From Constantinople to Rome: Why I did not join the Eastern Orthodox Church]](LT133 - Regarding Father Raymond Brown's form-critical approach to the Virginal Conception of Jesus / From Constantinople to Rome: Why I did not join the Eastern Orthodox Church)

This guy makes some wild generalizations based more on his own fancy than fact. He also makes expectations of the Orthodox according to Western standards. For example, Orthodox are less akin to think in terms of “infallibility” than in terms of Tradition, faithfully passing down the Faith. .

“Probably the majority by now”:- many traditional and even conservative Catholics say the same about the Catholic hierarchy (e.g. the majority of bishops are liberals!) Really though, statements like these show more the slant of the speaker than about the reality of things. . ,

Orthodox couples are counseled to seek the advice of their spiritual father in regards to birth control.

The second paragraph does not make sense. It claims that the East has become infected with liberal and secularizing tendencies of the West because it broke communion with the See of Peter; yet these liberal and secularizing tendencies are not foreign to the Latin Church (just browse the Traditional Catholic threads). False ecumenism, as just one example, is a problem that afflicts both the Latin Church and the Eastern Churches alike…

 

[Abu]

It is precisely because, besides Tradition and the inerrancy of the Sacred Scriptures, primacy and infallibility are the driving force in Catholicism that the Catholic Church can always, has always, identified and overcome heresy, schism and dissent. It is not those who assent to the Magisterium, Tradition and the Scriptures that fall prey to relativism and secularism, but those who don’t – the dissenters. That is why dissent is always identified, and the truth affirmed.

It is precisely because of this lack of primacy and especially of infallibility that there is no sure norm outside of the Catholic Church on many grave issues such as abortion, contraception, euthanasia, remarriage, capital punishment, IVF, cloning, marriage only between the opposite sex, and many other modern problems - this fact results in uncertainty and confusion.

It is precisely because of infallibility, that the Catechism of the Catholic Church can be issued by an Apostolic Constitution as a sure guide to faith and morals for the whole Church.

 

[Mickey]

“And when He had spoken this, He says, Follow Me.”

Here again He alludes to his tender carefulness, and to his being very closely attached to Himself. And if any should say, How then did James receive the chair at Jerusalem? I would make this reply, that He appointed Peter teacher, not of the chair, but of the world

And then here he calls St Paul “teacher of the world”.
The merciful God is wont to give this honor to his servants, that by their grace others may acquire salvation; as was agreed by the blessed Paul, that teacher of the world who emitted the rays of his teaching everywhere.
St John** Chrysostom**

 

[shawnbm]

Hi! Your question is an excellent one for many people have misconceptions and misunderstandings about the early church. To put it simply the Pope has no juridiction over the churches of the east. His relationship is more of an elder brother. First among equals. The Pope never and I mean never appointed bishops in the East. The Eastern Church did that. The Pope is to the Eastern Church as St .Peter is to the other 11 Apostles. Since the Eastern Church had many apostolic origins her relationship to Rome is the same as the other 11 had with St.Peter. The so called shcism in my opinion was not a shcism but a terrible fight a shouting match. When I read the excommunioncations I could not believe the language used. No wonder the Orthodox reponded the way they did. If anyone used language like that today it will be considered hate language. Heck I would not blame the Eastern Church to move even to the planet Venus. But we didn’t and look at what happened. You don’t go to someones home and declare to them their mistakes and them tell them you are taking over. Now the Popes have apologized to the East and yes they have admitted the mistakes Rome had begun. The affair in reality should not have happened. The Church of Rome under misguided counsel went too far. The Orthodox did not do anything wrong. The responsibility was largely Rome and Rome has now apologized. It is now up to the East to receive this apology and now work with their brothers and sisters for reconciliation. I don’t know why Catholics insist on supreme Papal Authority over the whole Church. You got to be kidding!! This kind of thinking is what started the mess in the first place, so stop justifying it. Listen to your Popes and to the past. The Popes have insisted the errors back then so why do you bring them up! The Popes do not want jurisdiction over the East. They want the same relationship today as the Church of Rome had with the East before the Great Heated Arguement. So stop this Supreme Authority and listen to your Popes and read what they have written especially His Holiness John Paul II. This man was a great saint and opened the door for reconciliation. Please correct yourselves because all you do is to continue this stupid heated arguement. Read your Popes and you will better understand what is necessary to restore this relationship. The Orthodox Church needs to have her rightful claim alongside the Church of Rome as she had with the Catholic Church from the beginning. That is all it takes. So don’t try to include anything else. The Orthodox Church is as part of the Roman Catholic Church as the Roman Catholic Church is of the Orthodox. Heated arguements from the past cannot alter this. We are united in Christ. All it takes is for us to end this useless and misguided affair is to declare the truth about each other. We are brothers, Period! Nothing and I mean nothing should take that away from us. So let us bury it and bury it good and receive each other as brothers and sisters. My God we both have Apostolic Foundation . This guarantees our coexistence and calling. The Pope is in my opinion a sign for unity. Peter has this primacy given to him by our Lord to guarantee this unity. The Papacy is a great gift as well as the Holy Father. We all should uphold in prayer the Holy Father. And as much as the Holy Father needs us we should be thankful for we need him as well. God Bless!

Thank you for your reply. I too believe the Papacy is a great gift. I also believe the five ancient Sees of Christendom can and should be reunited with Rome presiding in love like before. Juridically, I don’t see why that would involve the Vatican inserting itself into the ecclesiastical logistics of each of these other Patriarchates and their dioceses without being asked or without first calling attention to something being officially taught by a bishop or metropolitan that cries out heretical thinking or apostacy. I would then think Rome could voice its concerns and the others would respect and investigate accordingly. I have seen other replies suggesting direct Roman intervention in the East due to various heretical issues and whatnot back when the Church was undivided and will look into that.

All in all, though, it seems that there is not much in theological terms separating the two any longer. The issue of infallibility of the Pope is best considered as him pronouncing something that is in union with the bishops of the worldwide Church–not as a personal right to say what he thinks. Obviously, the Church has been guided by the Holy Spirit into all Truth and has been infallible in Her Councils, in expounding Tradition when setting forth the biblical canon and in passing on Tradition through Apostolic Succession. As such, I believe that has been blown out of proportion. I think the East preferring “Dormition” as opposed to “Assumption” is likewise not a sticking point, so I tend to believe the two are, as JPII said, the Church’s “two lungs”–they are not identical in every way, but they are largely the same and integral to the Body.

Both Rome and the East maintain the fullness of the orthodox catholic faith in contrast to the mainline Protestant denominations and the non-denominational evangelical groups sprouting up, as well as against the post-modernist views of the Church, the Bible, Tradition and the world in general. The more the East and Rome join together on these things, the better example they are to the world and the Light of the World. Pax tecum.

 

[Ignatios]

“And when He had spoken this, He says, Follow Me.”

Here again He alludes to his tender carefulness, and to his being very closely attached to Himself. And if any should say, How then did James receive the chair at Jerusalem? I would make this reply, that He appointed Peter teacher, not of the chair, but of the world.

newadvent.org/fathers/240188.htm

How have you been Madaglan?

…And, again, here he said that ALL the Apostles are in charge of the world:

“…And this He did to withdraw them from their unseasonable sympathy for each other; for since they were about to receive the charge of the world, it was necessary that they should no longer be closely associated together; for assuredly this would have been a great loss to the world…”

And then here were Peter yield to Paul in Antioch, not to mention also that “he feared that certain who came from James”:

• “…But now this apparent contest was much to their advantage; as Paul had yielded to the Apostles at Jerusalem, so in turn they yield to him at Antioch. The cause of censure is this, “For before that certain came from James,” who was the teacher at Jerusalem, “he did eat with the Gentiles, but when they came he drew back and separated himself, fearing them that were of the Circumcision:…”*

"…

 

[tdgesq]

And then here he calls St Paul “teacher of the world”.
[/INDENT]The merciful God is wont to give this honor to his servants, that by their grace others may acquire salvation; as was agreed by the blessed Paul, that teacher of the world who emitted the rays of his teaching everywhere.
St John** Chrysostom**

…And, again, here he said that ALL the Apostles are in charge of the world:

"…And this He did to withdraw them from their unseasonable sympathy for each other; for since they were about to receive the charge of the world, it was necessary that they should no longer be closely associated together; for assuredly this would have been a great loss to the world…"

And then here were Peter yield to Paul in Antioch, not to mention also that “he feared that certain who came from James”:

• “…But now this apparent contest was much to their advantage; as Paul had yielded to the Apostles at Jerusalem, so in turn they yield to him at Antioch.* The cause of censure is this, “For before that certain came from James,” who was the teacher at Jerusalem, “he did eat with the Gentiles, but when they came he drew back and separated himself, fearing them that were of the Circumcision:…”

"…

Mickey and Ignatios,

It has been a long time. As always, no response will be given without source material referenced. Give me a link and I will respond. Otherwise, I just have to assume you took these quotes from some crazy internet site that advocates aerial tollhouses.

 

[SyroMalankara]

Not really sure what Ignatios and Mickey’s quotes are supposed to get at.

The Pope today “yields” authority to local Bishop’s Conferences - that doesn’t mean he has lost any authority.

All the bishops together in union with one another are in charge of the Church in the world.

 

[Abu]

SyroMalankara
All the bishops together in union with one another are in charge of the Church in the world

.
– Under the primacy of the pope following Christ conferring of His authority to Peter.

St. Paul went to Jerusalem to talk to Peter and the others because Judaizers were saying that the gentiles did have to follow the Mosaic laws. They further reaffirmed that gentiles were not subject to those laws. The Council of Jerusalem actually said that gentiles were able to receive baptism without becoming Jews themselves

It was Peter who at the Council of Jerusalem settled the dispute, as the first Pope, that the Gentiles didn’t have to be circumcised. It was St Peter who received the vision of the sheet with clean and unclean animals (Acts 10), who baptized Cornelius, and who argued so forcefully at the Council of Jerusalem that circumcision was no longer a requirement for converts.

What St Paul was objecting to was that, when St Peter was in Antioch, although he’d been eating and socialising with gentile Christians, when the Jerusalem crowd arrived he felt embarrassed and concealed the fact, eating (so to speak) on the ‘Jewish table’. What St Paul was disagreeing with was not St Peter’s teaching or beliefs, but his behaviour—he was, in fact, accusing him of being a hypocrite.

Peter laid down the principle; Paul was dominant in applying it.

St. Peter is in the leadership position while St. James appears only briefly, and never in a leadership role. In Galatians 1:18-19, we are told that Paul went to Jerusalem after his conversion specifically to confer with Peter. He stayed with Peter 15 days. In contrast, Paul visited James only briefly during this time.

St. Paul was among those who fell silent at the Council of Jerusalem once St. Peter spoke.

 

[Mickey]

tdgesq;6190464:

As always, no response will be given without source material referenced.

Hey pal! Here is the source for the St Chrysostom quote that I posted: Chrysostom, on Genesis, Homily 24, Migne PG 53:211, Giles page 165

I just have to assume you took these quotes from some crazy internet site that advocates aerial tollhouses.

There is no need for a response.
It is snide little jabs such as this that I do not care much for your opinion.

 

[Mickey]

.
It was Peter who at the Council of Jerusalem settled the dispute, as the first Pope, that the Gentiles didn’t have to be circumcised.

St Peter was the first Pope?

It is very clear that St James settled the dispute. You must read the passage again.

 

[SyroMalankara]

Again, not sure how St. James acting as “spokesman” for the Apostles lessens Peter’s role as ‘primus inter pares’.

When Pope John Paul II accepted the Pastoral Provision for protestant ministers who converted to Catholicism, it was Cardinal Ratzinger who ‘spoke’ for the Church and Cardinal Law who promoted it in the US - does that mean John Paul didn’t have Papal authority?

 

[Mickey]

Again, not sure how St. James acting as “spokesman” for the Apostles lessens Peter’s role as ‘primus inter pares’.

St John Chrysostom tells us that St James had the “chief rule” at this council. Furthermore, in Acts 15 St James says: "For which cause I judge…

It’s quite obvious that St James was the head of the council of Jerusalem.

 

[Nyarlathotep]

St John Chrysostom tells us that St James had the “chief rule” at this council. Furthermore, in Acts 15 St James says: "For which cause I judge…

It’s quite obvious that St James was the head of the council of Jerusalem.

Actually, archeologists from the University of Tel Aviv just unearthed a text from an excavation in Jerusalem called “Palemanía Mía – He Máche gia ton Papismó” (Wrestlemania 1 – the Pounding for the Papacy).

Apparently, there was some sort of competition between Yaakov “Big Jimmy” ben Zebdi and Shimon “The Rock” Cephas.

Unfortunately, just before the end of the text, where The Rock has thrown Big Jimmy out of the ring, but Big Jimmy is climbing back over the ropes with a stool, the conclusion is obliterated by graffiti, which read: “Shlomo wuz heer” / I luv u Debbie / Caesar is a [illegible].

 

[Mickey]

Actually, archeologists from the University of Tel Aviv just unearthed a text from an excavation in Jerusalem called “Palemanía Mía – He Máche gia ton Papismó” (Wrestlemania 1 – the Pounding for the Papacy).

http://img638.imageshack.us/img638/1677/screenshothhhvsstonecolb.jpg

 

[marlo]

for every council, the bishop who preside (or rule on the council) decides, collects and Judges the opinion of fellow bishops, but ultimately all their decision will have to be approved by a chief bishop, which for all churches he is the Pope of Rome.

so even if St. James presided, and the whole of the apostles agreed, it will be given to Peter for final acceptance and implementation for the whole church. This is the apostolic tradition.

St John Chrysostom tells us that St James had the “chief rule” at this council. Furthermore, in Acts 15 St James says: "For which cause I judge…

It’s quite obvious that St James was the head of the council of Jerusalem.

 

[bpbasilphx]

\Why do we Catholics consider the Roman church to be the true church of Jesus Christ when Christianity first spread to predominately Greek-speaking parts of the East before it ever reached Rome?\

**That’s a good question, since the Catholic Church is not only Roman.

To put it another way, the Roman Church is NOT the only church of the Catholic Church, which is a communion of over 20 (depending on how you count them) sui juris churches. The Roman is only ONE of them.

As for myself, though I spent a long time in the official Orthodox jurisdictions, and a shorter time in the Independent movement, I’ve found the stability and safety and security I was seeking, as well as numerous other blessings, in an Eastern Catholic Church in communion with (not under) Rome.**

 

[peresieh]

If you read History of the Church by Eusebius you will note that “Peter and Paul” appointed Linus first Bishop of Rome. Also, Peter was bishop of Antioch before this and traveled to Rome with Paul. It appears that Peter and Paul had dual roles as leaders of the Gentile Church. Both were martyred under Nero. James (stepbrother or cousin of the Lord, not one of the 12) was the first Bishop and developed the first formal liturgy. He stayed in Jerusalem. Primacy was given to Rome after Jerusalem was destroyed and the Jews and Jewish Christians were dispersed.

 

[Mickey]

so even if St. James presided, and the whole of the apostles agreed, it will be given to Peter for final acceptance and implementation for the whole church.

I don’t see that part in the Acts of the Apostles.

 

[Mickey]

** in an Eastern Catholic Church in communion with (not under) Rome.**

As an Eastern Catholic, do you not have to submit to Rome?