Why Doesn't Rome Give Up Her Heresies and Come Back into Communion With The Eastern Christian Churches?

[cyberjacques]

Christy74, I’ll assume from your rather energetic outburst that you are unaware that the Melkite Greek Catholic Church is in full communion with Rome, and has been for some time. Therefore, I would guess that either you have been terribly misinformed, or that you belong to some break-away group from Melkite Greek Catholicism. The former is more likely than the latter.

As some have pointed out, the “heresies” that you have brought up are non-issues. Some have never been doctrine, and the rest are accepted by those Churches in full communion with Rome.

 

[Milliardo]

I don’t know about what other Melkites think of their relationship with Rome is going, but a few months back a Melkite priest visited our parish, and he too had the same reservations regarding a number of Latin beliefs and practices, and he intimated that there’s much discontent with Melkites regarding their relationship with Rome, too. He doesn’t seem to be a member of some breakaway group or some such, either I find the excuse of a breakaway Melkite group to merely shore up and justify the continued stay of the Melkites with the Catholic Church)…

 

[adstrinity]

My question is which will happen first, this thread losing charity or dawn.

The thread cannot lose that which it did not have in the first place.

 

[allhers]

Lets just take them one at a time, let others post what they have to say on this one.

1. Limbo - unbaptized babies in hell for all eternity even though they have never sinned.

I have been Catholic, Latin Rite, my entire life and never was I taught that nor have I ever read that we teach that. What I did hear about limbo was that it was an opinion, not doctrine, and it was never presented as hell for all eternity for the unbaptized (babies or otherwise.) It was a place of perfect happiness. Didn’t sound anything like hell to me.
Do you, OP, have a source for what you think of limbo as being presented as the way you say it was presented?

 

[Dempsey1919]

I was going to post in this thread but:

A) There are too many big issues to deal with in one thread.

B) The OP lacks charity and also appears to have made his mind up, and will not change regardless of what I, or anybody else, says.

 

[Hisalone]

The forum rules apply here as well.

*6. Do not view the discussion area as a vehicle for single-mindedly promoting an agenda.
Why is this rule never enforced on the flagerant abuse by Catholics on this very forum?

 

[Aramis]

Re: Why Doesn’t Rome Give Up Her Heresies and Come Back into Communion With The Eastern Christian Churches?

Just curious

Because there are none.

more properly, Rome does not see them as heresies, and Rome can not, due to the nature of the church, deny the changes.

Likewise, properly, none of them have been anathematized properly by the Orthodox, since they have not had Ecumenical Councils to Anathematize them.

The Real solution is to hold a joint council, and resolve it. (Simple in theory, nigh impossible in practice due to the issues between the MP and the EP, and especially the Estonian Orthodox…) It would, however, require all to agree to accept the outcome ahead of time… and the RO, especially, can not do so as a hierarchy, since they require councils to be ratified by the Sobors afterwords.

Further, EO Unity is much vaunted, but only liturgical, not practical, in its existence. In the last 20 years, there have been periods where the various Patriarchs have refused to commemorate one or more of the others, and some of the Monks of Mt. Athos refused to acknowledge the EP as their patriarch for a while. If that is ‘unity’, it sure doesn’t look like it from here.

If there are grounds to cease commemoration of another Patriarch, it definitely is worthy of a general council to resolve the issue, but by the canons, it requires an emperor to call such a council… only one still reigns: Pontifex Maximus, Patriarchus Romanum.

 

[wanner47]

Why is this rule never enforced on the flagerant abuse by Catholics on this very forum?

If you see a post breaking the rule, click on the “Report Post” button and report it. The moderators take it from there.

Generally, posters on this forum are giving several verbal warnings before disciplinary measures such as suspension or banning take place (though this depends on the severity of the offense), so that could be why you think that “no action” is being taken.

Moderators keep an eye on threads as best they can, but they can’t be everywhere at once. If you see a questionable post, help the mods out by reporting it.

 

[allhers]

Lets just take them one at a time, let others post what they have to say on this one.

1. Limbo - unbaptized babies in hell for all eternity even though they have never sinned.

I have been Catholic, Latin Rite, my entire life and never was I taught that nor have I ever read that we teach that. What I did hear about limbo was that it was an opinion, not doctrine, and it was never presented as hell for all eternity for the unbaptized (babies or otherwise.) It was a place of perfect happiness. Didn’t sound anything like hell to me.
Do you, OP, have a source for what you think of limbo as being presented as the way you say it was presented?

Now, unless, and until the OP answers this post, I will not be moving on to the second question at hand.

 

[ralphinal]

Why is this rule never enforced on the flagerant abuse by Catholics on this very forum?

It is. I know of at least one Catholic poster that had two names banned.

 

[mardukm]

To my Latin brethren,

I think there is too much sarcasm here from some Latins. Please permit me to explain something. Sister Christy is a full-fledged Catholic, a member of the Melkite Catholic Church. Her concerns stem from the fact that she has experienced, perhaps too often, the charge from LATIN Catholics that her faith as an Eastern Catholic (which has the same theology as the Eastern Orthodox) is not fully Catholic.

I imagine that there have been some in the past who have wickedly failed to attempt to understand Eastern theology when she has brought up her beliefs. Instead of trying to recognize the compatibility of Eastern and Western (and Oriental for that matter) Traditions, some Latins automatically dismiss her as a heretic. Once can only take so much of that treatment before one begins to adopt a paradigm that there really is no way to view Eastern and Western Traditions as compatible.

THAT is where our sister is coming from. Please be gentle and try to avoid sarcasm or triumphalism. Sister Christy is doubting her own Catholicism because of such attitudes. Help her. Don’t push her away.

Sister Christy,

I do hope you will pray to the Spirit for understanding regarding the issues you have brought up. There really is a way to reconcile the Western/Eastern/Oriental Traditions. But one has to be willing to look. You have brought up a good many topics. As you know, I translated from Coptic Orthodoxy to Catholicism, and I used to have many of the same misgivings about Latin Catholicism that you currently seem to possess. I hope you will permit me and others here a chance to answer your questions. But, like I said, it really requires a desire for you to truly understand our Latin brethren in the first place.

Abundant Blessings,
Marduk

 

[ASimpleSinner]

All of those Rome has embraced since they split from the other 4 Patriarchs.

Which of the “other Four patriarchs”, Christy?

The Patriarchs that became part of the Oriental Orthodox Church? Or the Patriarchs that became part of the Eastern Orthodox Church?

What establishes in your mind that the “Pentarchy” is a measurement for assesment, and which “Pentarchs” do you include?

Maybe annunciate the clear and binding teachings of the national churches in the autocephalous polyarchy of (Byzantine) Eastern Orthodoxy that points to the “heresies of the west”?

 

[cathopologist]

To my Latin brethren,

I think there is too much sarcasm here from some Latins. Please permit me to explain something. Sister Christy is a full-fledged Catholic, a member of the Melkite Catholic Church. Her concerns stem from the fact that she has experienced, perhaps too often, the charge from LATIN Catholics that her faith as an Eastern Catholic (which has the same theology as the Eastern Orthodox) is not fully Catholic.

I imagine that there have been some in the past who have wickedly failed to attempt to understand Eastern theology when she has brought up her beliefs. Instead of trying to recognize the compatibility of Eastern and Western (and Oriental for that matter) Traditions, some Latins automatically dismiss her as a heretic. Once can only take so much of that treatment before one begins to adopt a paradigm that there really is no way to view Eastern and Western Traditions as compatible.

THAT is where our sister is coming from. Please be gentle and try to avoid sarcasm or triumphalism. Sister Christy is doubting her own Catholicism because of such attitudes. Help her. Don’t push her away.

Sister Christy,

I do hope you will pray to the Spirit for understanding regarding the issues you have brought up. There really is a way to reconcile the Western/Eastern/Oriental Traditions. But one has to be willing to look. You have brought up a good many topics. As you know, I translated from Coptic Orthodoxy to Catholicism, and I used to have many of the same misgivings about Latin Catholicism that you currently seem to possess. I hope you will permit me and others here a chance to answer your questions. But, like I said, it really requires a desire for you to truly understand our Latin brethren in the first place.

Abundant Blessings,
Marduk

I really have great respect for the Eastern Catholics and Orthodox churches (i’m rather reserved about the RO, though). There is so much Latin Christians can learn from the Eastern churches. But i agree with you; triumphalism is the major hindrance. Everyday i pray for a full reunion with the Orthodox churches. I think everyone here can agree on one thing; we (Latin Christians) are the ones who stand to lose. Islam is spreading and has overtaken the Catholic Church’s long standing position of adherents around the world. And here we are, still bickering about our unfortunate relationships with one another. Let go of the past and embrace one another already. Patriarchs, bishops, if you scan through these forums, i hope you read this plea loud and clear.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

Because there are none.

more properly, Rome does not see them as heresies, and Rome can not, due to the nature of the church, deny the changes.

Likewise, properly, none of them have been anathematized properly by the Orthodox, since they have not had Ecumenical Councils to Anathematize them.

The Real solution is to hold a joint council, and resolve it. (Simple in theory, nigh impossible in practice due to the issues between the MP and the EP, and especially the Estonian Orthodox…) It would, however, require all to agree to accept the outcome ahead of time… and the RO, especially, can not do so as a hierarchy, since they require councils to be ratified by the Sobors afterwords.

Further, EO Unity is much vaunted, but only liturgical, not practical, in its existence. In the last 20 years, there have been periods where the various Patriarchs have refused to commemorate one or more of the others, and some of the Monks of Mt. Athos refused to acknowledge the EP as their patriarch for a while. If that is ‘unity’, it sure doesn’t look like it from here.

If there are grounds to cease commemoration of another Patriarch, it definitely is worthy of a general council to resolve the issue, but by the canons, it requires an emperor to call such a council… only one still reigns: Pontifex Maximus, Patriarchus Romanum.

Btw, its Romanus, or Romanorum, or Romae, depending what you meant.

Just quickly.

Stricking from the diptychs happens. It happened in the first milleniium Church.

The MoP struck the EP from the diptychs. The other patriarchs refused to strick either. Communion was maintained.

The Synod of Jerusalem struck its patriarch from its diptychs. The other patriarchs in synod agreed, struck him from theirs, and he was deposed.

The Russian Church in Exile was on some diptychs, not on others (those still saw them as semi-schismatic, but not heterodox). They finally put the Pom on their diptychs, the Pom put their primate on theirs, and now, lesss than a century, there is not issue to bring up.

Old Calendarist’s can’t even get their own diptychs in order, so many come back to their Orthodox primate on the patriarchs diptychs. Athonites included.

Yes, it would be easier to let one person do this by fiat, but that’s a two edge sword. We see what havoc that can to liturgical “reform.” The Early Church muddled through, so will we.

As we have had several Pan-Orthodox Synods that reaffirm the anathemas of the Ecumenical Councils, applying them to new heresies (filioque, the five solas, etc.) an Ecumenical Council is not needed to deal with the heterodox. The Fathers have spoken, the case is closed.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

Now, unless, and until the OP answers this post, I will not be moving on to the second question at hand.

It was taught, I was in a Latin school when it was passing out of favor, and now has been officially abandoned. Techinically no longer an issue except for collateral issues (development of doctrine idea, the Vatican’s idea of the magisterium, etc.) Let’s move on.

 

[mardukm]

Yes, it would be easier to let one person do this by fiat, but that’s a two edge sword. We see what havoc that can to liturgical “reform.”

Don’t know what you mean. The Liturgical “reforms” were authorized by a Council, not the Pope alone. Besides, the havoc was due to crazy MISinterpretations and/or direct contravention of the principles laid down by the Council, not because of the Council’s directives themselves.

The Early Church muddled through, so will we.

The Catholic Church will perservere indeed.

As we have had several Pan-Orthodox Synods that reaffirm the anathemas of the Ecumenical Councils, applying them to new heresies (filioque, the five solas, etc.) an Ecumenical Council is not needed to deal with the heterodox. The Fathers have spoken, the case is closed.

This is the first I’ve heard of the anathemas of the Ecumenical Councils applied to filioque. Do you mean the textual addition, or the theology? And which Ecumenical Councils made decrees against ALL the five solas?

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[Isa_Almisry]

Which of the “other Four patriarchs”, Christy?

The Patriarchs that became part of the Oriental Orthodox Church? Or the Patriarchs that became part of the Eastern Orthodox Church?

What establishes in your mind that the “Pentarchy” is a measurement for assesment, and which “Pentarchs” do you include?

Maybe annunciate the clear and binding teachings of the national churches in the autocephalous polyarchy of (Byzantine) Eastern Orthodoxy that points to the “heresies of the west”?

Since the Vatican has 5-7 patriachs (depending on how you count. It used to be 10) on those 4 cathedra, I think that font of unity, the pontifex maximus, has a bigger problem as to “what four patriarchs” than Christy.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

Don’t know what you mean. The Liturgical “reforms” were authorized by a Council, not the Pope alone.

Ah, but by their own words, they can never act without “their head,” and he has to approve all that they do.

Besides, the havoc was due to crazy MISinterpretations and/or direct contravention of the principles laid down by the Council, not because of the Council’s directives themselves.

There’s a Italian, Greek proverb about a fish’s head.

The Catholic Church will perservere indeed.

Indeed She has.

This is the first I’ve heard of the anathemas of the Ecumenical Councils applied to filioque.

Can’t be. I’ve seen it, and brought it myself, several times on these threads.

Do you mean the textual addition, or the theology?

You know very well that we don’t resort to Jesuitry on this: they are one and the same.

And which Ecumenical Councils made decrees against ALL the five solas?

Solo Deo Gloria runs afoul of the Seventh. I’ve. run out of time, so I’ll have to return to it later.

 

[Timothysis]

The Blessed Mother identified herself to Saint Bernadette as “I am the Immaculate Conception.” Do you suggest that the Blessed Mother is mistaken about her own existence?

 

[mardukm]

Ah, but by their own words, they can never act without “their head,” and he has to approve all that they do.

Ahhhh! So that means that none of the other bishops approved it. Gotcha! :banghead:

You know very well that we don’t resort to Jesuitry on this: they are one and the same.

Oh, OK. That must mean that the Creed of Epiphanius is heretical because it is not textually identical to the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed. Gotcha! :banghead:

Solo Deo Gloria runs afoul of the Seventh. I’ve. run out of time, so I’ll have to return to it later.

Looking forward to it. I already know how some of the Councils can be directly applied to them, but I’m not sure about sola scriptura and sola fide. Is there a Council that specifically states that one cannot use Scripture alone? Or that Faith alone is a heresy? I’m not talking about inferences, but direct statements.

Blessings,
Marduk