- Nov 20, 2024
- 538
- 255
- 18
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Single
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Christian Forums is looking to bring on new moderators to the CF Staff Team! If you have been an active member of CF for at least three months with 200 posts during that time, you're eligible to apply! This is a great way to give back to CF and keep the forums running smoothly! If you're interested, you can submit your application here!
They were, all things considered, two peas in a podPeople sometimes equate St. Gregory of Palamas and St. Thomas Aquinas as birds of a feather because they both made some use of Aristotle, but St. Gregory of Palamas was not a systematic theologian. Rather, he was writing, and arguing at a council convened in the Church of Constantinople, in order to defend the Hesychasts of Mount Athos, such as the 12th century St. Symeon the New Theologian, whose writings we find, along with some of St. Gregory I think, in the Philokalia, which is easy to access.
By the way, as far as I am aware most Byzantine Rite Catholic Churches do venerate St. Gregory of Palamas on the second Sunday of Lent, just like the Orthodox.
They were, all things considered, two peas in a pod
I'm not sure what your goal has been with this thread. The OP questioned whether the differences in Orthodox and Catholic theology were the result of language, and by post #14 you were starting to make inflammatory implications that the Orthodox were "like spoiled brats."I thought this thread would help with self reflection among christian groups to see that division is not in the will of God, but what has come is a hardening of those divisions along with a review of human history and not a review of the words of acts of God.
And the official Catholic position is that the Orthodox Church is not part of the Church, even if it recognizes the validity of its sacraments and the existence of "ecclesial elements" in it and refers to the particular churches within Orthodoxy as "churches."Some in the Orthodox faith say that the Catholic Church is not part of the Church.
You've gotten some constructive suggestions where you could flesh out discussion of the problems in Catholicism and Orthodoxy, rather than going on and on about how the Orthodox are schismatics who need to stop being prideful and submit to Rome.What do we get? Nothing but derision.
Pope "all religions are ways to arrive at God" isn't doing you any favors on this one.The only way that Orthodox and Protestant arguments work, is if the Pope is painted as heretic or antichrist.
I will say that I found the article of the OP strongly biased in the Catholic direction. If Flanders is so strongly opposed to Bradshaw's book, then perhaps he should have reviewed something else alongside Williams' book. (Granted, I agree with him that Bradshaw's book is subpar. That isn't overly controversial.)I thought this thread would help with self reflection among christian groups to see that division is not in the will of God
Do you actually have a source for that claim, or are you interpolating? Because I have never seen that claim substantiated.And the official Catholic position is that the Orthodox Church is not part of the Church
In these sorts of discussions there are fundamental data points. Given Christian group X, in relation to Christian group Y, does it:...even if it recognizes the validity of its sacraments and the existence of "ecclesial elements" in it and refers to the particular churches within Orthodoxy as "churches."
Sort of shines a bright spot light on the useless ecumenism that many times goes on in this forum. You'll have people like your post, say it's a winner, compliment your input, but in the end of the day, you're outside the Church.I thought this thread would help with self reflection among christian groups to see that division is not in the will of God, but what has come is a hardening of those divisions along with a review of human history and not a review of the words of acts of God.
I can only liken this to the attitude of the older brother in the parable of the prodigal son. The elder son refused to join the celebration called by his father.
Probably the most explicit source would be Unam Sanctam, but even Lumen Gentium could be considered a source for it if "subsists in" is understood to refer to the "substantial existence" of the Church.Do you actually have a source for that claim, or are you interpolating? Because I have never seen that claim substantiated.
I'm not sure how these are relevant to the question when I've said before that I'm talking about the normative, canonical sense of being in the Church. In that sense, I don't see how someone in an apostolic church could say that anyone outside his communion was in the Church unless he embraces branch theory. Could he affirm that in the more ecumenically-minded, "imperfect communion" and "invisibly united" sense? Sure, but I don't think that's what boughtwithaprice was talking about, which is why I only addressed the more clear-cut sense of the issue.In these sorts of discussions there are fundamental data points. Given Christian group X, in relation to Christian group Y, does it:
The predicate "____ is part of the Church" is not worth much at all if it is divorced from these fundamental data points.
- Recognize that it worships the same God?
- Recognize it as Christian?
- Recognize its sacraments?
- Engage in intercommunion?
- How does it relate to its doctrinal claims?
- Does it see it as heretical?
- Does it see it as schismatic?
Thanks, I'll take a look at this.If we want a better source, then even without reading it in its entirety, I can almost guarantee that Aiden Nichols' "A Catholic View of Orthodoxy" is going to be of higher quality than Flanders' article.
A 700 year old Papal Bull? That is a data point but it isn't the first place one would look, theologically speaking.Probably the most explicit source would be Unam Sanctam
Lumen Gentium certainly outranks Unam Sanctam, but it simply doesn't say that the Orthodox are outside the Church, even on that reading. It certainly implies that the Church of Christ does not subsist in the Orthodox Church(es).but even Lumen Gentium could be considered a source for it if "subsists in" is understood to refer to the "substantial existence" of the Church.
Canon law pertains to particular Churches. There is no canon law for the Church of Christ. That's why I pointed to the substantive theological fundamentals.I'm not sure how these are relevant to the question when I've said before that I'm talking about the normative, canonical sense of being in the Church.
Lumen Gentium 8 is more or less the idea that the fullness of Christianity is found in the Catholic Church, but it draws no line of exclusion for the East. In fact the Decree on Ecumenism of the Second Vatican Council has this to say:In that sense, I don't see how someone in an apostolic church could say that anyone outside his communion was in the Church unless he embraces branch theory.
I definitely agree with that.Effectively, all I was intending to say is that neither Catholicism nor Orthodoxy embraces branch theory, so nobody here is saying we should be comfortable with a state of schism existing between us, as he was insinuating.
A 700 year old Papal Bull? That is a data point but it isn't the first place one would look, theologically speaking.Probably the most explicit source would be Unam Sanctam
Lumen Gentium certainly outranks Unam Sanctam, but it simply doesn't say that the Orthodox are outside the Church, even on that reading. It certainly implies that the Church of Christ does not subsist in the Orthodox Church(es).but even Lumen Gentium could be considered a source for it if "subsists in" is understood to refer to the "substantial existence" of the Church.
Canon law pertains to particular Churches. There is no canon law for the Church of Christ. That's why I pointed to the substantive theological fundamentals.I'm not sure how these are relevant to the question when I've said before that I'm talking about the normative, canonical sense of being in the Church.
How does an Orthodox like @The Liturgist view Oriental Orthodoxy? Does he say they are outside the Church?In that sense, I don't see how someone in an apostolic church could say that anyone outside his communion was in the Church unless he embraces branch theory.
I definitely agree with that.Effectively, all I was intending to say is that neither Catholicism nor Orthodoxy embraces branch theory, so nobody here is saying we should be comfortable with a state of schism existing between us, as he was insinuating.
"Not in full communion" sounds suspiciously like "slightly pregnant". Just as there are no grades of being pregnant, you either are pregnant or you are not, in terms of Church communion there either is or there isn't. Last I heard, Catholics are not permitted to receive sacraments in Orthodox Churches and I don't believe Orthodox are permitted to receive sacraments in Catholic ChurchesThat's not to say that it is in full communion or that it represents the fullness of Christianity, but Catholic theology does not say that a Church that is not in full communion is eo ipso outside the Church of Christ
See:"Not in full communion" sounds suspiciously like "slightly pregnant".
For Catholicism Orthodoxy only lacks union with the Pope. Its Churches are real Churches, its sacraments are valid, etc.
In these sorts of discussions there are fundamental data points. Given Christian group X, in relation to Christian group Y, does it:
The predicate "____ is part of the Church" is not worth much at all if it is divorced from these fundamental data points.
- Recognize that it worships the same God?
- Recognize it as Christian?
- Recognize its sacraments?
- Engage in intercommunion?
- How does it relate to its doctrinal claims?
- Does it see it as heretical?
- Does it see it as schismatic?
I am starting to think what started as a good idea has been taken by the spirit of indifferentism, which is the heresy of the Masonic lodge. That spirit places all religions on equal ground subject to the “grand architect of the universe”Sort of shines a bright spot light on the useless ecumenism that many times goes on in this forum. You'll have people like your post, say it's a winner, compliment your input, but in the end of the day, you're outside the Church.
"Not in full communion" sounds suspiciously like "slightly pregnant". Just as there are no grades of being pregnant, you either are pregnant or you are not, in terms of Church communion there either is or there isn't. Last I heard, Catholics are not permitted to receive sacraments in Orthodox Churches and I don't believe Orthodox are permitted to receive sacraments in Catholic Churches
We know where salvation is found and we cannot compromise on that. We leave those who are outside to God's judgement. If there is salvation outside the Orthodox Church then that is up to God, it is not for us to say.This is an important video from Gavin Ortlund. It is about the historic Orthodox view that there is no salvation outside the Orthodox Church.
Without rambling on, I am not orthodox, I know there are private prayers the EO Church uses for those who died outside the faith.We know where salvation is found and we cannot compromise on that. We leave those who are outside to God's judgement. If there is salvation outside the Orthodox Church then that is up to God, it is not for us to say.
That is correct. Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, the Assyrian Church of the East, and the Polish National Catholic Church are allowed to partake, but are “urged to respect the discipline of their own Churches” per the missal. The RC sees them as having valid sacraments despite being in schism.Orthodox are allowed by the Catholics to partake, but most EO bishops frown on them doing this.
We know where salvation is found and we cannot compromise on that. We leave those who are outside to God's judgement. If there is salvation outside the Orthodox Church then that is up to God, it is not for us to say.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?