Orthodox Christians can't be saved under Catholicism

The Orthodox generally deny that the Holy Ghost proceeds from both the Father and the Son.

The Catholic Athanasian Creed says "The Holy Spirit was neither made nor created nor begotten; he proceeds from the Father and the Son...This is the catholic faith:
one cannot be saved without believing it firmly and faithfully."

QED under Catholicism most Orthodox go to Hell.

Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68

DMT Has Friends For Me Shirt $21.68

Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68

  1. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    >be Protestant
    >affirm the Athanasian Creed
    >tell people I'm Catholic

    • 6 months ago
      Dirk

      Good point

      That's generally what happens yeah. Protestants say the creeds and claim to be members of the one Catholic church

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        YOVR ATTENTION

        THE ONE HOLY CATHOLIC APOSTOLIC CHVRCH HAS AVTHORITATIVELY DECLARED OVR RECOGNITION OF THE LICIT SACRAMENTS AND APOSTOLIC SVCCESSION OF THE AVTOCEPHALOVS EASTERN ORTHODOX CHVRCHS

        OP IS A homosexual

        THIS HAS BEEN A PVBLIC SERVICE ANNOVNCEMENT

        YOU MAY NOW RETVRN TO YOVR REGVLARLY SCHEDVLED BROADCASTING

        It's not a good point at all. You don't get to talk about orthodoxy, Calvinist. I don't talk about Calvinism, you don't talk about orthodoxy.

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          Shell game. Most reject that the Holy Ghost proceeds from both the Father and the Son so the creed clearly states they are not saved. You wouldn't reject a creed, would you?

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            They uphold literally every other word in the Creed besides that one, and you dare consign them to the everlasting flames of hell and the outer darkness of the abyss for such a slight?

            Even as they faithfully raise up the host of the Eucharist, and the other holy sacraments? They, who ask the intercession of the same saints you do? Who are you to say these things, a priest or bishop? If you are merely lay, as I suspect, you must hold your tongue and learn humility.

            You would do well to consider the words of Christ.

            1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.

            2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

            3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

            4 Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?

            5 Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.

          • 6 months ago
            OP

            Are you a Catholic?

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            That literally doesn't matter at all.

            But even if it did, the Latin church recognizes the sacraments of the eastern churches, full stop. Tiny disagreements over theology don't matter that much compared to everything that is still shared. The sacraments matter more, apostolic succession matters more than a single word written on a page and recited verbatim.

            Are you a sedevacantist based tradcath who don't take no guff from no false pope? No popery for you eh?

            Cause the based Pope Benedict Emeritus died man, there's only one Pope now.

          • 6 months ago
            OP

            >Tiny disagreements over theology don't matter that much
            Athanasian creed says you are not saved if you don't believe the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son so clearly the view if you agree with the Catholic church is that this disagreement very very much does

          • 6 months ago
            OP

            >Tiny disagreements over theology don't matter that much
            Athanasian creed says you are not saved if you don't believe the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son so clearly the view if you agree with the Catholic church is that this disagreement very very much does

            Remember the Athanasian creed says "Anyone who does not keep it whole and unbroken will doubtless perish eternally."

            WHOLE and UNBROKEN.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            Chill bro.

            The body of Christ is whole, and unbroken. That is why the Eucharist is so precious. Creed isn't on the level of the sacraments, it's just words that mean a certain thing in a certain order.

            What saves you?
            The body of Christ, or the Nicene Creed?

          • 6 months ago
            OP

            Are you a Catholic?

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      That used to be the norm, back when Protestants' whole point was to tell priest to stop conning sinners with false indulgences.

      You should just ignore the pope. He's going to do what popes do, which is ignore the big problems for long enough until they go away. he'll keep talking out of both sides of his mouth on the transgender issue until the cultural moment has passed, eventually banning discussion of it if he has to.
      In the meantime he will continuing to make broad rulings on relatively minor uncontroversial and unimportant issues which Catholics will placate themselves with chewing over.
      Its a tried and tested method thats worked hundreds of time over the past 2000 years.

      Transgenderism is barely an issue: they're in essence no different from the Skoptsy in being mentally unwell individuals who self-mutilate themselves contrary to God's wishes while insisting they are faithful in spite, and should be treated as such.

      What is and continues to tear the Church apart is how homos, and pedophiles, and pedophiliac homos in the clergy are given practical carte blanche to sodomize whomever they please and have the backing of the clergy to prevent them facing justice.

  2. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    You should just ignore the pope. He's going to do what popes do, which is ignore the big problems for long enough until they go away. he'll keep talking out of both sides of his mouth on the transgender issue until the cultural moment has passed, eventually banning discussion of it if he has to.
    In the meantime he will continuing to make broad rulings on relatively minor uncontroversial and unimportant issues which Catholics will placate themselves with chewing over.
    Its a tried and tested method thats worked hundreds of time over the past 2000 years.

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      Just like the cultural moment of left handedness will pass. Two more weeks fellow chuds.

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        It's what he thinks he's going to do. When flustered in a recent interview his advisor who he works closely with dropped a controversy which went a similar way. In my view, telling.

        • 6 months ago
          Cult of Passion

          Because human undanding of Biology is antiquated, there are not two genders/sexes, there is one, you are hybridized species living in smybiosis, and there are subspecies, again, divided in twix, in a major/minor fashion.

          The only comprehensible way of describing it is "hyperdimensional", as there are opposites and opposites of opposites that are not like the first. Inversions, and double inversions, requires extrememly orthogonal thinking (neither left or right is up or down/forward and backward) and the human experience and society does not know how to unterpret this so it reduces it down a comprehensible binary and the irreducible binary of humanity is male and female.

          If you can only view left or right, someone moving up or down would look like the opposite (or same) to you, but it isnt. A numerical value on a slide scale that is increasing but not moving, boggles the mind.

          Humans are not reasy to accept the mirror, that the human body, and by proxy consciousness itself, its a collective coherence of physiology and developed over time evolutionarily, the "ideology" part isnt natural and turns peopme into asymetrical maladpated beings that will not percieve reality with harmony in themselves...their morals and ability to feel empathy become stunted, or the otger side they become hyper-empathic and unable to face the world, people whi need the government to manage it for them.

          All humans are schizophrenic and multiple personalities, the standard is one aspect rules over them as a tyrant, one measure of reality they trust and ignire the rest (of their phenomenological experience).

          Yuri touched on that, you show them facts...but they cannot see it. Mind blind, Psy-Ops are a product of Biology too...

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            Look if you're trans, I don't have a problem with you. I'm just telling you, that's what the pope is going to do. So it's pointless for you or tradcaths to worry too much about what the pope says. He's just going to toss curmbs to both sides until he passes away. The next will probably do the same.

          • 6 months ago
            Cult of Passion

            Hi, youre not a doctor, so you if you dont have a PhD, Im going to ask you to keep your femine emotions to yourself.

            No, I will not validate your lived truth, youre a weak willed homosexual and an embarrassment of your father. I dont care how "kek" you think you are, your parent are diagusted by you or are the cause of you and deserve punishment for failing the most basic duty of adults.

            Youre not a man, youre a failure of evolutionary adaptation.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            you're mentally ill cult.

          • 6 months ago
            Cult of Passion

            Youre not a Doctor, Geneticist/Evolutionary Biologist, BioPhysicist, Theologian, Psychologist OR ANY OTHER FIELD THAT I AM.

            Damn right you shut the frick up with "I know what the Pope thinks." and "f u schizo".

            I didnt attend 10,000 hours of STEM lectures to be told "TsssNuh uh." by some quasi-literate failure on the internet...man the frick up, BOY, you failed to actualize into a real human.

            YOU ARE NOT A MAN, GO TO CLASS.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            you spend 18 hours a day trolling the least active board on Oyish.com, you're just a sperg.

          • 6 months ago
            Cult of Passion

            >you're just a sperg
            Asperger Hyper-Savant.

            I dont where you have been, you havent seen shit, I dont care what you know, you dont know shit, I dont care what you feel...YOU DONT KNOW YOURSELF.

            I KNOW YOU BETTER THAN YOU DO.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            NTA, but the first step to knowing anything at all is the understanding that some, or probably most, other people know better than you do on most subjects. If you're not willing or able to accept that, chances are pretty good that you don't know anything about anything.

            That other anon isn't wrong, either. Chances are pretty good that the church will start rolling back protections for fifth column elements (Affirmative Action, LGBT, Immigration) in short order in tandem with sitting governments. Pendulum gonna pendulum.

          • 6 months ago
            Cult of Passion

            >probably most, other people know better than you do on most subjects
            Hah, shut up Socrates, your psuedo-humility is obviously pride and ego, emotional reactions instead of critical thinking of what was said.

            >That other anon isn't wrong
            You know nothing though, Socrates, you shouldnt assume, you should audit.
            >Chances are pretty good...
            Im not even going to review the thread, instead Im just going to wing it;

            I didnt say anything about that, I know what both are speaking about because its my field of research and Im watching society reconcile reality to their stubborn grip on old science, old understandings of reality and theology, trying to match one with the other, but I already have.

            I have no reconciliations because I live in reality, the world spins comforting lies because its not about the true truth, its about the closest thing to the truth the weakest link can hold without snapping...the underpinning of civilization thats kept behind closed doors to protect the emotional wellbeing of the flock.

            I'd be more than happy to lecture the Pope on Christianity and the Holy Spirit...but celebrity status makes such things unattenable and often unwise as the people have needs beyond exiting the Matrix and revealing Revelation unfiltered to the masses.

          • 6 months ago
            Cult of Passion

            >you spend 18 hours a day trolling
            Also, mother fricking non-schizo doesnt have multiple braind operating at the same time.

            I troll, attend, lecture and write at the same time.

            WE ARE LEGION FOR WE ARE MANY.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            This board is far from the least active lol, the /vst/ is far slower and that is just from the boards I frequent

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            God created man and woman checkmate

          • 6 months ago
            Cult of Passion

            That is for you.

            I use another Book call Word. Its scripture is found in every tablet, every scroll, every tome and every tweet in the world.

            The Holy Word.

    • 6 months ago
      Cult of Passion

      >Its a tried and tested method thats worked hundreds of time over the past 2000 years.
      Kind of like like how it works with your life's problems?

      I mean...you *do* have a Bugatti-in-Christ, right? 10 brides in the DM's, 5 you'd smash, 5 you'd pass? Cap or no?

      Nam vera, Amen.

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      The church will just eventually pick whichever side ends up winning, as it always does. It's the only way to remain "infallible" for thousands of years.

      • 6 months ago
        Cult of Passion

        If the truth is a trasncedental number and humans count using using a decimal system, then every decimal place is a set of ten, to which less than 1/10th is need to mathematical rigor.

        Never accurate, just approaching accurate.
        (All Humans Are Wrong.)

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      You cannot be a Roman Catholic and ignore the Pope. Vatican 1 clearly enshrines the centuries accepted belief of Papal Infallibility and most if not all of the current Roman homosexualry is predicted on Vatican 2 which you must accept because the Pope is infallible. Becoming a Protestant of any denomination means engaging in far more heresy than even the Romans were capable of. Eastern Orthodoxy is the only way that one can truly continue the One Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church established by Christ at Pentecost.

      Would recommend this book by an 18th century Roman priest that documents the crimes and heresy of the Papacy for any brothers and sisters interested in the truth. orthodoxinfo .com /inquirers/guettee_thepapacy .pdf

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        >Claim to be the 'orthodox' church
        >Excommunicate anyone that dont confess the palamite monstrosity
        You are in a larp church

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          What is "the palamite monstrosity"?

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          >Excommunicate anyone that dont confess the palamite monstrosity
          The energy-essence distinction is the correct theological belief as we can feel God's effect on us, but we will never be able to know his true essence. It is a simple concept that doesn't require the gymnastics of Roman dogma. Accepting that God has both an energy and an essence doesn't make him a composite or contradict the Nicaean creed on divine unity. And some Roman converting and have a sperg out at Hesychasm and then losing doesn't invalidate the practice, and Hesychasm has since been accepted by all the Orthodox Church fathers as an acceptable practice.
          >You are in a larp church
          The larp Church is the Church that embraces humanist ideals and rationalism, it is the Church that kisses and washes the feet of non-Christians and calls all religions equal and valid. It is the Church that embraces homosexuality, transgenderism, and atheism. The Church that actually has larpers performing circus tricks inside their "holy" Church. If there is a larp Church it is the Romans and their heresies they and their Pope commit frequently enough that even the Protestants seem traditional. Christ is King brother, and I long for the day when Rome remembers itself and we can embrace in full communion once again.

          What is "the palamite monstrosity"?

          Roman cope over teachings of Saint Gregory Palamas, primarily energy-essence distinction and practice of the Jesus prayer.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            Here's where I critique essences.

            >we will never be able to know his true essence

            Is that really true? Don't we know Christ personally, know his body and nature as Son of Man, Son of God? How can you distinguish between his body and his essence if his natures are inseparable?

            Fully knowing his divine nature seems impossible, but if it is fully united with his human nature then it must be possible for us to know at least in part through communion. Isn't that the point of theosis?

            I don't like the word essence, never have.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Is that really true?
            I believe so, you have describe an essence of the Son, but we know that God is not God the Son, but instead that God is the divine trinity of God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. So if this is the essence of God the Son as you have described, is it the essence of God the Father, and God the Holy Spirit? If not, what are those essences? I don't believe that there is an answer to those questions which is why we say that God's essence is unknowable which it seems you agree, and yet we feel his energy in the warmth, happiness, and love that he brings us.
            >but if it is fully united with his human nature then it must be possible for us to know at least in part through communion
            Communion will provide us with God's energy, but not his essence which is unknowable. Saint John Chrysostom held and Saint Gregory Palmas affirmed that when we partake in Eucharist or "[receive God's] deifying grace" as they put it, that we are actually interacting with God's divine energy which is divisible and capable of being shared among the faithful as a part of God, as opposed to his divine essence which is indivisible.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Communion will provide us with God's energy, but not his essence which is unknowable.

            How can you distinguish between the body of Christ and his essence? There is no separation between his nature as Son of Man and Son of God.

            Right now I just can't accept that the body of Christ is his energy as opposed to his essence.

            >a part of God
            >divisible

            IDK man, that's toeing very close to the line for me.

            I do not believe the body of Christ can be broken or divided, which is exactly why the Eucharist is special. Even though the bread is broken, the body of Christ is communicated through it whole. Through becoming one with his being in transubstantiation, it is unbroken despite the accidents of the host itself.

            Am I in misunderstanding?

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >How can you distinguish between the body of Christ and his essence?
            Because Christ, God the Son is consubstantial with God the Father, and God the Holy Spirit whose essence is unknowable to us. You would not say that God the Father or God the Holy Spirit is a physical man and divine in nature. The essence distinction serves to define the being and the substance of God, the Trinity, not just God the Son. The body of Christ however has a form and its essence is known to us because Christ is fully man, but Christ is also fully divine and under this hypostatic union we are able to distinguish between the body and essence of Christ.
            >There is no separation between his nature as Son of Man and Son of God.
            Of course not, we dealt with Arian heretics a long time ago.
            >IDK man, that's toeing very close to the line for me.
            The essence-energy distinction does not establish God as a composite of parts, it although I understand your hesitance at the terms. God's essence remains an undivided, single trinity of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. It is God's energy, his gift of divine experiences to us that is divisible and proportionally given to the faithful.
            >Am I in misunderstanding?
            I'm not sure. In Eucharist we hold that the essence of the bread and the wine are in fact just bread and wine. That through the epiclesis, transubstantiation occurs and the essence of these are changed to the body and blood of Christ. The essence-energies distinction applies here (which is where I think the misunderstanding occurs). God's essence is unknowable, and inaccessible to man. God's energy is known and divided amongst his faithful. Therefore when the Eucharist is blessed we are engaging with God's divine energy. Because God's energy is divisible it becomes a part of the Eucharist.

            I'm guessing you are Roman or Protestant?

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            The Son of Man is not energy, his nature is one undivided person as Son of God. Eternally begotten of and one in being with the Father, from whom proceeds the Holy Spirit.

            >when the Eucharist is blessed we are engaging with God's divine energy. Because God's energy is divisible it becomes a part of the Eucharist

            We engage intimately with the physical and glorified body of Christ in the Eucharist, which is indistinguishable from his essence.

            We seem to be at odds here.

            >gifts

            The charismatic gifts are energies of the Holy Spirit, got it. That checks out, keeping it 100. The energies correspond to particular members of the body of Christ.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >The Son of Man is not energy
            Agreed, I didn't say this.
            >his nature is one undivided person as Son of God.
            Incorrect, the Church teaches Christ as a hypostatic union of both fully man and fully divine.
            >Eternally begotten of and one in being with the Father, from whom proceeds the Holy Spirit.
            The Son and the Holy Spirit are begotten from the Father as the Nicene creed states, anything else is the Filioque heresy.
            >We engage intimately with the physical and glorified body of Christ in the Eucharist
            Yes, but only after it has been blessed by God's divine energy, until then it remains bread and wine
            >which is indistinguishable from his essence.
            We as men are unable to perceive the essence of God, this is stated clearly by the Church fathers. Eucharist is a spiritual gift given by God to the faithful and precedes from God's divine energy, which we are able to perceive.
            >We seem to be at odds here.
            If you are not Orthodox I can understand why.
            >The charismatic gifts are energies of the Holy Spirit, got it.
            No, the spiritual gifts given by God. His warmth and love, the blessings and sacraments. This is what energies means in the essence-energies distinction. The things that we feel and receive from God's presence. As opposed to what God is, his essence.
            >The energies correspond to particular members of the body of Christ
            The energies are proportionally divided amongst the faithful.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            Solid.

            I was just confused by your earlier remark about the energies being "part of God" but divisible. It seems to me these holy energies must emanate ubiquitously from the Godhead rather belonging to only a part. And I would much rather not say that they are divided like a beam of light through a prism, rather that they correspond proportionally and harmoniously to all the members of the church.

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        You can, because like I said, he won't force anyone over an issue likely to cause mass schism. In doing so, you're not ignoring anything important or infallible, you're just ignoring his PR, which is not a problem even for Catholics. You don't have to follow everything the pope says on every issue, only when he rules infallibly on an issue.

        In this case the only ruling he will make potentially in his lifetime is a ban on discussing it, and that's unlikely since his current double talk is working well.

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          >You can
          You quite literally can't. If the Pope has embraced transgender ideology than every Roman Catholic must follow step because the Pope is infallible, and there is the inherent contradiction.
          >he won't force anyone over an issue likely to cause mass schism
          As if a Pope hasn't done this before,
          >you're not ignoring anything important or infallible
          As a Roman Catholic that is not for you to decide unless you are deciding to convert to a Protestant sect.
          >even for Catholics
          It is, Roman Catholic dogma has made it explicitly clear that the Pope is infallible and his word is canon.
          >You don't have to follow everything the pope says on every issue, only when he rules infallibly on an issue
          If the Pope is infallible than you must follow everything he says. Infallibility is not a choice or decision on an issue that can be ruled, it is a state, the Pope is either always infallible or he is fallible.
          >In this case the only ruling he will make potentially in his lifetime is a ban on discussing it, and that's unlikely since his current double talk is working well.
          If the statement is accurate, the "ruling" was transgenders are "daughters of God", you must accept this as a Roman Catholic, if you now deny that transgenders are no longer "daughters of God" but are instead correctly, sons of God, then you are asserting that the Pope is wrong, but the Pope is infallible and therefore cannot be wrong, but if you no longer believe that the Pope is infallible you are not a Roman Catholic.

          You cannot pick and choose as a Roman Catholic, the Pope is infallible on everything, or he is fallible.

  3. 6 months ago
    Cult of Passion

    "Everyone is crazy."

    Correct.

    t.Doctor

  4. 6 months ago
    Cult of Passion

    Be the Fire that Drives Evololution.

  5. 6 months ago
    Cult of Passion

    "What are you doing?"

    Everything.

  6. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    So all the churches except for Rome was wrong?
    If it's so significant why wasn't the Filioque in the original creed in the first place?

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      Do not worry. That claim is bunk. The Filioque and its associated creed were not even with the Apostles. Everything a Christian needs is contained within the New Testament, which fulfills the Old Testament, also worthy of reading and study.

  7. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    New Testament doesn't say anything against gays and trannies iirc
    So why are you homies getting your thongs in a twist
    also it would be hypocritical of Jesus to preach love while hating homosexuals and trannies.

  8. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    The Orthodox Church is the church of Theodosius. Catholics changed the Creed without an ecumenical council.

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      Theodosius was not a member of the sect of palamas

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        Sect of Palamas aahahahhhhahahahaha

  9. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    >The Holy Spirit was neither made nor created nor begotten; he proceeds from the Father and the Son...This is the catholic faith:
    >one cannot be saved without believing it firmly and faithfully.
    This is one of those things that feels like word game played by people who speculate on the nature of God when we really have no way of checking the details of his nature. Maybe it is true, but is it really relevant to the whole salvation thing as long as you don't believe in something wacky like the Arianism, but a created Holy Spirit rather than Jesus?

  10. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Ctrl-F Eastern Catholic
    >0 results found
    This board is moronic and knows about nothing

  11. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Finally I died, I was so tired of life and temptation. I was faithful to Jesus my whole life, lived in extreme poverty, became a eunuch for the kingdom of God, and served others because of my faith. I can't wait to be at the right hand of God.
    >Um actually you thought the Holy Spirit emanated from the father but actually it PROCEEDED from the father. Enjoy roasting in fire for all eternity.
    Come on christcucks.

    • 6 months ago
      OP

      It's only Catholics who say that. Christians who truly value scripture know that Romans 10:9 is true: "If you declare with your mouth, 'Jesus is Lord', and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved."

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        Nope. The Eastern Catholic churches use the Nicene Creed without the filioque in their services.

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          I don't see how your reply is supposed to be a refutation of what you are replying to

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            I thought you were OP of the entire thread

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            I am

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            What I was pointing out was that after Vatican II the Catholics no longer enforce conformity on the Eastern churches and allow them to use the creed without the filioque because it seems like the only thing that matters is everyone agreeing to bend the knee to the Pope.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            You’ve exposed your ignorance. There have been Eastern rite churches in the Catholic Church from the period of the schism in the 11th century, and after the Union of Brest, even more Eastern Orthodox became Catholics, and were permitted to use the original version of the creed without the Filioque

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            Mate, where did I say in my post that Eastern rite churches began with Vatican II. From my understanding Vatican II made their tradition of using the creed without the filioque formally acceptable in line with the reforms allowing liturgy in the vernacular. The point that the only thing that matters is obedience to the Pope still stands, especially with the context you've provided that this hasn't been effective practice not only for a few decades but for centuries.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            hasn't been the case only for a few decades but has been effective practice for a few centuries

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            > From my understanding Vatican II made their tradition of using the creed without the filioque formally acceptable
            It already was. Vatican II did encourage some traditional Eastern practices like allowing priests to chrismate, or allowing patriarchs with their synods eparchs to nominate bishops and establish new eparchies without the pope breathing down their neck.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >It already was
            Interesting, when was the tension between the insertion of the clause or its absence in the Greek resolved? From my understanding the contemporary position of the Vatican II church was that it was acceptable in the Latin creed, which is dogmatic, while its insertion has additional and heretical senses when inserted into the Greek, thus it is excluded but implied. Prior to that, I know of the understanding agreed to at the Council of Florence that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father through the Son, which was drafted in Latin, but rejected by the majority of the Byzantine clergy when they were informed of the result, and therefore did not find implementation. While I knew of Eastern rite churches within the Catholic church, I didn't realize that they had reached settlements on the issue prior to Vatican II, and due to the additional privileges that they were assigned in Vatican II, assumed that formalization of their usage of the creed without the filioque was within its legislative acts.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            At the latest it was resolved at the Union of Brest in 1595, there they were admitted to communion with Rome and allowed to retain the creed without the filioque, from what I know. What I don’t know is what happened with the Greek Rite churches in Rome. Pope Leo IX left them open the Greek and permitted them to retain their traditional ways, while Michael Cerularius closed all Latin rite churches. Also, the Orientals have long been permitted to say the creed in mass without the addition, at least from the time of Florence with Eugenius IV, when some of the Armenians came back. A good overview on the observance of the oriental and eastern rites is Allatae Sunt by Pope Benedict XIV in 1755.

  12. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    >QED under Catholicism most Orthodox go to Hell.
    We absolutely do. And we're fine with that. Catholics think institutions will get them to heaven, let them.

  13. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    Here is the teaching of the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church (Not the Vatican II masonic sect) :

    Pope Pius XII, Mystici Corporis Christi (# 23), June 29, 1943: “For not every offense, although it may be a grave evil, is such as by its very own nature to sever a man from the Body of the Church, as does schism or heresy or apostasy"

    Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, “Cantate Domino”, 1441:

    “The Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that all those who are outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans but also israelites or heretics and schismatics, cannot share in eternal life and will go into the everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless they are joined to the Church before the end of their lives; that the unity of this ecclesiastical body is of such importance that only for those who abide in it do the Church’s sacraments contribute to salvation and do fasts, almsgiving and other works of piety and practices of the Christian militia produce eternal rewards; and that nobody can be saved, no matter how much he has given away in alms and even if he has shed blood in the name of Christ, unless he has persevered in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.”

    Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Sess. 8, Nov. 22, 1439:

    “Whoever wishes to be saved, needs above all to hold the Catholic faith; unless each one preserves this whole and inviolate, he will without a doubt perish in eternity."

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      >unless they are joined to the Church
      We are. Just not to the Roman institution.

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      You do realize that by denying the communion with Rome this document specifically indicts you, right?

      You're just like the schismatics who started the reformation, see they thought they knew better than the Church leadership too. They claimed to be the one true Church too.

      Maybe instead of splitting yourself off from the Church and hiding, waiting and doing nothing, you should fight back from within. There are official channels for this kind of action. Like any other body, the Church must have an immune system. If her immune system doesn't work or abandons her, she may become I'll and her illness will not improve.

  14. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    Who wants the over under on the church recognizing and performing homosexual marriages before they allow priests to be married?

    I'd be so inclined to wager at 2 to 1, personally. But something tells me neither one of these change in my lifetime.

  15. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    >catholic back then meant >universal, not "Roman catholic" which is a contradiction in terms.

  16. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Decrees_of_the_Vatican_Council/Part_3/Chapter_3 also says
    "Hence We teach and declare that by the appointment of our Lord the Roman Church possesses a sovereignty of ordinary power over all other Churches, and that this power of jurisdiction of the Roman Pontiff, which is truly episcopal, is immediate; to which all, of whatsoever rite and dignity, both pastors and faithful, both individually and collectively, are bound, by their duty of hierarchical subordination and true obedience, to submit, not only in matters which belong to faith and morals, but also in those that appertain to the discipline and government of the Church throughout the world; so that the Church of Christ may be one flock under one supreme Pastor, through the preservation of unity, both of communion and of profession of the same faith, with the Roman Pontiff. This is the teaching of Catholic truth, from which no one can deviate without loss of faith and of salvation."

    So according to Vatican I neither Orthodox nor Protestants can be saved since they deny that the Pope is the head of all churches

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      They can be saved by invincible ignorance.

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        How on earth do you figure that? At that point 'invincible ignorance" just becomes universalism.

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          Catholic theology has already been heading that way for a while. The decrees of Lumen Gentium about the possibility of salvation outside the Church were being taught by Dominicans for centuries prior to Vatican II in reference to the unevangelized and those outside of the Church, and were not condemned by the magisterium. If there is some Orthodox Christian out there who given his context and knowledge doesn’t know that the Catholic Church is the true visible Church of Christ, and lives his life faithfully in obedience to the law written on his heart and what he knows of the Gospel (which will be a lot given that he is EO), why should we expect God to damn him? The context of the formulation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus is to schismatics, heresiarchs and obstinant heretics who directly work against the Church. Early Christians like Justin Martyr thought that people like Plato and Heraclitus were ‘Christians’ for knowing the Logos, so in this sense, we’re witnessing a return to form for Catholic theology.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            Such notions contradict the Athanasian Creed and as such are heretical under Catholicism. Someone MUST accept what it says or according to Catholicism they are damned, as it begins with
            "Whoever desires to be saved should above all hold to the catholic faith. Anyone who does not keep it whole and unbroken will doubtless perish eternally."

            And ends with "This is the catholic faith:
            one cannot be saved without believing it firmly and faithfully."

            In fact those statements themselves fall under "one cannot be saved without believing it firmly and faithfully" so anyone who believes you aren't damned for not accepting the Athanasian Creed is according to Catholicism themselves damned.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            There is such thing as culpable ignorance and inculpable ignorance, however.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            There are so many inconsistencies in both Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox theology, doctrines, and traditions.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            None of that matters compared to the rites, apostolic succession, and the sacraments that both maintain.

            Traditions are supposed to be divergent, they wouldn't be traditions otherwise. Divergences in authoritative teachings aren't great, but it's not insurmountable.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Divergences in authoritative teachings aren't great, but it's not insurmountable.
            It really is when you believe your tradition is infallible

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >you believe your tradition to be infallable
            Traditions, there are more than one.

            Apostolic Tradition is sacrosanct, but there are other traditions like those particular to monastic orders that aren't meant for the whole church.

            Orthodox Christians believe that not all the teachings of the Apostles are in the New Testament, and that a single Living Tradition of their teachings is handed down to us through apostolic succession.

            For example, confession of sins is a sacrament. But the form confession has taken hasn't always been the same. For many many years most of the early Church confessed their sins publicly in front of the whole congregation. This changed because the Irish practice of making private confession was derived from the early Aegyptian Desert Fathers and gradually took precedence and became tradition.

            Both traditions totally affirm the sacrament of penance.

            Which Apostolic Tradition is different between the Latin and Greek churches? I don't know of any.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            Catholics and Orthodox disagree majorly on the Apostolic tradition, what are you smoking? Rome claims their leader is the leader of all churches everywhere forever and the Orthodox vehemently reject this

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            Is that all you got? Tell me something I don't know.

            Like, you could have said "durr the filioque" and it would have been just as impressive.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            It's a large enough difference that the two churches have been split for over a thousand years and have fought full-blown wars, sounds like a pretty impressive gulf to me but you do you.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            Not really. The differences come down to sperging over an addition to the creed, which (let’s be honest), comes down to a dispute over papal authority. Everything else is just Orthos getting mad over azymes or Latin priests not having beards

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            I would consider "the successor in this Apostle's area is permanently and forever the undisputable leader of all saved humanity who can issue forever infallible divine decrees" to be a pretty massive dispute. It's certainly been treated like one.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >There are so many inconsistencies in both Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox theology, doctrines, and traditions.
            such as?

  17. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    St Maximus the Confessor
    "Those of the Queen of cities [Constantinople] have attacked the synodal letter of the present very holy Pope [Martin I], not in the case of all the chapters that he has written in it, but only in the case of two of them. One relates to theology, because it says he says that ‘the Holy Spirit proceeds (ekporeusthai) also from the Son. . .With regard to the first matter, they [the Romans] have produced the unanimous documentary evidence of the Latin fathers, and also of Cyril of Alexandria, from the sacred commentary he composed on the gospel of St. John. On the basis of these texts, they have shown that they have not made the Son the cause (aitian) of the Spirit — they know in fact that the Father is the only cause (aitian) of the Son and the Spirit, the one by begetting and the other by procession (ekporeusin); but [they use this expression] in order to manifest the Spirit’s coming-forth (proienai) through him and, in this way, to make clear the unity and identity of the essence (ousias). . . .One should keep in mind that they cannot express their meaning in a language and idiom that are foreign to them as precisely as they can in their own mother-tongue, any more than we can do.”

  18. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    Holy heretical trinitarian autism schism !

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *