Login Register

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic Page 2 of 2   [ 31 posts ]   Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: "St" Seraphim of Sarov
PostPosted: Sat Aug 18, 2018 9:39 pm 
Offline
Sons of Thunder
Sons of Thunder
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2015 9:36 am
Posts: 8875
Location: India
Religion: Catholic (Syro Malabar)
From what has been said about the extent of and conditions governing the infallibility of the People of God and of the Church's Magisterium, it follows that the faithful are in no way permitted to see in the Church merely a fundamental permanence in truth which, as some assert, could be reconciled with errors contained here and there in the propositions that the Church's Magisterium teaches to be held irrevocably, as also in the unhesitating assent of the People of God concerning matters of faith and morals.

It is of course true that through the faith that leads to salvation men are converted to God,(32) who reveals Himself in His Son Jesus Christ; but it would be wrong to deduce from this that the Church's dogmas can be belittled or even denied. Indeed the conversion to God which we should realize through faith is a form of obedience (cf. Rom 16:26), which should correspond to the nature of divine Revelation and its demands. Now this Revelation, in the whole plan of salvation, reveals the mystery of God who sent His Son into the world (cf. 1 Jn 4:14) and teaches its application to Christian conduct. Moreover it demands that, in full obedience of the intellect and will to God who reveals,(33) we accept the proclamation of the good news of salvation as it is infallibly taught by the pastors of the Church. The faithful, therefore, through faith are converted as they should to God, who reveals Himself in Christ, when they adhere to Him in the integral doctrine of the Catholic faith.

It is true that there exists an order as it were a hierarchy of the Church's dogmas, as a result of their varying relationship to the foundation of the faith.(34) This hierarchy means that some dogmas are founded on other dogmas which are the principal ones, and are illuminated by these latter. But all dogmas, since they are revealed, must be believed with the same divine faith.(35)

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congr ... ae_en.html

_________________
"May our tongues proclaim Your truth. May Your Cross be a protection for us as we let our tongues be turned into new harps and sing hymns with fiery lips"

-From the introduction to Our Father, "On the feasts of the Lord and other important feasts", Syro Malabar rite


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: "St" Seraphim of Sarov
PostPosted: Sat Aug 18, 2018 9:43 pm 
Offline
Eminent
Eminent
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2002 11:59 am
Posts: 16588
Religion: Католик
Those atheists tried to take relics of St. Seraphim of Sarov to the atheist museum in order to remove the veneration of the relics. The relics were found in the Cathedral of Our Kady of Kazan at St. Petersburg, which was originally the atheist museum, and were solemnly moved back.

http://www.orthodoxengland.org.uk/seraphim.htm

Deo gratias.

The Icon of Our Lady of Kazan is venerated by both Orthodox and Catholic Christians. St. John Paul II prayed daily before the icon. He returned the icon to the Russian Orthodox Church.

_________________
ABORTUS NECNON INFANTICIDIUM NEFANDA SUNT CRIMINA.

Abortion and infanticide are abominable crimes. (Gaudium et Spes, 51)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: "St" Seraphim of Sarov
PostPosted: Sat Aug 18, 2018 10:39 pm 
Offline
Sons of Thunder
Sons of Thunder
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2005 9:15 am
Posts: 4881
Religion: Catholic
Such research.

Light of the East wrote:
HalJordan wrote:
Lyons 2 and Florence are both ecumenical councils. The East agreed to all this then.

Before that, the Athanasian Creed spoke of the procession of the Spirit from Father and Son and the Formula Of Hormisdas is quite clear that communion with Rome was a requisite for sound doctrine and avoiding schism


Well, that's nicely confusing to me.

Hmmmmm........

23. The Holy Spirit is of the Father and of the Son; neither made, nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding.

24. So there is one Father, not three Fathers; one Son, not three Sons; one Holy Spirit, not three Holy Spirits.

23 kind of leaves things hanging if you look at it. Proceeding from whom? The way that is written is kind of an open-ended statement by which one could say just about anything. It doesn't specify from whom. Could it be that the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed was a point of clarification on this?

It seems also that by the eleventh century, the pope of that time had the original Creed -sans filioque - engraved on golden plates at the Vatican to make a point on the proper understanding. Why was his action so ignored in the West?

As for the Formula of Hormisdas, I was doing a little research on it and came across this interplay at another forum:

Quote:
>>>This is powerful stuff.<<<

Not really. Every now and again, a "Catholic" apologist will dredge it up as "proof" that the Eastern Churches accepted "papal supremacy". But to put the Acacian Schism and the "Formula of Hormosidas" in those terms is anachronistic at best, and ignores the actual historical context of both the dispute and the resolution.

>>>I really would like to know what the modern Orthodox response would be such a precedent from the early Church. I hope it is something better than trying to dodge the question by claiming the "Apostolic See" didn't necessarily refer to Rome.<<<

The answer is that the "Formula" was imposed on the Eastern Churches by the Emperor Justin I as a means of ending the Acacian Schism and therefore open the way to the reestablishment of Byzantine jurisdiction over Italy (which was accomplished by Justin's successor Justinian the Great). When the document was ratified by the Church of Constantinople, the Patriarch signed his name with a caveat, that "Constantinople, being 'New Rome', is one with and equal to 'Old Rome'". There was never on the part of the Eastern Churches any interpretation of the Formula of Hormosidas as making them "subordinate" to the Church of Rome, let alone the notion that Rome had any sort of jurisdiction over the Eastern Churches. Going beyond the immediate facts around the signing of the Formula, one must look at how the Eastern Churches actually lived their relationship with the Church of Rome in order to see what interpretation must be given to the Formula itself. And there, we see that the Eastern Churches acted as full and independent, neither subordinate to or under the jurisdiction of Rome. In effect, everything stayed as it was, and in the three centuries after the signing of the Formula, it remains an historical fact that the Bishop of Rome had to have his election ratified by the Emperor of New Rome, and had to submit a synodicon to the imperial exarch at Ravenna. In other words, the Formula of Hormosidas had absolutely NO effect on the inner or outer lives of either the Western or Eastern Churches, and therefore has no bearing on relations between the Eastern and Western Churches today--except in the minds of people like Jim Likoudis.

>>>Of course Rome was not the only Apostolic See. But it is manifestly obvious that in this context, the statement is certainly referring to Rome. This at the very least is a confirmation that the Primacy of Rome is an Apostolic tradition acknowledged by the early Church.<<<

Meaning nothing, since the primacy of Rome was acknowledged throughout the Ecumene (the bounds of the Roman world, East and West). The key question, always ignored by both sides, is what primacy actually meant at the time when there was unity in the Church. And most assuredly, that primacy bore no relationship to the Roman self-defined concept that emerged in the wake of the Gregorian reforms and which reached its apogee in Pastor Aeternus.


So apparently there is more than one way of viewing the Formula and the intent that it had at that time. There is a rather human habit in all of us of going back in time, taking quotes, and retooling them to serve our needs. Because of this, any such discussion as we are having now requires a lot of digging, study, and consideration when an issue such as this comes up.

_________________
http://www.popinainteasy.blogspot.com


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: "St" Seraphim of Sarov
PostPosted: Sat Aug 18, 2018 10:58 pm 
Offline
Master
Master
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 7:22 pm
Posts: 1663
Location: Canada
Religion: la foi Catholique
Church Affiliations: K of C 4th Degree
The Ukrainian Catholic Church has a catechism which should make it pretty clear that yes ex cathedra states such as those on the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption are binding as matters of faith on Eastern Catholics just as much as Roman Catholics.

Paragraph 291 of Christ our Pascha reads

Quote:
In the Eucharist celebrated by the bishop, as well as through a com-mon faith, every local Church enters into communion with other local Churches. Local Churches in communion with one another form a self-governing Church, headed by one who presides: a bishop, archbishop, met-ropolitan, or patriarch. The first among self-governing Churches is the Church of Rome, because its presider is the Pope of Rome, the successor of the apostle Peter. He is the teacher and the standard of the apostolic faith; to him the Lord has granted the gift of infallibility in matters of faith and morals [when proclaimed ex cathedra], in order to preserve the purity and immutability of divine teaching. As the apostle Peter mani-fested his love for Christ more than others, and received from Christ the mandate to shepherd his flock (see Jn 21:15-18), so the Roman See of Peter “presides in love”244 and maintains a primacy (in Latin, primatus) among self-governing Churches. This primacy is fulfilled through the Petrine ministry of the Bishop of Rome. Our Church professes the Pope’s ministry by titling him “the most holy universal Pontiff.”



To say that the dogmas of the Catholic Church are "Roman" dogmas is a fiction that is directly contradicted by both reason (how can something be true de fide in one geographic area but not another?) and the very Catechism of Ukrainian Greek Catholics. To pretend anyone here advocates for making Eastern Catholics "Romans" is disingenuous.

_________________
In Te speravi, Domine: dixi: Tu es Deus meus, in manibus Tuis tempora mea.
Have mercy on me, O Lord, for I am weak: heal me, O Lord, for my bones are troubled.
All that the Father giveth to me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me, I will not cast out.
Tiber swim team '13


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: "St" Seraphim of Sarov
PostPosted: Sat Aug 18, 2018 11:08 pm 
Offline
Master
Master
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 7:22 pm
Posts: 1663
Location: Canada
Religion: la foi Catholique
Church Affiliations: K of C 4th Degree
Light of the East wrote:

Again, I remind you....we are "katholicos" not Roman Catholic.



If I was asking you to affirm Salesian spirituality, the rosary, the scapular, observe our feasts, or pray in Latin you'd have a strong point.

As it stands, I'm only talking about the dogmas concerning the Petrine Office (affirmed in your own Catechism). This is not "Roman" Catholicism, it is just Catholicism.

_________________
In Te speravi, Domine: dixi: Tu es Deus meus, in manibus Tuis tempora mea.
Have mercy on me, O Lord, for I am weak: heal me, O Lord, for my bones are troubled.
All that the Father giveth to me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me, I will not cast out.
Tiber swim team '13


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: "St" Seraphim of Sarov
PostPosted: Sun Aug 19, 2018 1:11 am 
Offline
Sons of Thunder
Sons of Thunder
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2003 9:34 pm
Posts: 29098
Location: Sine Domum
Religion: Roman Catholic
Benedict XIV dealt with the question of martyrs outside visible union. He distinguished between martyrs apud Deum, in the sight of God, and apud ecclesiam, in the Church. Even if purely material, schismatics can never be canonized or venerated as saints, because the Church can only judge directly external reality, because of scandal, and because their life offers a defective example.

But, we should not, that the relationship between the schismatic Eastern Orthodox and the true Church, i.e the Roman Catholic Church, has not always been clear cut. The history before the Synod of Jerusalem offers so much mutability in relations. Some Russian Orthodox have argued there was not a true schism between Moscow and Rome before the 19th century! Evidence includes that the Russian sacramental theology has been closer to ours, e.g they did not engage in corrupting extreme unction by giving it to all, as some Orthodox erroneously do.

_________________
Quoniam sapientia aperuit os mutorum, et linguas infantium fecit disertas.

http://stomachosus-thomistarum.blogspot.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: "St" Seraphim of Sarov
PostPosted: Sun Aug 19, 2018 10:43 am 
Offline
Sons of Thunder
Sons of Thunder
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 9:25 pm
Posts: 10454
Location: As I understand it.....in God's will. This is the best place to be.
Religion: Orthodox (In Communion With Rome)
Church Affiliations: Past Grand Knight KoC 15107
ForeverFaithful wrote:
To say that the dogmas of the Catholic Church are "Roman" dogmas is a fiction that is directly contradicted by both reason (how can something be true de fide in one geographic area but not another?) and the very Catechism of Ukrainian Greek Catholics. To pretend anyone here advocates for making Eastern Catholics "Romans" is disingenuous.


Perhaps no one here in this forum advocates making Eastern Catholics into Roman Light Catholics, but the facts of our existence in the United States speak to a different reality regarding the actions of the bishops in the Roman Church.

When I joined the Ukrainian Catholic parish to which I belong, there were Stations of the Cross on the walls. That is a lovely devotion --- FOR THE WEST -- it is not part of our spirituality. Likewise the whole parish was filled with Western art rather than icons. The prayer books have the Creed with the filioque inserted. Someone had taken the time to take a pen and scratch through that part, but the point is that way back when, no one apparently batted an eyelash when the books were first published for use in the UCC.

Then there's that issue of married priests and the Ruthenians (and by extension the UCC) being told point blank that we would not have married priests in the United States.

YOU may not be advocating for Eastern Catholics to become Romans.....but we have a whole history of dealing with such abuses from the hierarchical authorities of the West. So much so that the great majority of our people do not understand that they are Orthodox in dogma, praxis, and Liturgy, as His Holiness, Patriarch Sviatoslav said.

It is going to be a long, tough road to reunion.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: "St" Seraphim of Sarov
PostPosted: Sun Aug 19, 2018 10:45 am 
Offline
Sons of Thunder
Sons of Thunder
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 9:25 pm
Posts: 10454
Location: As I understand it.....in God's will. This is the best place to be.
Religion: Orthodox (In Communion With Rome)
Church Affiliations: Past Grand Knight KoC 15107
ForeverFaithful wrote:
Light of the East wrote:

Again, I remind you....we are "katholicos" not Roman Catholic.



If I was asking you to affirm Salesian spirituality, the rosary, the scapular, observe our feasts, or pray in Latin you'd have a strong point.

As it stands, I'm only talking about the dogmas concerning the Petrine Office (affirmed in your own Catechism). This is not "Roman" Catholicism, it is just Catholicism.


Fair dinkum. I am still studying the differences and conflicts between East and West on the working out of the Petrine office. As I understand it, the collegiality of the East does not have a problem with the concept of "first among equal" for the Holy Father. It is the actual application of that office which has been a problem.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: "St" Seraphim of Sarov
PostPosted: Sun Aug 19, 2018 10:54 am 
Offline
Sons of Thunder
Sons of Thunder
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 9:25 pm
Posts: 10454
Location: As I understand it.....in God's will. This is the best place to be.
Religion: Orthodox (In Communion With Rome)
Church Affiliations: Past Grand Knight KoC 15107
ForeverFaithful wrote:
Why did St. John Paul II refer to Seraphim of Sarov as a saint?

Why does Fr. Philippe refer to Seraphim of Sarov as a saint?


While I can't know the state of his soul at death, the man was not a visible member of the Catholic Church. So is it even licit to venerate him?


Back to the OP.

What makes a man a "visible member of the Catholic Church?" What makes a man a practitioner of the Catholic faith.

I maintain that it is the Eucharist, administered by licitly and validly ordained priests in succession with the Apostles.

Which means, as I see it, that the Western Churches (Roman Catholic and the 23 rites in communion with Rome) and the Eastern Churches (the autocephalous Orthodox Churches of the five Patriarchates) are all part of the Church Catholic, despite our separation on earth.

Your opinion?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: "St" Seraphim of Sarov
PostPosted: Sun Aug 19, 2018 11:11 am 
Offline
Sons of Thunder
Sons of Thunder
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2015 9:36 am
Posts: 8875
Location: India
Religion: Catholic (Syro Malabar)
Light of the East wrote:
as I see it, that the Western Churches (Roman Catholic and the 23 rites in communion with Rome) and the Eastern Churches (the autocephalous Orthodox Churches of the five Patriarchates) are all part of the Church Catholic, despite our separation on earth.

Your opinion?

Pope Pius Xi dwelt with similar themes in Mortalium Animos.

They add that the Church in itself, or of its nature, is divided into sections; that is to say, that it is made up of several churches or distinct communities, which still remain separate, and although having certain articles of doctrine in common, nevertheless disagree concerning the remainder...They soon, however, go on to say that that Church also has erred, and corrupted the original religion by adding and proposing for belief certain doctrines which are not only alien to the Gospel, but even repugnant to it. Among the chief of these they number that which concerns the primacy of jurisdiction, which was granted to Peter and to his successors in the See of Rome. Among them there indeed are some, though few, who grant to the Roman Pontiff a primacy of honor...
Jesus Christ sent His Apostles into the whole world in order that they might permeate all nations with the Gospel faith, and, lest they should err, He willed beforehand that they should be taught by the Holy Ghost:[15] has then this doctrine of the Apostles completely vanished away, or sometimes been obscured, in the Church, whose ruler and defense is God Himself? If our Redeemer plainly said that His Gospel was to continue not only during the times of the Apostles, but also till future ages, is it possible that the object of faith should in the process of time become so obscure and uncertain, that it would be necessary to-day to tolerate opinions which are even incompatible one with another? If this were true, we should have to confess that the coming of the Holy Ghost on the Apostles, and the perpetual indwelling of the same Spirit in the Church, and the very preaching of Jesus Christ, have several centuries ago, lost all their efficacy and use, to affirm which would be blasphemy. But the Only-begotten Son of God, when He commanded His representatives to teach all nations, obliged all men to give credence to whatever was made known to them by "witnesses preordained by God,"[16] and also confirmed His command with this sanction: "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be condemned."[17] These two commands of Christ, which must be fulfilled, the one, namely, to teach, and the other to believe, cannot even be understood, unless the Church proposes a complete and easily understood teaching, and is immune when it thus teaches from all danger of erring.

Besides this, in connection with things which must be believed, it is nowise licit to use that distinction which some have seen fit to introduce between those articles of faith which are fundamental and those which are not fundamental, as they say, as if the former are to be accepted by all, while the latter may be left to the free assent of the faithful: for the supernatural virtue of faith has a formal cause, namely the authority of God revealing, and this is patient of no such distinction. For this reason it is that all who are truly Christ's believe, for example, the Conception of the Mother of God without stain of original sin with the same faith as they believe the mystery of the August Trinity, and the Incarnation of our Lord just as they do the infallible teaching authority of the Roman Pontiff, according to the sense in which it was defined by the Ecumenical Council of the Vatican. Are these truths not equally certain, or not equally to be believed, because the Church has solemnly sanctioned and defined them, some in one age and some in another, even in those times immediately before our own? Has not God revealed them all?

_________________
"May our tongues proclaim Your truth. May Your Cross be a protection for us as we let our tongues be turned into new harps and sing hymns with fiery lips"

-From the introduction to Our Father, "On the feasts of the Lord and other important feasts", Syro Malabar rite


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: "St" Seraphim of Sarov
PostPosted: Sun Aug 19, 2018 11:19 am 
Offline
Sons of Thunder
Sons of Thunder
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2015 9:36 am
Posts: 8875
Location: India
Religion: Catholic (Syro Malabar)
So, then, if anyone says that the Roman Pontiff has merely an office of supervision and guidance, and not the full and supreme power of jurisdiction over the whole Church, and this not only in matters of faith and morals, but also in those which concern the discipline and government of the Church dispersed throughout the whole world; or that he has only the principal part, but not the absolute fullness, of this supreme power; or that this power of his is not ordinary and immediate both over all and each of the Churches and over all and each of the pastors and faithful: let him be anathema.

Vatican I

_________________
"May our tongues proclaim Your truth. May Your Cross be a protection for us as we let our tongues be turned into new harps and sing hymns with fiery lips"

-From the introduction to Our Father, "On the feasts of the Lord and other important feasts", Syro Malabar rite


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic Page 2 of 2   [ 31 posts ]   Go to page Previous  1, 2


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


Jump to: