Out to win the "nice guy" award? Or the "you're next to go" vacation award? Or the "no beams in my eyes" award?
I know, just "stating the facts as you see them" award.
sorry if i seem blunt, i should be more polite, ProScibe said that we should look at the facts and then you will see that the EO is the Church that has maintained the apostolic traditionWell, in general I think Rhamiel is wrong on every point, cept for the Methodists. That said, I seriously doubt he's trying to be offensive to anyone. At least not intentionally. His posting style is just a bit more blunt than most.
oh not to get off topic, but i thought you were catholic? when did you change back to anglican?
how do you know that the Orthodox Church is the Church and not the Coptic Church, or one of the schimatic EO groups like the "Old Believers" or any of the other groups that became broke off from the EO?
if you do not like a council you call it a "robber council"
if you do not like a Patriarch you say he is not teaching the true faith
the EO seems to have no rock, no basis, you say that the laity has to accept a tradition for it to be true, so you do not even trust your own magisterium. on the other hand you recognize that at times most of the Church in the east has been gnostic at one time, and only a few kept the true faith...
the EO just seems so arbitrary
Nah, I was an Orthodox catechumen for two years and then took the RCIA classes mostly to learn about the RCC. I've been attending an ACNA church but honestly, I'm about to head back to the Orthodox church where I belong. Seem a bit schizophrenic? Possibly, but discernment is a tricky thing and the Truth matters a lot to me.
And now back to your regularly scheduled GT thread.
insted of defending the Eastern Orthodox Church you just attack the Catholic Church, interestingI agree it gets a bit complicated.
What you may suggest about the Eastern Orthodox Church could easily be countered with the specific idea that the Roman Church was the only See that broke away from the rest of the Apostolic Sees in the history of Christendom. Thus, the Roman Schism which is primarily the apparent isolation of the Vatican and the Vatican does not speak for the rest of the world history concerning the Orthodox Church. ((READ THE BOOK: THE ORTHODOX CHURCH)) by Timothy Ware. (the 1054 schism was always a hobby for me to eclucidate and explain.)
also, how do we know that the EO is the truest form of Orthodox Christianity and not the Old Believers or Old Calanderists or any of the other schismatic groups that formed up? wait the Calanderists were not all schismatic right?
how do you know that the Orthodox Church is the Church and not the Coptic Church, or one of the schimatic EO groups like the "Old Believers" or any of the other groups that became broke off from the EO?
if you do not like a council you call it a "robber council"
And if you don't like a Patriarch you call him an Anti-Pope and call for a mulligan.if you do not like a Patriarch you say he is not teaching the true faith
The EO doesn't have a magisterium and for good reason. There is no such thing in Christ's church.the EO seems to have no rock, no basis, you say that the laity has to accept a tradition for it to be true, so you do not even trust your own magisterium.
And the few that kept the faith brought them out of it. At times your magisterium has led the RCC into error, and there isn't a thing that can be done to bring them out of it. All the power lies in the hands of one man who wouldn't admit he was wrong on a doctrinal issue if Christ Himself came down to point it out.on the other hand you recognize that at times most of the Church in the east has been gnostic at one time, and only a few kept the true faith...
Ahem. Likewise.the EO just seems so arbitrary
insted of defending the Eastern Orthodox Church you just attack the Catholic Church, interesting
i thought the Orthodox believed that all the Bishops are equal? and there was more then one bishop in western Europe at the time of the 1054 schism, it seems to be a split between latin speaking christians and greek speaking christians
why so much emphasis on the Pentarchy if all bishops are equal?
i thought the Orthodox believed that all the Bishops are equal?
why so much emphasis on the Pentarchy if all bishops are equal?
Errm how do we know the RCC is the Church and not the Lutherans, or the other 1000's of schismatic groups that she has spawned? Not really a line of argument you should probably be taking.
And it seems the RCC never met a council it didn't like. Of course they accept them easy enough, they just don't actually adhere to them. See filioque.
And if you don't like a Patriarch you call him an Anti-Pope and call for a mulligan.
The EO doesn't have a magisterium and for good reason. There is no such thing in Christ's church.
And the few that kept the faith brought them out of it. At times your magisterium has led the RCC into error, and there isn't a thing that can be done to bring them out of it. All the power lies in the hands of one man who wouldn't admit he was wrong on a doctrinal issue if Christ Himself came down to point it out.
Ahem. Likewise.
well then you can not say it as "one bishop left the other 4"We do. All Bishops are considered equal except for the Ecumenical Patriarch who seems to be developing into the position of the Orthodox Pope. But not likely
well then you can not say it as "one bishop left the other 4"
because there was more then one bishop in the Western Church and more then 4 Bishops in the Eastern Church at the time of the Schism
I am torn betwix the 2In reality, it begs the question why are u Catholic and not Orthodox??
Well, in general I think Rhamiel is wrong on every point, cept for the Methodists. That said, I seriously doubt he's trying to be offensive to anyone. At least not intentionally. His posting style is just a bit more blunt than most.
why does that beg the question why i am Catholic? i am just trying to understand the paradigm that the EO are working from, are all Bishops equal or not? when you talk about the authority of the Pope you talk about them all being equal, but when you talk about the Schism it seems there are only 4 Bishops in the whole world??? it is just inconsitantIn reality, it begs the question why are u Catholic and not Orthodox??
Blunt is cool. But let's be factual.
No group thinks the other is anything but splintered, apostasized. Each and every one has fallen by the wayside, according to each and every one.