An "Apology" from P and P

[All4Christ]

I actually heard that the first ex cathedra statement was that they could make ex cathedra statements, and the second was concerning Mary's Immaculate Conception. could be wrong on those, though.

That's what I thought as well.

 

[All4Christ]

Good question.

As I understand it there have been only TWO ex-cathedra definitions since Vatican I: the dogmatizing of the bodily Assumption of the Theotokos, which we already knew, and the declaration by John Paul II that women could not be ordained to the presbyterate or episcopate, which we also already knew.

As a matter of history, the Chalcedonian Patriarchate of Antioch was for centuries in a state of double communion with both Old and New Romes. This continued until the 17th century when both Romes made an issue of it.

Keep in mind that contrary to Protestant polemicists, papal infallibility is so carefully defined and limited as to make its exercise impossible in quotidian or even frivolous matters.

Christ is risen!

Indeed He is risen!

I understand that it is exercised carefully and is limited, but it still is a valid question in regards to Monk Brendan's post imho. Whether it is common or not - accepting papal infallibility (ex cathedra) does have a potential impact on theology.

Also, I've always read that the immaculate conception was a statement in ex cathedra. Would you disagree with that?

 

[prodromos]

HONK! Your wrong! We follow the beliefs and practices of Eastern Orthodoxy.

Stop playing at being Orthodox and become Orthodox already. Sheesh!
Also, that should have read, "You're wrong", seeing as you want to get picky about spelling.

 

[Jack Isaacks]

Indeed He is risen!

I understand that it is exercised carefully and is limited, but it still is a valid question in regards to Monk Brendan's post imho. Whether it is common or not - accepting papal infallibility (ex cathedra) does have a potential impact on theology.

Also, I've always read that the immaculate conception was a statement in ex cathedra. Would you disagree with that?

No, I would not disagree. But this was BEFORE V1.

Christ is risen!

 

[All4Christ]

No, I would not disagree. But this was BEFORE V1.

Christ is risen!

Yep, I agree that it was before Vatican 1.

Indeed He is risen!

And if I may...

Christ is risen from the dead, trampling down death by death - and upon those in the tombs bestowing life!

 

[Monk Brendan]

If Pope Francis makes a statement in Ex Cathedra, do you need to accept it in some form? Or at least accept that it can be interpreted in an "orthodox" way?

If Pope Francis makes a statement that he considers infallible, AND if it is delivered in the correct manner, AND if my Patriarch agrees with it, and preaches it, then I will obey. However, if Pope Francis says that all houses should be painted green, I will paint my house orange, just to give comfort to the enemies.

 

[Anhelyna]

Monk Brendan

Please be aware that you are a guest in this board [ as am I - and I'm a Ukrainian Catholic ! ]

I've been posting here for many years and believe me I'll continue posting here.

ArmyMatt is NOT a Catholic Basher - and language like that is not tolerated here.

Anhelyna - Ambassador Member

 

[Monk Brendan]

Also, that should have read, "You're wrong", seeing as you want to get picky about spelling.

You are correct. Mea Culpa!

 

[ArmyMatt]

Well, I'm sorry you feel that way. I will pray for you, and for myself that God will NOT make me a good, observant, willing to serve, and loving my neighbor as I love myself Orthodox Christian like you.

In a book I have, published by ROCOR, it is written, "Orthodoxy of faith and life, and not jurisdictional dependence, is the criterion for recognizing a true Orthodox Church. I'm sorry you don't attend such a church

You have reached the end of the olive branch. You are just another Catholic Basher, and I pity your pastor, who must be pulling out his beard by the roots because of all the hatred that is floating around in that Church.

Christ is Risen!

for one, my pastor and bishop say the same thing. for two, the loving thing to do to the heretic, is to point out the heresy.

and my confessor pulls his hair out in frustration because of me, but not because of my stance on Rome and those in her communion.

no need to take personal cheap shots, come on now.

 

[rusmeister]

Monk Brendan

Please be aware that you are a guest in this board [ as am I - and I'm a Ukrainian Catholic ! ]

I've been posting here for many years and believe me I'll continue posting here.

ArmyMatt is NOT a Catholic Basher - and language like that is not tolerated here.

Anhelyna - Ambassador Member

What she said.

 

[Christina C]

for one, my pastor and bishop say the same thing. for two, the loving thing to do to the heretic, is to point out the heresy.

and my confessor pulls his hair out in frustration because of me, but not because of my stance on Rome and those in her communion.

no need to take personal cheap shots, come on now.

I think maybe Monk Brendan is mostly upset because the term papist is generally thought of (at least in the U.K., perhaps not in the US?) as a derogatory/disparaging term that Catholics (usually Roman Catholics) take offence (sorry offense!) to? Everyone's comments/observations to him are correct and their questions to him are valid, but perhaps the actual word papist was what he took exception to? Apologies if I have this wrong.

 

[ArmyMatt]

I think maybe Monk Brendan is mostly upset because the term papist is generally thought of (at least in the U.K., perhaps not in the US?) as a derogatory/disparaging term that Catholics (usually Roman Catholics) take offence (sorry offense!) to? Everyone's comments/observations to him are correct and their questions to him are valid, but perhaps the actual word papist was what he took exception to? Apologies if I have this wrong.

he might have, and maybe because he thought we were just lumping him in with the Latin rite and all their theological weirdness. that was why I said it is to be in communion with Rome, whether or not you agree with Rome.

and I was not the one who originally called him a Papist, I simply defined the word.

 

[GregConstantine]

I think "Papist" in the UK carries a much more stronger sense of insult than it does in America.

 

[~Anastasia~]

I think "Papist" in the UK carries a much more stronger sense of insult than it does in America.

Did not know this.

I was told by a good friend (so no acrimony) that referring to them as "Roman" Catholics was considered offensive by some (and these were Latin, Western-rite, whatever you'd call it?) so I've since tried to be sensitive in the words I use, but other than just "Catholic" that doesn't seem to leave any very descriptive term?

 

[ArmyMatt]

ArmyMatt is NOT a Catholic Basher - and language like that is not tolerated here.

thanks, I must also point out that last night I went to a seminary fundraiser to speak about married students, and an Italian wedding reception was being held in the same venue. I can say that nary a Roman Catholic was bashed, I wished the happy couple many years, and even gave a "sup?" head nod to one of the Latin priests there from across one of the hallways.

 

[Christina C]

he might have, and maybe because he thought we were just lumping him in with the Latin rite and all their theological weirdness. that was why I said it is to be in communion with Rome, whether or not you agree with Rome.

and I was not the one who originally called him a Papist, I simply defined the word.

Apologies Matt, I didn't take note of who first used the term. I would have thought that to be in communion with Rome a denomination would need to accept RC doctrines such as Immaculate Conception and Papal Infallibility, but I may be wrong about that.

 

[Christina C]

Did not know this.

I was told by a good friend (so no acrimony) that referring to them as "Roman" Catholics was considered offensive by some (and these were Latin, Western-rite, whatever you'd call it?) so I've since tried to be sensitive in the words I use, but other than just "Catholic" that doesn't seem to leave any very descriptive term?

In the U.K. Churches list themselves as Roman Catholic, so I don't think it is considered offensive over here. Papist would, however, be considered offensive.

 

[~Anastasia~]

In the U.K. Churches list themselves as Roman Catholic, so I don't think it is considered offensive over here. Papist would, however, be considered offensive.

I guess it can be hard to sort out ... ? There have been some times and places in history when Catholics have been on one end or the other of some serious issues, so I suspect there is more history of offense to draw on, that some of us might be unaware of.

 

[~Anastasia~]

A good bit of English history I was taught in school had to do with Catholic vs. Protestant (Church of England?) rulers and all the fallout from that.

 

[Christina C]

A good bit of English history I was taught in school had to do with Catholic vs. Protestant (Church of England?) rulers and all the fallout from that.

Absolutely! Henry VIII, Edward VI, Mary Tudor, Elizabeth I - lots of martyrs on both Catholic and Church of England sides. Foxe's book of martyrs. Gunpowder Plot. An interesting period of History!
C of E didn't start out that Protestant - Henry just didn't like that the Pope wouldn't grant him a divorce so declared himself head of the Church in England. But other than that the beliefs were consistent with Rome for a while (until influences from the Protestant reformation on the continent filtered over) and England even turned back to Catholicism for a short while under Mary I.