Do Catholics and Orthodox rely on private interpretation?

[patricius79]

We've been far too busy being persecuted by Turks and Communists to come up with any new heresies

I would have to read up some more as my memory is not the best anymore.
You should too, going to primary sources and historians rather than wasting your time reading apologetics.

I wish I could but I'm not able to read well due to health problems, and I don't have money to buy books. I don't think it would adequately resolve the issues between us either, since we would then have to argue about who is a good historian, who is unbiased, etc.

I would like to talk to you about contraception and whether the Eastern Orthodox have upheld morality in this area. I don't believe that the Eastern Orthodox have simply been holy martyrs and haven't had any issues with heresy or corruption. They are human like Catholics and everyone else.

It appears that Chrysostom and Augustine--two of the great fathers, one from the East and one from the West--both condemned contraception in the strongest terms, along with Clement of Alexandria and others.

What is the official teaching of the Orthodox on this important moral issue (of contraception)?

 

[Rajni]

And my problem with this is that in order to ascertain that the priests and bishops and cardinals and the Pope are trustworthy to begin with, one has to have ultimately already made a private discernment that they are trustworthy, thereby making their entire belief system reliant on a private discernment to begin with and so nullifying any objections that Protestants rely on private discernment.

I think I see where you're coming from.

This is why I figure that if I'm supposedly not qualified
enough to interact with God directly, minus the middle-
man, I’m probably not qualified enough to determine
which of the countless middle-men out there are
capable of doing it for me.

And as far as the term "Cafeteria Catholic" goes, all I
can say is that the Cafeteria isn't confined solely within
the walls of Catholicism, or any single religion. The
Cafeteria encompasses all the religious options out
there, and cafeteria-like picking-and-choosing,
using one's own private interpretation of which religion
is The Truth in order to conclude which religion one
will join up with is, basically, unavoidable.

-

 

[patricius79]

I think I see where you're coming from.

This is why I figure that if I'm supposedly not qualified
enough to interact with God directly, minus the middle-
man, I’m probably not qualified enough to determine
which of the countless middle-men out there are
capable of doing it for me.

And as far as the term "Cafeteria Catholic" goes, all I
can say is that the Cafeteria isn't confined solely within
the walls of Catholicism, or any single religion. The
Cafeteria encompasses all the religious options out
there, and cafeteria-like picking-and-choosing,
using one's own private interpretation of which religion
is The Truth in order to conclude which religion one
will join up with is, basically, unavoidable.

-

There is truth to what you say.

But though we are human and fallible, there must be a way for us to keep moving closer to the Truth, as opposed to merely loving our own opinions.

As a Catholic, I know I must accept whatever the Magisterium proclaims, or reject it all.

 

[Rajni]

But though we are human and fallible, there must be a way for us to keep moving closer to the Truth, as opposed to merely loving our own opinions.

I’m confident that the Spirit takes care of this. (John 16:13)

As a Catholic, I know I must accept whatever the Magisterium proclaims, or reject it all.

And that is based on conclusions you’ve drawn pertaining to that,
which is absolutely fine.

Whatever conclusions we draw (on anything, not just within the scope of our
belief systems) has to go through our filters of perception, and ultimately it is we,
ourselves, who draw those conclusions of what is and what is not valid, based
on those filters. I think that’s the point the OP was trying to make.

This is likely why we find such a variety of belief within religions, as well
as well as among them.

-

 

[patricius79]

I’m confident that the Spirit takes care of this. (John 16:13)

And that is based on conclusions you’ve drawn pertaining to that,
which is absolutely fine.

Whatever conclusions we draw (on anything, not just within the scope of our
belief systems) has to go through our filters of perception, and ultimately it is we,
ourselves, who draw those conclusions of what is and what is not valid, based
on those filters. I think that’s the point the OP was trying to make.

This is likely why we find such a variety of belief within religions, as well
as well as among them.

-

Is what you are saying true, or is it simply your subjective perception?

 

[patricius79]

I'll tell you if and when you are able to post the context.

Cyprian's letters have long been in the public domain

Prodromos, you had mentioned that Pope Honorius was condemned by an Ecumenical. But it sounds like Honorius was condemned only for not speaking out against Monothelitism, while it was Sergius, the Patriarch of Constantinople for 28 years was the most influential exponent of Monothelitism.

Also, Armstrong says that it was the East that had the most problems with heresy, and that Rome really was the pillar of orthodoxy. He says that between 343 and 843 the East was split off from the Catholic Church through various problems or heresies, such as Arianism and Monothelitism and the Acacian Schism.

He lists numerous Patriarchs of Constantinople, Alexandria, and Antioch who were either Monophysite, Arian, Monothelite, or Semi-Arian. (And one Modalist, and one Nestorian--Nestorius, a patriarch of Constantinople)

Anyway, I started a thread abou the history of the Papacy on the history section if you want to talk there.

 

[fatherjimparker]

<< I've often read the Catholic objection to Protestantism in that Protestants rely on their own private interpretation of Scripture which is fallible. However, don't Catholics (and Orthodox) as well?>>

No. Orthodox receive the interpretation of the Church and that is based on the apostolic teaching and scripture.

My private interpretation, if it is contrary to what the church teaches, is called "heresy."

jim

 

[Rajni]

Is what you are saying true, or is it simply your subjective perception?

Exactly!
As a human, I'm using the same processes as anyone else
in coming to my conclusions, meaning I've
got just as much growth and discovery to look
forward to as anyone in this journey called Life.

Who knew that seeing through a glass darkly could be
so adventuresome?

-

 

[patricius79]

<< I've often read the Catholic objection to Protestantism in that Protestants rely on their own private interpretation of Scripture which is fallible. However, don't Catholics (and Orthodox) as well?>>

No. Orthodox receive the interpretation of the Church and that is based on the apostolic teaching and scripture.

My private interpretation, if it is contrary to what the church teaches, is called "heresy."

jim

Hi Father Jim,

I respect the Eastern Orthodox very much for their beliefs and love of Mary and Jesus, but I believe the Catholic Church is right about purgatory and the Papacy, etc, and I've read that the Orthodox have moved away from Apostolic tradition about contraception.

What is your take, if I may ask, on the issue of contraception?

 

[fatherjimparker]

<< I've read that the Orthodox have moved away from Apostolic tradition about contraception. >>

That's news to me.

<<What is your take, if I may ask, on the issue of contraception?>>

Here's one opinion:

On contraception: “For the Health of Body and Soul: An Eastern Orthodox Introduction to Bioethics: General agreement exists among Orthodox writers on the following two points: since at least one of the purposes of marriage is the birth of children, a couple acts immorally when it consistently uses contraceptive methods to avoid the birth of any children, if there are not extenuating circumstances; contraception is also immoral when used to encourage the practice of fornication and adultery. Less agreement exists among Eastern Orthodox authors on the issue of contraception within marriage for the spacing of children or for the limitation of the number of children. ...Most authors, however, emphasize the sacramental nature of marriage and its place within the framework of Christian anthropology, seeing the sexual relationship of husband and wife as one aspect of the mutual growth of the couple in love and unity. This approach readily adapts itself to an ethical position that would not only permit but also enjoin sexual relationships of husband and wife for their own sake as expressions of mutual love. Such a view clearly would support the use of contraceptive practices for the purpose of spacing and limiting children so as to permit greater freedom of the couple in the expression of their mutual love." http://www.goarch.org/en/ourfaith/articles/article8076.asp

 

[patricius79]

<< I've read that the Orthodox have moved away from Apostolic tradition about contraception. >>

That's news to me.

<<What is your take, if I may ask, on the issue of contraception?>>

Here's one opinion:

On contraception: “For the Health of Body and Soul: An Eastern Orthodox Introduction to Bioethics: General agreement exists among Orthodox writers on the following two points: since at least one of the purposes of marriage is the birth of children, a couple acts immorally when it consistently uses contraceptive methods to avoid the birth of any children, if there are not extenuating circumstances; contraception is also immoral when used to encourage the practice of fornication and adultery. Less agreement exists among Eastern Orthodox authors on the issue of contraception within marriage for the spacing of children or for the limitation of the number of children. ...Most authors, however, emphasize the sacramental nature of marriage and its place within the framework of Christian anthropology, seeing the sexual relationship of husband and wife as one aspect of the mutual growth of the couple in love and unity. This approach readily adapts itself to an ethical position that would not only permit but also enjoin sexual relationships of husband and wife for their own sake as expressions of mutual love. Such a view clearly would support the use of contraceptive practices for the purpose of spacing and limiting children so as to permit greater freedom of the couple in the expression of their mutual love." http://www.goarch.org/en/ourfaith/articles/article8076.asp

Thanks Father.

I'm confused. I'm asking a question about a serious moral issue and about Christian Tradition. How can the Orthodox only be able to tell me that there are different opinions? My understanding is that the Orthodox do not believe in doctrinal development. And my understanding is that until the 1960s--roughly--the Orthodox generally condemned all contraception. As the Catholic Church still does, and as the Protestants did until 1930. I read that when Humanae Vitae came out, the Ecumenical Patriarch, Athenagoras, endorsed the Pope's teaching.

 

[prodromos]

Hi Father Jim,

I respect the Eastern Orthodox very much for their beliefs and love of Mary and Jesus, but I believe the Catholic Church is right about purgatory and the Papacy, etc, and I've read that the Orthodox have moved away from Apostolic tradition about contraception.

What is your take, if I may ask, on the issue of contraception?

Natural Family Planning, when used to avoid pregnancy, is contraception by another name. However, a number of surveys demonstrate that Catholic women often use other forms of contraception.
Personally, I don't know any Orthodox who use contraception, its not the kind of thing I would ask someone and no one has volunteered such information. I can only tell you that my wife and I don't.
What I can tell you is that faithful Orthodox abstain from sexual relations at minimum a little over half the year due to the proscribed fasts in the Church calendar. Add to that additional days fasting the day before receiving Holy Communion, and it doesn't leave much room for NFP as an option if for health or financial reasons, a couple need to avoid pregnancy.

 

[prodromos]

Patricius79, perhaps you can explain to me how the annulment of marriages in the Catholic Church (Latin rite) due to some deficiency in the intent of one or both of the couple, is not in essence the heresy of Donatism, which has been rightly condemned by the Church?

 

[fatherjimparker]

Thanks Father.

I'm confused. I'm asking a question about a serious moral issue and about Christian Tradition. How can the Orthodox only be able to tell me that there are different opinions? My understanding is that the Orthodox do not believe in doctrinal development. And my understanding is that until the 1960s--roughly--the Orthodox generally condemned all contraception. As the Catholic Church still does, and as the Protestants did until 1930. I read that when Humanae Vitae came out, the Ecumenical Patriarch, Athenagoras, endorsed the Pope's teaching.

I'm afraid I'm not up to speed on that. In the 60s, I just wanted.....well, never mind.

On all major issues, the Eastern Orthodox churches follow the decisions of the 7 great councils. (The Oriental Oriental Orthodox didn't accept Chalcedon because they didn't think it solved the problem created by Nestorius.) At that time, there was no such thing as a "birth control pill" or an IUD. Modern technology has created new challenges which all churches must address.

jim

 

[patricius79]

Natural Family Planning, when used to avoid pregnancy, is contraception by another name. However, a number of surveys demonstrate that Catholic women often use other forms of contraception.
Personally, I don't know any Orthodox who use contraception, its not the kind of thing I would ask someone and no one has volunteered such information. I can only tell you that my wife and I don't.
What I can tell you is that faithful Orthodox abstain from sexual relations at minimum a little over half the year due to the proscribed fasts in the Church calendar. Add to that additional days fasting the day before receiving Holy Communion, and it doesn't leave much room for NFP as an option if for health or financial reasons, a couple need to avoid pregnancy.

Yes, many many Catholics use contraception and, in my opinion, many priests are remiss in preaching about it.

But what I'm asking is this: what EXACTLY is the constant teaching of the Orthodox Tradition, from the beginning, as to contraception?

Is it that contraception is always wrong?

Is it that contraception is not always wrong?

Or is it neither? (If it is something else, please explain)

 

[patricius79]

Patricius79, perhaps you can explain to me how the annulment of marriages in the Catholic Church (Latin rite) due to some deficiency in the intent of one or both of the couple, is not in essence the heresy of Donatism, which has been rightly condemned by the Church?

I don't know about that issue at all. It sounds like a good question. You could ask someone on Catholic answers.

 

[patricius79]

I'm afraid I'm not up to speed on that. In the 60s, I just wanted.....well, never mind.

On all major issues, the Eastern Orthodox churches follow the decisions of the 7 great councils. (The Oriental Oriental Orthodox didn't accept Chalcedon because they didn't think it solved the problem created by Nestorius.) At that time, there was no such thing as a "birth control pill" or an IUD. Modern technology has created new challenges which all churches must address.

jim

Hi Father,

I don't see how modern technology which change a moral principle. There were contraceptives at the time of the early Church. I just want to know what the Orthodox have constantly taught about contraception, through the centuries.

 

[prodromos]

I don't know about that issue at all. It sounds like a good question. You could ask someone on Catholic answers.

I did. No one wants to touch it.
Seeing as you seem to wish to pick on what you consider flaws in Orthodox teaching, I think it is only fair that you respond to the same regarding the Catholic Church, don't you?

 

[fatherjimparker]

<<Yes, many many Catholics use contraception and, in my opinion, many priests are remiss in preaching about it.

But what I'm asking is this: what EXACTLY is the constant teaching of the Orthodox Tradition, from the beginning, as to contraception?

Is it that contraception is always wrong?

Is it that contraception is not always wrong?

Or is it neither? (If it is something else, please explain)>>

In the beginning (2000 years ago) people couldn't go to the corner store and buy condoms or to Planned Parenthood and get birth control pills. Therefore there can be no constant teaching from the beginning about things which did not exist in the beginning.

And, contraception is not an area in which I have a good understanding of the church's position. Having come to Orthodoxy late in life, I have not had to deal with it.

 

[patricius79]

I did. No one wants to touch it.
Seeing as you seem to wish to pick on what you consider flaws in Orthodox teaching, I think it is only fair that you respond to the same regarding the Catholic Church, don't you?

Sure, if I knew about it. Sorry I don't. Are you saying you don't have an answer about the issue of contraception either?

Peace,
Pat