Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Either, or, I don't trust anything written...there is always something deeper in meaning to fool the average....Anything can be written and anything can be debunked....Things like this are why the truth seekers can get sent on crazy roads....there is only one truth....
I might even sell you a bridge in New York for cheap.
For me the problems go far past the tone of the author. I think there are some serious problems with the man's rational faculties. I think the thing that stands out to me the most is that the author conflates all Popes into one person.
The author surprised me in going off on the same tired and dishonest tactics of protestant anti-Catholic writers. This includes making statement against something that implies the Catholic Church believes it to be so.
Yes... is adding gasoline to the flame really necessary?Rome gets a taste of her own medicine.
I honestly didn't receive this impression from the article. I didn't receive the message that all popes should be conflated into a single person, but that all popes should be conflated into a single office. Crucial distinction here. All Roman popes since 1014 or so have willfully occupied a non-Christian office. Predictably (and inevitably) this sort of tyrannical usurpation has led to periodic persecutions throughout the history of the Church against other Christian bodies. (Not to mention many other problems.)
The papacy replaces Christ as the Head of the Church on earth. And as such, the papacy should be condemned for what it is.
The Popes desire is one: to seize us and place us under his dominion and authority and thus succeed in robbing us of our freedom in Christ. He has said that he will seek a new way to exercise his authority as a robber who tells you that he will find a new way to rob your house.
The Pope has always sought to spiritually plunder and rob Orthodox Christians of their true Faith. He has demonstrated this many times, especially during the Fourth Crusade, when the Papists sacked the City, raping and slaughtering its inhabitants. Later, his soldiers of fortune violated the Holy Mountain and massacred many monastics. What was the monastics crime? They refused to pray with the Papists and pay homage to their unholy leader, the Pope. The Pope went on to invent Unia, wherein Orthodox Christians receive significant material help from the Pope and keep all their traditions, but lose their Orthodoxy, for they were forced to commemorate the (un)Holy Father, the Pope of Rome. These ex-Orthodox traitors became know as Uniates. What is their goal since abandoning the true Faith? They join the Pope and wage war against the faithful Orthodoxa war that continues to this day. The instant they accepted this offer and fell into the trap, they lost the grace of the Holy Spirit as well as their eternal salvation, for they chose the Pope in preference to Jesus Christ. They are despised by Catholics and shunned by the Orthodox Christians; they have accordingly surrendered their eternal inheritance found only within the true Faith, the Orthodox Faith. This is what will happen to all Orthodox Christians who join the Pope. It is spiritual suicide, for Christ will place them among the goats.
The Pope Provides Clarity of His True Position
The Pope has indeed cleared the air.
Dialogue with this heretical enemy is forbidden by Holy Scripture. A man that is a heretic, after the first and second admonishment, reject, knowing that such a man is subverted and sins being self-condemned. (Tit 3:10-11).
And to briefly address the point just made by our Catholic friend:
Our point is not that Roman popes are corrupt and Orthodox bishops are not. In fact, Orthodoxy vociferously supports the recognition that all men (including her own) are inherently fallible, and thus capable of corruption, especially when vested with more power than they ought to have. This is precisely why we condemn the papacy.
Let's please not oversimplify our critiques.
If we're going to have a problem with the author, then let's have a substantive one. Anyone who is worried about the author's "tone" needs to re-read the polemical writings of the Fathers against the heretics. They make this author look like child's play.
nutroll, I'd like to interact with your post, but I have a project to get back to. I'll get back with you in a bit.
I was going to say earlier that the author's tone is reminiscent of Jack Chick and the kind folks at jesus-is-savior.com.
I have major problems with the papacy myself (obviously), but there are far better ways of expressing them than by sounding like some hateful anti-Catholic protestant.
If we're going to have a problem with the author, then let's have a substantive one. Anyone who is worried about the author's "tone" needs to re-read the polemical writings of the Fathers against the heretics. They make this author look like child's play.
Apples and oranges. Orthodoxy (as you know) does not challenge ecclesiastical infallibility; it challenges non-conciliarism. We believe in conciliar infallibility, Rome doesn't. Rome severed the 'head' (the Pope) from the Body (the rest of the Church).The Pope, just as the orthodox bishops believe, that every man is fallible. The Pope is fallible, the Pope's statements are (generally) fallible. However, the Pope has, just as other apostles and their successors (Bishops) have, the ability to speak infallibly on matters of faith when inspired by the Holy Spirit.
And precisely which Nicene Creed are we talking about here? I mean... ya know...while we're now talking about counciliar infallibility.The Orthodox Church does not condemn the See of Rome because of a shared belief. If they did, the bible would be fallible as would its seven ecumenical councils.
Though I agree that the author is indeed condemning the papacy, his words make it clear that he hangs the transgressions of all Popes on this Pope. Look at one section of what he says:
[/font][/color]
which Pope? the current Pope? Why not say, the Papacy's desire is one? Because he wants to further indict this Pope beyond his actual words. Then the paragraph immediately following this:
[/font][/color]
Again, he makes no attempt to clarify that he is now talking about Popes rather than one Pope in particular. He could easily identify individual Popes, and further clarify that he is intending to show a trend within the Papacy. That argument I would not have a problem with. But again, he wants you to see Pope Benedict as personally embodying these transgressions so that no one will have any dialogue with him. And to show this, I quote the next two lines:
This is now referring directly to Pope Benedict and his words. He is intentionally trying to point to all the previous Popes as being one and the same as this one so that the statement that he made immediately preceding all of this will make sense to the reader:
I think it is true intellectual dishonesty, and the sad thing is that there are legitimate cases to be made concerning the Papacy, and the author chooses instead to make a dishonest attack.
[/size][/color][/font]
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?