Joshua Elie Blachier
prije 2 godine
Latins are still conflating Peter with Rome I see. Let's
ignore the fact that Peter and Paul founded and led Antioch first, and that
Alexandria was founded through Peter before Rome, or that Pope Gregory I
explicitly stated that the authority of Peter lies in all three Sees as one See
of Peter.
Rome will never understand the Church until it understands
that it is not synonymous with Peter.
ElasticGiraffe
prije 1 godinu
@jackie disspain I listen to EWTN Radio fairly regularly,
including and especially Catholic Answers, and I'm well acquainted with church
history. I'm also familiar with the evolution of papal self-assertion, from
Damasus I through Leo the Great, Gregory VII, Innocent III, Boniface VIII,
Urban VIII, and Pius IX. So you have some audacity calling me "willfully
ignorant" and afraid of Roman Catholic websites. The biblical argument for
papal supremacy is simply and obviously overrated by your church's apologists,
as anyone not blinded by prejudice--and bound by a faith requirement to affirm
any development in Latin church teaching for the reasons determined by the
Roman magisterium--can see. 10:46 Bonnie Johnstone
Bonnie Johnstone
prije 1 godinu
Latin Mass Choir
First among equals was the norm in the council of Patriarchs until Western Rome wanted more power over the other Patriarchs. Even Peter never did this. It was James in Jerusalem who headed the first council and at Antioch Peter did not lead by himself. Christ never said upon Peter I will build my Church, but this rock (which many interpret as example). 10:58to je rasprava između Pravoslavnih i katolikavodi se 2 godine vidim na videu o 1054. od Rivsaima neki Škot pravoslavni koji se raspravljaja sam se prije raspravljao na onom videu o 1242. bitka na ledu, o Grgi IX i inkvizicijii to s nekim pravoslavcemwhat great Vasilios was saying even from the 4 century and its before the chisma((If the wrath of God continues against us, what help can the Western arrogance and arrogance offer us? They neither know the truth nor want and tolerate to learn it, but as they are hypered by unspeakable suspicion ... they are afraid of those who tell them the truth and support the heresy with their attitude. I even think of writing to the first (Pope of Rome Damascus) and a leading of them ... that they neither know the truth nor admit to follow the path through which they could learn it ... and not to regard it as a virtue the pride, which is sin enough to create, by itself, was hating God "(Great Vasilios , EI 1, 304).Three centuries later, in 680 AD, the Sixth Ecumenical Synod indicated to the Catholics some innovations, but they did not matter. The West proceeded to separate.
By the time we reached the 9th century, when, to the
surprise of not only the Eastern but also the Western ones, the Pope wanted to
appear "the divine right" (!), The ruler of the Church and the whole
world, above all the Patriarchs and Ecumenical Councils (who recognized the
pride of honor, the lead between equals, however, he demanded superior
authority) !!! From ambition he was stirred up in the internal affairs of the
Church of Constantinople, when the Patriarch of Constantinople was Ignatius and
Photios.
From that time onwards, because the Westerners were
increasingly moving away from the Holy Tradition of the Church of the Holy
Christ, the Easterners did not agree with their arbitrary innovations. The
Schism in the Church of Christ was now more than visible.
Finally, in 1054 we reached the final separation. The
following happened: A three-member delegation, supposedly supposedly sent by
Pope Leo the 9th (who had meanwhile died), after provoking many episodes in
Constantinople, rushed to the Holy Sacred Sacred Church during the Divine
Worship, and Cardinal Overt left a document to the Holy See, with which he then
ordained the then Orthodox Patriarch Constantine Michael Kürularius and all the
Orthodox as heretics!
Since then the Catholics have ceased to communicate with the
Eastern Orthodox Church, as well as with the four other Patriarchates, a sad
fact that contrasts with the Evangelical Law, who does not want to have Schism
in the Church of Christ.And we come to today, in 2012, where the Catholics,
instead of revisiting their attitude and coming back from where they left, ask
the Orthodox Church to refuse the ancient Holy of the Faith and to submit to
the Pope of Rome!
But let's look at our basic dogmatic differences with the
Catholics:
1) In the Symbol of Faith ("Believe"), they added
arbitrarily the phrase "and from the Son", a foreign teaching not in
the Gospel. On the contrary, our Lord Jesus Christ, He clearly states that the
Holy Spirit rather than the Father is coming (according to the Gospel of John,
Chapter 15, Section 26), which the First and Second Ecumenical Synods
recognized and validated.
2) Catholics argue that the Pope has the infallibility! The
Apollo of Catholics, in 1870, during the first Vatican Synod, recognized the
infallibility. That is, when the Pope speaks of faith from the earth, he is
sure!
But the idea that the Pope does not make mistakes is
contrary to the Bible and the Apostolic Tradition because it means Absolute
Divine Being!
We know that Absolutely God-inspired and therefore
infallible, were only the Holy Apostles, who were especially enlightened by the
Holy Spirit, and they spoke and wrote what they saw and heard (Luke the Gospel,
Chapter 6, Section 10, and John the Gospel , Chapter 14, Section 26, and
Chapter 16, Section 13).On the other hand, the apostles Peter and Paul, the
First Priests, never asked for their own will, but they were discussing enough,
all together the Enlightened Holy Apostles, and then ended up in their Divine
Conclusions, and never in the dictatorial way the Pope, who has come to
proclaim himself the successor of Apostle Peter and a representative of Christ,
the visible head of the Church (the so-called "Pope's Protector") and
a sure-footed teacher of Christian Faith !!! And this is so, while the New
Testament clearly states that only Christ is the Head and the Chief of the
Church, both the Armed here on Earth and the Triumphant Church in Heaven
(Ephesians Letter, Chapter 1, Paragraphs 22-23 ).
3) The Catholics imposed on their clergy obligatory
celibacy! While, according to the New Testament and the entire Church
Ecclesiastical Tradition, the Cleric is free to choose between Marriage and
Celibacy.
4) They teach that there is purifying fire, which is not
mentioned anywhere, neither in the Bible nor in the Holy Ecclesiastical
Tradition! That is, the souls after death are cleansed of stains of sins that
were not cleansed when they lived with the body on Earth!On the other hand, the
New Testament teaches us clearly that the Lord Jesus Christ, with His Crossing
Sacrifice, has been "Sacrifice of our sins", that is, the grace of
Christ that came from His Cross-Sacrifice, He gives the remission of the sins
for as long as we are on earth and confess (John 1, Catholic Letter, Chapter 2,
Section 2).
And yet, when we leave this life, there will be no
purification of our souls, except their Judgment by the Lord.
holy tradition allows the ceremony's called mnimosina and
the prayers for the dead in Church and in private especially for the dead we
pray since they cannot help them shelf's
Nema komentara:
Objavi komentar