|
0 members (),
261
guests, and
25
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums26
Topics35,219
Posts415,299
Members5,881
| |
Most Online3,380
Dec 29th, 2019
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,264
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,264 |
Borislav,
I see your basic point, except for the fact that Unitarianism does not origiate with one of the 5 great apostolic sees of the Pentarchy nor is it the Church of Sts. Peter and Paul. Additionally, Unitarian theology contradicts the basic tenents of Christian orthodoxy. Rome accepts the teachings and the authority of the first six ecumenical councils.
So, the underlying issue is, if the ancient and venerable apostolic Church of Rome and her reigning bishop is to be regarded as heretical, on what basis and by what ecumenical authority has he been declared as such?
No disrespect to the fledgling Bulgarian hierarch, but I'd like to see him either defend his position or repent of it.
God bless,
Gordo
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,760
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,760 |
In these forums it has been written that violations of the Canons establised by the Councils are very serious and should be dealt with severely, as the young Archbishop of Bulgaria appears to believe. In Church History actions by councils have been reversed; some actions in future centuries seem to be nonapplicable. For instance the quote below is from the Orthodox Synod of Jerusalem, which condemned the Calvinist influence. (Note that in this interpretation "Catholic" and "Orthodox" are used interchangeably.) QUESTION I.
Ought the Divine Scriptures to be read in the vulgar tongue by all Christians?
No. For that all Scripture is divinely-inspired and profitable {cf. 2 Timothy 3:16} we know, and is of such necessity, that without the same it is impossible to be Orthodox at all. Nevertheless they should not be read by all, but only by those who with fitting research have inquired <153> into the deep things of the Spirit, and who know in what manner the Divine Scriptures ought to be searched, and taught, and in fine read. But to such as are not so exercised, or who cannot distinguish, or who understand only literally, or in any other way contrary to Orthodoxy what is contained in the Scriptures, the Catholic Church, as knowing by experience the mischief arising therefrom, forbiddeth the reading of the same. So that it is permitted to every Orthodox to hear indeed the Scriptures, that he may believe with the heart unto righteousness, and confess with the mouth unto salvation; {Romans 10:10} but to read some parts of the Scriptures, and especially of the Old [Testament], is forbidden for the aforesaid reasons and others of the like sort. For it is the same thing thus to prohibit persons not exercised thereto reading all the Sacred Scriptures, as to require infants to abstain from strong meats.
_________
Quoted below is one of the Apostolic Canons Accepted by the Council of Trullo:
[quote] Canon LIV.
If any of the clergy be found eating in a tavern, let him be excommunicated, unless he has been constrained by necessity, on a journey, to lodge in an inn. ----------- Do you know of any deacon who has a business or practice? He in violation of Canon 37 and should be deposed. What would the Archbishop say about these violators. Fr. Deacon Paul
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,133
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,133 |
No disrespect Fr. Deacon but.....
A clergy member eating in a tavern, and Papal Supremecy and infalibility....
A deacon having a buisness or job, and the Purgatory and Immaculate Conception....
Surely you see the problem with that argument.
Last edited by Borislav; 02/24/07 11:53 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,760
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,760 |
My point, Borislav, is that if one is an ideologue who rules out any discussion or a hearing for the "guilty" party should he not apply it to all the canons so as not to compromise himself.
One as high ranking as a Metropolitan must have a "guard on his lips."
That is all.
Since you mentioned Purgatory, I was just thinking about this this morning and want to know your thoughts.
When a person dies, and is judged, if he is not guilty of a serious sin, but has many less serious sins, does he not need to be "purged" of these impurities?
See, what major difference is there from a "purging" state and "purgatory?"
Your brother in Christ,
Fr. Deacon Paul
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,133
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,133 |
You certainly raise some interesting points Fr. Deacon.
I, myself do not subscribe to this Pope-heretic thing....
At the same time it is very clear that some of the things that Rome stands for are very questionable. I can not in good heart condemn this Bishop. I do agree that calling the Pope a heretic cuts of any chance of diologue instead of nurturing it. He should have said that some of the things that Roman Catholicism teaches can be considered heretical as they apply to Orthodoxy.... That would probobly be a better way to put it I guess.
The canons you mentioned however do not put in question the very basis of Orthodoxy, on the other hand Rome not only puts them in question it completely shatters them.
Last edited by Borislav; 02/26/07 02:27 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
