• For users new and old: the forum rules were streamlined when we transitioned to the new software. Please ensure that you are familiar with them. Continued use of the forum means that you (a) know the rules, and (b) pledge that you'll abide by them. For more information, check out the OrthodoxChristianity.Net Rules section. (There are only 2 threads there - Rules, and Administrative Structure.)

"apostalic" Church

DerekMK

Protokentarchos
Joined
Oct 4, 2002
Messages
5,437
Reaction score
0
Points
0
This term "apostalic" church gets thrown around to describe various conservititve protestants or Oriental Orthodox. What exactly does this mean when ecumenically minded people use this term? Would anyone who uses the term wish to clarify what it means?
 

Serge

Archon
Joined
Oct 3, 2002
Messages
3,310
Reaction score
44
Points
48
Age
55
Website
sergesblog.blogspot.com
Faith
Catholic
Jurisdiction
Ukrainian Archdiocese of Philadelphia
First, I admit the notion of apostolicity outside the borders within which one puts the Church is a Catholic one. The Orthodox will go far as to admit ‘valid form’, etc. but are agnostic about grace outside Orthodoxy.

My use of ‘apostolic’ mirrors what appear to be Catholicism’s criteria for recognition of orders and Communion: basic credal orthodoxy (such as on the Trinity, divinity of Christ, hypostatic union, virgin birth and physical resurrection), a lineage of apostolic succession and — here’s the kicker — historically consistent, unbroken teaching and practice about the Eucharist (belief in the Real Presence — that the Sacrament IS the body, blood, soul and divinity of Christ).

Any church that has all these is seen unequivocally as apostolic — ‘valid’ orders and ‘valid’ Eucharist, in western Catholic-speak — by the Catholic Church. Such is how it views the Orthodox Church, the Oriental Churches, the Assyrian Church and small Western schisms that have maintained orthodox beliefs on these matters and have retained the form of the all-male apostolic ministry (the only such group in America is the small Polish National Catholic Church, descendents of an 1800s immigrant schism).

Such are Churches with a capital C from this POV.

The Orthodox, again, would concede that the forms are there in these churches but will add that the only guarantee of grace from their POV is to bring these forms into the community of the Orthodox Church.

There are also some Protestant churches that use the word apostolic in their names and as their denominational name but I don’t know what they mean by that. They don’t mean the same thing by it that we do here.
 

Dan Lauffer

Sr. Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2002
Messages
188
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
74
Location
Joliet, Illinois
Serge,

"There are also some Protestant churches that use the word apostolic in their names and as their denominational name but I don’t know what they mean by that. They don’t mean the same thing by it that we do here."

It usually mean Pentecostal or some variation of this. They believe that the gifts of the Holy Spirit, especially other tongues, is still manifested in those churches that are truly apostolic.

Dan Lauffer
 

Serge

Archon
Joined
Oct 3, 2002
Messages
3,310
Reaction score
44
Points
48
Age
55
Website
sergesblog.blogspot.com
Faith
Catholic
Jurisdiction
Ukrainian Archdiocese of Philadelphia
It usually mean Pentecostal or some variation of this.
Thanks, Dan. That’s what I thought it meant but wasn’t sure.
 

SamB

High Elder
Joined
Oct 3, 2002
Messages
787
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Apostolicity: I view this as Serge, who has frequently made his views on "Churchness" known, does. He sees his Church to be the one Church and chooses to exercise his freedom of opinion granted in Orthodoxy to ponder over the spiritual state of the other Churches.

Aside from the fact that Catholicism officially holds the view Serge here espouses, my subscribing to the same view can also be traced to the cultural mileu I hail from, where most Christians are Apostolic, and as a minority, we exhibit a solidarity on the level of the common people that is unusual in areas like the Balkans or North America, a domain of intellectual converts and spiritual seekers whose ties to their faiths are more convictional than familial or ethnic, which I submit makes them more aware than woefully ignorant of the deadly catastrophe known as AmChurch and N.O.ism to which ethnics are more vulnerable.

The Levant is one of the few places where the word "Christian" as opposed to "Orthodox" and "Catholic", is not shyed away from, and functions as a synonym for an Apostolic. The Eucharist is the Eucharist, and most would not bother to deny its reality in the other Churches, of which they aren't members. Familial ties by marriage is another reason. There are even cases where a child is baptized in a Church other than his own, even one outside of his own communion, particularly in famous ancient shrines like Said Naya where it is customary for people to make vows to have children baptized there. Even some Muslims baptize their children over there.

In IC XC
Samer
 
H

Hypo-Ortho

Guest
Samer<<Even some Muslims baptize their children over there.>>

And THIS is "Apostolic"?? ???

Hypo-Ortho
 

SamB

High Elder
Joined
Oct 3, 2002
Messages
787
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Hypo-Ortho said:
<<Even some Muslims baptize their children over there.>>

And THIS is "Apostolic"?? ???
No, I'm only giving you an idea of the cultural climate as it exists in some areas. Serge has a link to a Dalrymple column that descibes a scene of Muslims--making up the majority of the worshippers in the church--praying in prostration inside Said Naya.

In IC XC
Samer
 
J

jude

Guest
Muslim children in the Balkans are sometimes "baptized" by relatives; its "magic" you know!

Play by your own rules...?

Jude
 

DerekMK

Protokentarchos
Joined
Oct 4, 2002
Messages
5,437
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Since the term "Orthodox in communion with Rome" has been banned from the forums, I am curious after seeing the ecumenist definition of apostalic why non Orthodox are allowed to be called that on this forum. It is the same thing, reducing Orthodoxy to any "church" with smells and bell (to borrow the RC lingo). How can Apostalic nature of Orthodoxy be seperated from her and that term given to "churches" that teach papal infallibility, dual procession of the Holy Spirit etc. Are they novel doctrines worthy of the holy titlte apostalic? Also, why adopt the Latins ecclesiology...legal formulae is all that matters in valid orders, not possesing the True faith?
 

Orthodoc

Archon
Joined
Oct 3, 2002
Messages
2,526
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
81
Location
USA
[Since the term "Orthodox in communion with Rome" has been banned from the forums, I am curious after seeing the ecumenist definition of apostalic why non Orthodox are allowed to be called that on this forum.]

When was the term 'Orthodox In Communion With Rome" banned from this list?

There are those like myself that abhor the term for various reasons that have been stated here more than once. There are also those like myself that will continue to speak out against it whenever it is used here and elsewhere. But there is no one (including myself) that has demanded it be banned from this site.

Nothing should be banned. This is a discussion group. That is the point.

Orthodoc
 

DerekMK

Protokentarchos
Joined
Oct 4, 2002
Messages
5,437
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Maybe I am confused, but I thought people were asked not to use the term as it is offensive to Orthodox a few months back. If I am mistaken, I apologize.

Perhaps banned is not the word I was looking for. But I still don't understand how Orthodox can called an heretical group apostalic. I mean no dis-respect to these groups (I am a former Latin myself and am gratefull for the good things I learned there and hold no grudge). In the end the only reason that I can see for this is the branch theory and ecumenism.
 

Linus7

Archon
Joined
Jan 30, 2003
Messages
2,780
Reaction score
0
Points
0
My understanding of the term "apostolic" would limit it to the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church founded by Jesus Himself (Matt.16:18-19). That would be the Holy Orthodox Church, since she alone has maintained the Apostolic Tradition without change or innovation.

There are other groups within Christendom that have a valid historical apostolic succession of bishops but who have introduced obvious innovations into Christian teaching. Thus they have removed themselves from the one true Church and cannot claim true apostolic status.

The Roman Church is the chief example of these latter groups.

This is not meant to be offensive, and I pray for the reunion of the Roman Church with the Holy Orthodox Church. But such a reunion must proceed from a recognition by the Roman Pontiff of his need for repentance and a return to his rightful place as "first among equals" within the college of bishops. It would also necessitate a repudiation by Rome of the many novelties and errors she has introduced into Christian teaching.
 

Anastasios

Merarches
Staff member
Administrator
Joined
Oct 3, 2002
Messages
10,579
Reaction score
32
Points
48
Location
Reston, VA
Website
www.anastasioshudson.com
Faith
Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction
Greek Old Calendarist
What we said was that the term "Orthodox in Communion with Rome" was offensive to Orthodox so the term "Eastern (Rite) Catholic" should be substituted. If you wish to use that term for Eastern Catholics, be my guest, but you'll encounter lots of opposition!

In Christ,

anastasios
ADMINISTRATOR

(that's how I sign my posts when speaking officially, and I make the post blue.)
 

Orthodoc

Archon
Joined
Oct 3, 2002
Messages
2,526
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
81
Location
USA
[What we said was that the term "Orthodox in Communion with Rome" was offensive to Orthodox so the term "Eastern (Rite) Catholic" should be substituted. If you wish to use that term for Eastern Catholics, be my guest, but you'll encounter lots of opposition!]

Exactly! Not only is it offensive but an oxymoron to boot. And it will be corrected by myself as well asothers.

Orthodoc
 
Top