Traditional Catholicism

Alpha60

Taxiarches
Joined
Mar 14, 2017
Messages
5,793
Reaction score
2
Points
0
Location
Alphaville Zone Sud
Vanhyo said:
who was not yet styled as Pope,
This sounds to me like a wild conspiracy
Its a matter of fact.  Until the 6th century, only the Patriarch of Alexandria was styled as Papem, meaning "Father" or "Pope", a tradition in the Egyptian Church dating from the 2nd century.  The Bishop of Rome was the Bishop of Rome, considered by all to be an archbishop and patriarch of the West.  The Patriarch of Constantinople did not adopt "Ecumemical" until around 600 AD, thus receiving the scorn of Pope St. Gregory of Rome.

It is also not entirely clear when the word Patriarch became de rigeur for Antioch and Jerusalem, and Comstantinople for that matter; these were always archbishops, and were regarded as the leading, autocephalous bishops.  Virtually from their inception, the Archbishop of Cyprus, the Catholicos of the East, and the Catholicoi of Armenia and Georgia had autocephaly as well, but Ethiopia, which, like Armenia and Georgia, converted primarily in the 4th century, was not autocephalous with its own Patriarch until 1958.

Now, in all of these cases, it makes sense, save one, in that there was a language barrier from the beginning (the Church of the East spoke Syriac, the Armenians spoke Armenian, and the Georgians spoke Georgian).  What I don't quite grasp is why Cyprus always had autocephalous status; perhaps travel to Cyprus was a bother vs. travel between Antioch, Alexandria and Jerusalem, requiring sailing across the deep blue Mediterranean vs. sailing along the coast.

Rome managed to have the largest territory, especially after Archbishop Victor changed the language of the Roman Church from Greek to Latin.  He, like Pope Leo, also unsuccessfully tried to claim Papal supremacy, but was ignored or rebuffed by the other regional Patriarchs.
 

Vanhyo

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Mar 26, 2015
Messages
1,150
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Bulgaria
Pope=papa=father=отец

It is how we address ministers in the priesthood

So to say the bishop of Rome wasn't addressed in such manner by the ordinary folks till the forth century sounds to me like a Protestant conspiracy argument.
The Bishop of Rome was the Bishop of Rome, considered by all to be an archbishop and patriarch
What do you think a "patriarch" is ? It is chief father of the family.

A later developments began to distinguish between the two titles, but they seem to be essentially the same
 

minasoliman

Stratopedarches
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
May 24, 2004
Messages
20,198
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
NJ
Is the title "Pope" really relevant to this discussion.  I think both Orthodox and Catholics agree there's nothing "supremacist" about calling someone "Pope".  Unless I'm mistaken here.
 

Sharbel

OC.Net Guru
Joined
May 31, 2017
Messages
1,600
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Vanhyo said:
Sharbel said:
Indeed, we are visited every now and then by some of these, who have no qualms about telling our pastor that they are confident that his Holy Orders are valid, unlike of those Novus Ordo Romans...  ::)
But I suppose your pastors don't believe that the seat is empty, so if u 2 don't share the same faith, why are you giving them communion ?
Because it's not like they all wear a badge stating their sedevacantism or wear it on their sleeves.
 

Alpha60

Taxiarches
Joined
Mar 14, 2017
Messages
5,793
Reaction score
2
Points
0
Location
Alphaville Zone Sud
minasoliman said:
Is the title "Pope" really relevant to this discussion.  I think both Orthodox and Catholics agree there's nothing "supremacist" about calling someone "Pope".  Unless I'm mistaken here.
I agree on this point.  I just prefer to stress the historical point that the only archbishops formally called Papem in the Fourth Century were the Popes of Alexandria and all Africa, such as Sts. Peter, Alexander and Athanasius the Apostolic.
 

Čtec

Jr. Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2018
Messages
35
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Traditional Catholics have fiery faith and are honest with themselves, with the Scriptures and the teachings of the Church and the Fathers, Doctors as they would often call them, and that is that there is no Salvation outside the Catholic Church.
This is hard to believe in, because Christian Unity has failed greatly.
 

juliogb

High Elder
Joined
Jan 14, 2015
Messages
976
Reaction score
3
Points
0
Visiting CMRI mass will be worship through phony apostolic orders, if this make any sense, since the sedevacantist religion tells us the the gates of hell have defeated Rome and the Pope, and the apostolic succession in there have ceased, therefore they resort to take the apostolic succession from "old catholic" in order to validate their own religion.
Do they really defend the idea that the gates of hell really defeated true catholiciscm (even for a while), or they use some sort of ''invisible true roman church'' kind of argument?
 

Volnutt

Hoplitarches
Joined
May 22, 2011
Messages
15,089
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
34
Vanhyo said:
How do they worship God? Like every group outside the church but still having the Mass.
They have 2 options
- stay Home
- visit CMRI mass

Staying home = no worship

Visiting CMRI mass will be worship through phony apostolic orders, if this make any sense, since the sedevacantist religion tells us the the gates of hell have defeated Rome and the Pope, and the apostolic succession in there have ceased, therefore they resort to take the apostolic succession from "old catholic" in order to validate their own religion.

In other words, worship/mass with fake priesthood

So, Mr Sedevacantis is condemned by his own copy/paste macro.
Pretty sure the Catholic Church since Vatican I was clear that Old Catholics still have valid orders, just not licit ones (they "filled out all the proper forms," as it were). So a CMRI or otherwise independent priest could still say, by Catholic logic, that he has valid ordination from an Old Catholic bishop (or a Thục or Lefebvre line bishop) and the licitness comes from his own correct faith.

Still kind of janky imo, but it's not quite the same as just laying hands on yourself.
 

sedevacantist

High Elder
Joined
Mar 2, 2013
Messages
701
Reaction score
0
Points
0
juliogb said:
Visiting CMRI mass will be worship through phony apostolic orders, if this make any sense, since the sedevacantist religion tells us the the gates of hell have defeated Rome and the Pope, and the apostolic succession in there have ceased, therefore they resort to take the apostolic succession from "old catholic" in order to validate their own religion.
Do they really defend the idea that the gates of hell really defeated true catholiciscm (even for a while), or they use some sort of ''invisible true roman church'' kind of argument?
o, indefectibility (the promise of Christ
to always be with His Church, and that the
gates of Hell will not prevail against it) means that the Church will, until the end of time, remain
essentially what she is.  The indefectibility of the Church requires that
at least a remnant
of the
Church will exist until the end of the world, and
that a true pope will never authoritatively teach
error to the entire Church.  It does not ex
clude antipopes posing as popes (as we’ve had
numerous times in the past, even in Rome) or a co
unterfeit sect that reduces the adherents of the
true Catholic Church to a remnant in the last days.  This is precisely
what is predicted
to occur in
the last days and what happene
d during the Arian crisis. 
Further, it should be noted that the Church has
defined that heretics are the gates of Hell which
Our Lord mentioned in Matthew 16!
Pope Vigilius,
Second Council of Constantinople
, 553:
“... we bear in mind what was promised about the holy Church and Him who said
the
gates of Hell will not prevail against it
(by these we understand the death-dealing
tongues of heretics)
...”
2
Pope St. Leo IX, Sept. 2, 1053: “The holy Chur
ch built upon a rock, that is Christ, and
upon
Peter
... because by
the gates of Hell, that is, by the disputations of heretics
which
lead the vain to destruction, it would never be overcome.”
3
St. Thomas Aquinas (+1262): “Wisdom may fill the hearts of the faithful,
and put to
silence the dread folly of heretics, fittin
gly referred to as the gates of Hell.”
4
(
Intro. To
Catena Aurea
.)
Notice that heretics are the gates of Hell.  Here
tics are not members of the Church.  That’s why a
heretic could never be a pope.  Th
e gates of Hell (heretics) coul
d never have authority over the
Church of Christ.  It’s not those who expose th
e heretical Vatican II antipopes who are asserting that the gates of Hell have prevailed against the Church; it’s those who obstinately defend them
as popes, even though they can clearl
y be proven to be manifest heretics.
Pope Innocent III,
Eius exemplo
, Dec. 18, 1208:
“By the heart we believe and by the mouth we confess
the one Church,
not of heretics
,
but the Holy Roman, Catholic, and Apostolic Church outside of which we believe that no
one is saved.”
5
St. Francis De Sales (17
th
century), Doctor of the Church,
The Catholic Controversy
, pp.
305-306:  "
Now when he [the Pope] is explicitly a heretic, he falls
ipso facto
from his
dignity and out of the Church
..."
There is not one teaching of the Catholic Church th
at can be quoted which is contrary to the fact
that there is presently a counterfeit sect which ha
s reduced the true Catholic Church to a remnant
in the days of the Great Apostasy, which is presid
ed over by antipopes wh
o have falsely posed as
popes.  Those who assert that the Vatican II sect
is the Catholic Church assert that the Catholic
Church officially endorses false religions and fals
e doctrines.  This is impossible and would mean
that the gates of Hell have prevailed against the Catholic Church.
 

Volnutt

Hoplitarches
Joined
May 22, 2011
Messages
15,089
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
34
This copypasta routine of yours is really annoying to read (and possibly copyright illegal). Wound you mind at the very least reformatting it after you post?
 

sedevacantist

High Elder
Joined
Mar 2, 2013
Messages
701
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Volnutt said:
This copypasta routine of yours is really annoying to read (and possibly copyright illegal). Wound you mind at the very least reformatting it after you post?
for some reason when I copy and paste from this document it never comes out correctly, it would take me too much time to correct each line
 

Volnutt

Hoplitarches
Joined
May 22, 2011
Messages
15,089
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
34
sedevacantist said:
Volnutt said:
This copypasta routine of yours is really annoying to read (and possibly copyright illegal). Wound you mind at the very least reformatting it after you post?
for some reason when I copy and paste from this document it never comes out correctly, it would take me too much time to correct each line
Then you should put it in a blog or a Google doc or on Pastebin and copy from that.
 

Asteriktos

Hypatos
Joined
Oct 4, 2002
Messages
39,083
Reaction score
28
Points
48
Age
41
sedevacantist said:
Volnutt said:
This copypasta routine of yours is really annoying to read (and possibly copyright illegal). Wound you mind at the very least reformatting it after you post?
for some reason when I copy and paste from this document it never comes out correctly, it would take me too much time to correct each line
That just about sums up 95% of apologetics, regardless of school, religion, or century.
 

Mor Ephrem

Hypatos
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Oct 3, 2002
Messages
36,145
Reaction score
12
Points
38
Age
39
Location
New York!
Website
www.orthodoxchristianity.net
Asteriktos said:
sedevacantist said:
Volnutt said:
This copypasta routine of yours is really annoying to read (and possibly copyright illegal). Wound you mind at the very least reformatting it after you post?
for some reason when I copy and paste from this document it never comes out correctly, it would take me too much time to correct each line
That just about sums up 95% of apologetics, regardless of school, religion, or century.
Zing!
 

juliogb

High Elder
Joined
Jan 14, 2015
Messages
976
Reaction score
3
Points
0
Maybe I am seeing too much, but those justifications for sedevacantism, kinda remembers landmarkism, there is pure roman catholic church somewhere in history that never changed and it is hidden today, or something like that.
 

sedevacantist

High Elder
Joined
Mar 2, 2013
Messages
701
Reaction score
0
Points
0
juliogb said:
Maybe I am seeing too much, but those justifications for sedevacantism, kinda remembers landmarkism, there is pure roman catholic church somewhere in history that never changed and it is hidden today, or something like that.
No,it's quite simple, The Catholic Church has the same faith from all times, with Vatican 2 there is a different faith,they don't hold  the Catholic faith, it's unpleasant but it's just a fact..they can call themselves Catholic all they want but they are impostures, freemasons, it's hard to believe there are not others here who have figured this out.
 

Mor Ephrem

Hypatos
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Oct 3, 2002
Messages
36,145
Reaction score
12
Points
38
Age
39
Location
New York!
Website
www.orthodoxchristianity.net
sedevacantist said:
juliogb said:
Maybe I am seeing too much, but those justifications for sedevacantism, kinda remembers landmarkism, there is pure roman catholic church somewhere in history that never changed and it is hidden today, or something like that.
No,it's quite simple, The Catholic Church has the same faith from all times, with Vatican 2 there is a different faith,they don't hold  the Catholic faith, it's unpleasant but it's just a fact..they can call themselves Catholic all they want but they are impostures, freemasons, it's hard to believe there are not others here who have figured this out.
The Catholic Church indeed has the same faith from the beginning until now.  The problem for you is that neither the "Vatican II" sect nor your own is Catholic in any theologically meaningful way. 
 
Top