INNOVATIONS BY THE WESTERN CHURCH.

[OldOrthodoxChristian]

"INNOVATIONS BY THE WESTERN CHURCH. Although the beliefs of

the Roman Church are closer to the beliefs of the Orthodox Church than

are those of any other Church, it is necessary to list a few of the

innovations added by the Roman Church after the separation of the

Western from the Eastern Church. Also, it is necessary to mention that

the attitude of the Western section of the One Church, even before the

Schism, was not free from arbitrariness. The Western branch tended

to centralize administrative power, a characteristic inherited from early

political tendencies toward a totalitarian government. Following is the

list of innovations.

"Primacy. The supreme episcopal jurisdiction of the Pope, who is called

the Vicar of Christ (a title of the Roman pontiff dating from the 8th

century) expresses his claim to universal jurisdiction and implies that

the other bishops are not equal to him, but subordinate to him as his

representatives -- a claim that is foreign to the ancient Church.

"Infallibility. In 1870 the Roman Catholic Church, at the Vatican

Council, declared that infallibility (the inability to err in teaching the

revealed truth) was attached to the definition of the Pope in matters of

faith and morals, apart from the consent of the Church. The Vatican

Council declared: "Jesus Christ has three existences. His personal

existence, which Arius denied; His mystical existence in the Sacrament

of the Holy Eucharist, which Calvin denied; and His other existence

which complete the first two and through which He lives constantly,

namely His authority in the person of His Vicar on Earth. The Council,

maintaining this third existence, assures the world that it possesses

Jesus Christ". Herein, the Synods were abolished". [page 36: What Is

The Eastern Orthodox Church? Selected Fundamentals On Its Origin,

Teachings, Administration, and History. Third Edition -- Fifteenth

Printing. Published by the OLOGOS Mission, St. Louis, Missouri,

Copyright 1956.].

 

[Bloodwashed]

Thanks for the history lesson Scott! I'm sure all denomanations hold things as true, that are not! I doubt that anyone has it perfectly right. Thats why we are saved by Grace thru Faith! God Bless you, my EOC Brother! Peace, Love Mark!

 

[StephenDC]

I've done a search of the decrees of Vatican I, and I cannot find the quote that you've provided here. Can you provide a reference to the particular document and section from which your Vatican I quote comes?

Thanks!

 

[OldOrthodoxChristian]

I've done a search of the decrees of Vatican I, and I cannot find the quote that you've provided here. Can you provide a reference to the particular document and section from which your Vatican I quote comes?

Thanks!

I don't know where Fr. Mastrantonis got the quote. I do know this. Vatican I is heresy. I know the papists bishops of Rome have over 958 years of heresies behind them. More like over 999 years. Since 1013 AD.
Even dating back to Pope Nicholas I around the year 860.
Thus:
THE MYTH OF PAPAL INFALLIBILITY
"Can you show me in this great City of Rome anyone who would receive you as pope if they had not received gold or silver for it?" -- St. Bernard
"The entire world knows how profitable this fable of Christ has been to us and ours." -- Pope Leo X (1513-1521)
Regarding Vatican I
"As a violent thunderstorm raged above St. Peter's Basilica in Rome on July 18, 1870, the bishops of the First Vatican Council adopted a decree that would alter Christian history ... as such, the doctrine of infallibility remains a fundamental obstacle to the reunion of Christianity."
"Pius IX ... compared opposition bishops to Pontius Pilate condemning Jesus and pleaded: "My children, do not leave me. Cleave to me and follow me. Unite with the representative of Jesus Christ." -- Time, 1979 (from a review of "How the Pope Became Infallible", by August B. Hasler
More on Papal Infallibility
"Moreri (Roman theologian):
"To make war against the pope is to make war against God, seeing that the pope is God and God is the pope."
"Nicolaus de Tudeschis, in "Commentaria" (lvi.34):
"The pope can do all things God can do."
"Pope Leo XIII: "We hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty." (Jude 20, 1894: Great Encyclical Letters of Pope Leo XIII: Benziger Brothers, "Reunion of Christendom," p. 304).
"Pope (St.) Pius X: "The pope is not only representative of Jesus Christ, but he is Jesus Christ Himself, hidden under the veil of the flesh. Does the pope speak? It is Jesus Christ Himself Who speaks."
"Not to be outdone, Pope Pius XI declared: "You know that I am the Holy Father, the representative fo God on earth, the Vicar of Christ, which means that I am God on earth." (Butler, Vatican I, Vol. I; Also, Scriptural Truths for Roman Catholcis, Dr. B. Brewer, Mission to Catholics, Int.)
"Lest anyone think that things have changed from those triumphal days of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, they have only to read the words uttered recently by Cardinal John O'Connor of New York:
"The Holy Father is the true successor of Christ on earth." (Sermon, St. Patrick's Cathedral, New York, March 1987)
and until the ritual was terminated by Pope Paul I, when the triple crown was placed on the head of a new pope at his "coronation" the officiating cardinal proclaimed:
"Receive the tiara adorned with three crowns, and know that thou art the Father of Princes and Kings, Ruler of the World; the Vicar of Our Saviour Jesus Christ ..." (vicar: n., a substitute)
the ritual changed; the words remain. ...."
Rev. Fr. Marc Auer. (1990). THE MYTH OF PAPAL INFALLIBILITY. Buffalo, NY: The Cenacle/ Liberty, TN:
The St. John of Kronstadt Press.

How infallible can any pope be? How infallible can Pope Benedict XVI be, when he covers up the sex-abuse scandal of Catholic priests and Catholic bishops molesting and sexually abusing little children, and not removing such priests and bishops from their office and ministry?

God save us all. In Erie Scott R. Harrington

PS Decrees of the First Vatican Council
www.papalencyclicals.net/Councils/ecum20.html

 

[StephenDC]

I don't know where Fr. Mastrantonis got the quote.

Scott,

OK. Soooo.... we can't really hang our hats off your post, since your assertions about what Catholics teach are unattributable. (Strike one.)

"Pope Leo XIII: "We hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty." (Jude 20, 1894: Great Encyclical Letters of Pope Leo XIII: Benziger Brothers, "Reunion of Christendom," p. 304).

I presume you mean to use this quote to imply that Leo was declaring himself God? In context, we see:

But since We hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty,... We feel drawn to follow the example of Our Redeemer and Master, Jesus Christ, Who, when about to return to Heaven, implored of God, His Father, in earnest Prayer

(From Leo's encyclical Praeclara Gratulationis Publicae -- emphases mine.)

If Leo was declaring himself God, why does he call Jesus Christ his "Redeemer and Master", and then demonstrate that Jesus prayed to His Father, not to Leo? (Strike two.)

"Pope (St.) Pius X: "The pope is not only representative of Jesus Christ, but he is Jesus Christ Himself, hidden under the veil of the flesh. Does the pope speak? It is Jesus Christ Himself Who speaks."
"Not to be outdone, Pope Pius XI declared: "You know that I am the Holy Father, the representative fo God on earth, the Vicar of Christ, which means that I am God on earth." (Butler, Vatican I, Vol. I; Also, Scriptural Truths for Roman Catholcis, Dr. B. Brewer, Mission to Catholics, Int.)

Since you have these books, I presume (and aren't just making a copy off of someone else's site), can you do me a favor and find a reference to these alleged quotes? When I search on them, I find only that others assert the same quotes -- but I can't find any writings of either Pius X or Pius XI where they say this.

How infallible can any pope be? How infallible can Pope Benedict XVI be, when he covers up the sex-abuse scandal of Catholic priests and Catholic bishops molesting and sexually abusing little children, and not removing such priests and bishops from their office and ministry?

You understand what "infallible" means in this context, don't you? It doesn't mean that everything out of the pope's mouth is understood to be perfect; instead, it just means that, when he makes a declaration about doctrine (faith and morals), he is understood to be protected by the Holy Spirit from making a doctrinal error. (Strike three.)

As an interesting thought experiment, let me ask: does your patriarch make errors on doctrine? If so, then why do you follow his lead? If not, then how is it that this is so?

Cheers,

Stephen

 

[StephenDC]

PS Decrees of the First Vatican Council
www.papalencyclicals.net/Councils/ecum20.html

Scott,

By the way, this link you've provided doesn't work. It needs to be: Decrees of the First Vatican Council

 

[OldOrthodoxChristian]

Scott,

OK. Soooo.... we can't really hang our hats off your post, since your assertions about what Catholics teach are unattributable. (Strike one.)




I presume you mean to use this quote to imply that Leo was declaring himself God? In context, we see:

(From Leo's encyclical Praeclara Gratulationis Publicae -- emphases mine.)

If Leo was declaring himself God, why does he call Jesus Christ his "Redeemer and Master", and then demonstrate that Jesus prayed to His Father, not to Leo? (Strike two.)



Since you have these books, I presume (and aren't just making a copy off of someone else's site), can you do me a favor and find a reference to these alleged quotes? When I search on them, I find only that others assert the same quotes -- but I can't find any writings of either Pius X or Pius XI where they say this.



You understand what "infallible" means in this context, don't you? It doesn't mean that everything out of the pope's mouth is understood to be perfect; instead, it just means that, when he makes a declaration about doctrine (faith and morals), he is understood to be protected by the Holy Spirit from making a doctrinal error. (Strike three.)

As an interesting thought experiment, let me ask: does your patriarch make errors on doctrine? If so, then why do you follow his lead? If not, then how is it that this is so?

Cheers,

Stephen

Could not Pope Leo be declaring himself God along with Jesus Christ as God? Also, vicar means vicar, substitute. But there is no substitute for Jesus Christ upon this earth. Papism is false, any way you look at it. There is no "bishop of bishops" or "supreme pontiff" anywhere in Christ's True Church.
Some of the popes killed people in the Crusades and Inquisition. Upon their "authority" and at their command, people were killed. That's doing something a member of the Church should not do.

 

[mori]

Also, vicar means vicar, substitute. But there is no substitute for Jesus Christ upon this earth.

The way we understand the word "substitute" is not what the word meant to most native Latin speakers. A Roman vicarius or Persian vizier was a substitute for their master only in the sense that they had been given a mandate and all the necessary authority. They did not for all purposes serve as a substitute.

You can think of a vicar as a deputy, who acts in the name and authority of his boss, or even note that from vicar comes "vice," as in vice president. You can see Jesus deputizing somebody here:

Truly I tell you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven. Again, truly I tell you that if two of you on earth agree about anything they ask for, it will be done for them by my Father in heaven. For where two or three gather in my name, there am I with them.

Obviously, there's some disagreement over what this means, who was given the authority, etc., but this is what we're talking about with a vicar - delegation of purpose and authority in the name of the master. We see it later too:

All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.

One might think that the position has been abused, and that's an interesting topic in its own right, but that Christ made vicars in the traditional Latin sense is indisputable.

 

[StephenDC]

Could not Pope Leo be declaring himself God along with Jesus Christ as God?

No. For that to make sense, you'd have to explain why Leo calls Jesus his "redeemer and master", yet claims that Jesus himself prays to "God, his Father". How would it be that Leo's master prays to him? Nonsensical ... so your claim falls flat.

Also, vicar means vicar, substitute.

In my experience, Christian ecumenical dialogue never fails so strongly as when one group takes it upon themselves to define the terms that another group uses. "Vicar" means "substitute" only in the sense of "agent" or "representative"; that is, the pope represents Jesus' authority over the Church here on earth, for the purpose of administration. They're still Jesus' sheep; the pope is just tending them for Him.

But there is no substitute for Jesus Christ upon this earth.

But we see how well it's worked over the past 700 years when "everyone did what was right in their own sight", haven't we? An agent -- to oversee (ἐπισκέψασθα&#953 the people of God -- with the authority to do exactly that... isn't that what Jesus had in mind?

Some of the popes killed people in the Crusades and Inquisition. Upon their "authority" and at their command, people were killed. That's doing something a member of the Church should not do.

Upon the "authority" of Peter, a guy got his ear hacked off -- and it would have been worse, had Jesus not intervened. A member of the Church should also not deny Christ once, let alone three times. Yet, we see that humans aren't perfect. Did Christ tell Peter "you're doing something no member of my church should do. Get outta here"? No... he retained him at the head of His Church. Given that Christ himself utilized imperfect humans... what's your point, again, exactly?

 

[OldOrthodoxChristian]

Scott,

OK. Soooo.... we can't really hang our hats off your post, since your assertions about what Catholics teach are unattributable. (Strike one.)




I presume you mean to use this quote to imply that Leo was declaring himself God? In context, we see:

(From Leo's encyclical Praeclara Gratulationis Publicae -- emphases mine.)

If Leo was declaring himself God, why does he call Jesus Christ his "Redeemer and Master", and then demonstrate that Jesus prayed to His Father, not to Leo? (Strike two.)



Since you have these books, I presume (and aren't just making a copy off of someone else's site), can you do me a favor and find a reference to these alleged quotes? When I search on them, I find only that others assert the same quotes -- but I can't find any writings of either Pius X or Pius XI where they say this.



You understand what "infallible" means in this context, don't you? It doesn't mean that everything out of the pope's mouth is understood to be perfect; instead, it just means that, when he makes a declaration about doctrine (faith and morals), he is understood to be protected by the Holy Spirit from making a doctrinal error. (Strike three.)

As an interesting thought experiment, let me ask: does your patriarch make errors on doctrine? If so, then why do you follow his lead? If not, then how is it that this is so?

Cheers,

Stephen

Pope Benedict XVI doing nothing about the sexual abuse of children by Catholic clergy. Strike 3. The pope is out.

 

[OldOrthodoxChristian]

No. For that to make sense, you'd have to explain why Leo calls Jesus his "redeemer and master", yet claims that Jesus himself prays to "God, his Father". How would it be that Leo's master prays to him? Nonsensical ... so your claim falls flat.



In my experience, Christian ecumenical dialogue never fails so strongly as when one group takes it upon themselves to define the terms that another group uses. "Vicar" means "substitute" only in the sense of "agent" or "representative"; that is, the pope represents Jesus' authority over the Church here on earth, for the purpose of administration. They're still Jesus' sheep; the pope is just tending them for Him.



But we see how well it's worked over the past 700 years when "everyone did what was right in their own sight", haven't we? An agent -- to oversee (ἐπισκέψασθα&#953 the people of God -- with the authority to do exactly that... isn't that what Jesus had in mind?



Upon the "authority" of Peter, a guy got his ear hacked off -- and it would have been worse, had Jesus not intervened. A member of the Church should also not deny Christ once, let alone three times. Yet, we see that humans aren't perfect. Did Christ tell Peter "you're doing something no member of my church should do. Get outta here"? No... he retained him at the head of His Church. Given that Christ himself utilized imperfect humans... what's your point, again, exactly?

One of the popes said of himself, "I am Tradition". One of the popes said of himself, "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life."
If you don't believe me, read a reliable source, THE MYTH OF PAPAL INFALLIBILITY. See also:
Brief Orthodox Replies to the Innovations of the Papacy, in THE LIVES OF THE PILLARS OF ORTHODOXY.
Buena Vista, CO: Holy Apostles Convent, 1990.
One of the popes only recently admitted the papacy had been wrong for what it did to Galileo, and they also apologized for the Inquisition and the Crusades. That was John Paul II who did, in something called "The Pope Apologizes". Doesn't sound like an infallible pope would need to apologize for anything. It's illogical to suppose that he would need to apologize for error if he were infallible.

 

[OldOrthodoxChristian]

"INNOVATIONS BY THE WESTERN CHURCH. Although the beliefs of

the Roman Church are closer to the beliefs of the Orthodox Church than

are those of any other Church, it is necessary to list a few of the

innovations added by the Roman Church after the separation of the

Western from the Eastern Church. Also, it is necessary to mention that

the attitude of the Western section of the One Church, even before the

Schism, was not free from arbitrariness. The Western branch tended

to centralize administrative power, a characteristic inherited from early

political tendencies toward a totalitarian government. Following is the

list of innovations.

"Primacy. The supreme episcopal jurisdiction of the Pope, who is called

the Vicar of Christ (a title of the Roman pontiff dating from the 8th

century) expresses his claim to universal jurisdiction and implies that

the other bishops are not equal to him, but subordinate to him as his

representatives -- a claim that is foreign to the ancient Church.

"Infallibility. In 1870 the Roman Catholic Church, at the Vatican

Council, declared that infallibility (the inability to err in teaching the

revealed truth) was attached to the definition of the Pope in matters of

faith and morals, apart from the consent of the Church. The Vatican

Council declared: "Jesus Christ has three existences. His personal

existence, which Arius denied; His mystical existence in the Sacrament

of the Holy Eucharist, which Calvin denied; and His other existence

which complete the first two and through which He lives constantly,

namely His authority in the person of His Vicar on Earth. The Council,

maintaining this third existence, assures the world that it possesses

Jesus Christ". Herein, the Synods were abolished". [page 36: What Is

The Eastern Orthodox Church? Selected Fundamentals On Its Origin,

Teachings, Administration, and History. Third Edition -- Fifteenth

Printing. Published by the OLOGOS Mission, St. Louis, Missouri,

Copyright 1956.].

"AN ISSUE: COUNCILS VS. POPE ALONE"

"Roman Catholic theologians make two very distinct points when

referring to the papacy:

(1) It is an office divinely mandated for the salvation of all men and

women.

(2) Nothing is above the pope -- he is strictly outside the jurisdiction

of any body of bishops (council or synod), or for that matter any

person within the secular or religious realm.

"Simply stated, no person or assembly can judge, re-order or counter-

mand a papal decree -- according to Roman Catholic theology and

tradition!

"As a consequence, however, one cannot accept this teaching at face

value if he understands the function and status of Church councils in

history. Reformed theologian Loraine Boettner, in his very informative

work Roman Catholicism, explains the dilemma history poses for the

papal defenders who wish to eliminate the role of deliberative councils

in the universal church.

"The Council of Constance declared that "every lawfully convoked

Ecumenical council representing the Church derives its authority

immediately from Christ, and every one, the pope included, is subject

to it in matters of faith, in the healing of schism, and the reformation

of the Church." But the Vatican Council of 1870 had decreed that

infallibility in the pope alone as head of the Church, when speaking

ex cathedra. ...." [p. 63.]. THE MYTH OF PAPAL INFALLIBILITY.

by Rev. Fr. Marc Auer. (1990). Buffalo, NY: The Cenacle/ Liberty, TN:

The St. John of Kronstadt Press.


Scott H. Erie PA

 

[OldOrthodoxChristian]

"INNOVATIONS BY THE WESTERN CHURCH. Although the beliefs of

the Roman Church are closer to the beliefs of the Orthodox Church than

are those of any other Church, it is necessary to list a few of the

innovations added by the Roman Church after the separation of the

Western from the Eastern Church. Also, it is necessary to mention that

the attitude of the Western section of the One Church, even before the

Schism, was not free from arbitrariness. The Western branch tended

to centralize administrative power, a characteristic inherited from early

political tendencies toward a totalitarian government. Following is the

list of innovations.

"Primacy. The supreme episcopal jurisdiction of the Pope, who is called

the Vicar of Christ (a title of the Roman pontiff dating from the 8th

century) expresses his claim to universal jurisdiction and implies that

the other bishops are not equal to him, but subordinate to him as his

representatives -- a claim that is foreign to the ancient Church.

"Infallibility. In 1870 the Roman Catholic Church, at the Vatican

Council, declared that infallibility (the inability to err in teaching the

revealed truth) was attached to the definition of the Pope in matters of

faith and morals, apart from the consent of the Church. The Vatican

Council declared: "Jesus Christ has three existences. His personal

existence, which Arius denied; His mystical existence in the Sacrament

of the Holy Eucharist, which Calvin denied; and His other existence

which complete the first two and through which He lives constantly,

namely His authority in the person of His Vicar on Earth. The Council,

maintaining this third existence, assures the world that it possesses

Jesus Christ". Herein, the Synods were abolished". [page 36: What Is

The Eastern Orthodox Church? Selected Fundamentals On Its Origin,

Teachings, Administration, and History. Third Edition -- Fifteenth

Printing. Published by the OLOGOS Mission, St. Louis, Missouri,

Copyright 1956.].

"Q&A -- "I AM TRADITION" -- Pope Pius IX and the Arrogance of

the Papacy" 3:01 youtube.com

 

[OldOrthodoxChristian]

"Q&A -- "I AM TRADITION" -- Pope Pius IX and the Arrogance of

the Papacy" 3:01 youtube.com

Lies by a Papist!

 

[StephenDC]

Pope Benedict XVI doing nothing about the sexual abuse of children by Catholic clergy. Strike 3. The pope is out.

Show me how this is a matter of doctrine. Then we can talk about how it relates to the question of infallibility.

(Unless, of course, you persist in holding to a definition of "infallibility" that isn't the same as what the Catholic Church is claiming in its doctrine. And if you want to go down that route, you're arguing apples and oranges...)

 

[StephenDC]

One of the popes said of himself, "I am Tradition". One of the popes said of himself, "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life."

Please provide a reference to a primary document. Claiming that "John Doe says that a pope says this" doesn't cut it -- you need to provide a reference to a document written by a pope, in order for this to hold water.

One of the popes only recently admitted the papacy had been wrong for what it did to Galileo, and they also apologized for the Inquisition and the Crusades. That was John Paul II who did, in something called "The Pope Apologizes". Doesn't sound like an infallible pope would need to apologize for anything. It's illogical to suppose that he would need to apologize for error if he were infallible.

You haven't read what I wrote. OK, then: please define for me what "infallibility" means, in the context of the declarations of Vatican I, and with respect to what it means for the pope.

(I'll give you a hint what my next question will be, if you answer that correctly: what does the Galileo episode, the Inquisition, or the Crusades have to do with that definition?)

 

[OldOrthodoxChristian]

Show me how this is a matter of doctrine. Then we can talk about how it relates to the question of infallibility.

(Unless, of course, you persist in holding to a definition of "infallibility" that isn't the same as what the Catholic Church is claiming in its doctrine. And if you want to go down that route, you're arguing apples and oranges...)

John 15:26 also shows Pope Benedict XVI is in doctrinal error. And deeds, in a way, teach doctrines. On this account, we have all practiced error. One cannot separate morals from doctrines. We may not officially preach heresies, but in a way practicing sin or fault of some kinds is teaching something. Of course, we can be forgiven for sins. All of us. So .... So can Pope Benedict XVI.

 

[OldOrthodoxChristian]

Please provide a reference to a primary document. Claiming that "John Doe says that a pope says this" doesn't cut it -- you need to provide a reference to a document written by a pope, in order for this to hold water.



You haven't read what I wrote. OK, then: please define for me what "infallibility" means, in the context of the declarations of Vatican I, and with respect to what it means for the pope.

(I'll give you a hint what my next question will be, if you answer that correctly: what does the Galileo episode, the Inquisition, or the Crusades have to do with that definition?)

Do you deny that Pope Boniface VIII said that it "is altogether necessary for salvation for everyone (every soul/person) to be subject unto the Pope of Rome"? If you're not sure about this quote, see the Contra Errores Graecorum, and Thomas Aquinas preaches the same thing. Or its equivalent.
Vatican I says the Pope of Rome cannot preach any error. Pope John Paul II admitted the papacy's error regarding Galileo. So one of the popes did preach doctrinal error regarding Galileo.