Contempt for Catholicism

[steve b]

Originally Posted by JRKH

I believe that basically your assumption is correct. One thing to consider though is that the Catholic Church considers these churches to be "Catholic" but that they are simply not in full communion.

If they are NOT in communion with the pope they are NOT Catholic.

http://forums.catholic.com/showpost.php?p=2935402&postcount=25
http://forums.catholic.com/showpost.php?p=2935437&postcount=30

Originally Posted by J

One thing to remember though was that the split really was not the result of deep theological differences. Even today the theological matters are not really insurmountable (contrary to what some might say) and the Churches are in discussions even now.
The split really stemmed from a combination of political/structural disagreements and pride - on both sides as usual..

If the issues were small we wouldn't be seperated. One of the big problems, the Orthodox aren't one church. Negotiations and agreements need to be made with each one individually. No ONE speaks for the whole.

[JRKH]

Originally Posted by steve b

If they are NOT in communion with the pope they are NOT Catholic.

http://forums.catholic.com/showpost.php?p=2935402&postcount=25
http://forums.catholic.com/showpost.php?p=2935437&postcount=30

Thank you for this clarification.
My statement was made on how the Catechism is written. In particular this:

838 "The Church knows that she is joined in many ways to the baptized who are honored by the name of Christian, but do not profess the Catholic faith in its entirety or have not preserved unity or communion under the successor of Peter."Those "who believe in Christ and have been properly baptized are put in a certain, although imperfect, communion with the Catholic Church." With the Orthodox Churches, this communion is so profound "that it lacks little to attain the fullness that would permit a common celebration of the Lord's Eucharist."

This statement along with others gave me the understanding that I expressed.
However I see that CAF wishes to keep defined lines of terminology and I will accept that as part of participating here.

If the issues were small we wouldn't be separated. One of the big problems, the Orthodox aren't one church. Negotiations and agreements need to be made with each one individually. No ONE speaks for the whole.

I never said that problems were small. There are many issues that separated us and I only mentioned theological ones. You are right in mentioning the matter of the various Orthodox Churches and the need to deal with them independently.
May God guide those charged with the discussions to true, charitable understanding and consensus.

Peace
James

[PRmerger]

Originally Posted by PRmerger

Do you have any documentation for this, krahnicles? When did the Church teach that there were only 5 or 6 sacraments?

(The question as to whether an 11th century Catholic might not know there are 7 is actually an irrelevant one. Heck, I could ask a few 21st century Catholics how many sacraments there are and they'd give the wrong answer too )

It is unfortunate that the poster who made the claim that the 11th century Church did not have seven sacraments cannot address my post above.

Suffice it to say, that when a claim such as that is made, we as Catholics are right to ask, "Can you please provide some documentation for such?"

There are so many ga-ga la-la nonsensical claims made against the Church (and the one posed by the banned poster is tame in comparison) that one has to wonder how anyone could believe such absurdities.

[JRKH]

Originally Posted by PRmerger

It is unfortunate that the poster who made the claim that the 11th century Church did not have seven sacraments cannot address my post above.

Suffice it to say, that when a claim such as that is made, we as Catholics are right to ask, "Can you please provide some documentation for such?"

There are so many ga-ga la-la nonsensical claims made against the Church (and the one posed by the banned poster is tame in comparison) that one has to wonder how anyone could believe such absurdities.

I would be a bit patient here PR. I noted that krahnicles disappeared last weekend and did not reappear until Tuesday...AND he is dealing with a lot of responses.

I believe him to be sincere - perhaps your nudge will bring a more direct response.

Peace
James

[PRmerger]

Originally Posted by JRKH

I would be a bit patient here PR. I noted that krahnicles disappeared last weekend and did not reappear until Tuesday...AND he is dealing with a lot of responses.

I believe him to be sincere - perhaps your nudge will bring a more direct response.

Peace
James

Sadly, krahnicles got himself banned.

I only posted my comment above for the lurkers--in case any of them were influenced by his post into thinking, "Oh, I never knew the Church added the 7 sacraments and that in the 11th century there were only (3,5, 6, whatever number proposed)".

Unless some sort of documentation can be provided that the Church taught something in the 11th century about there being (3, 5, 6, whatever number) sacraments, then that statement ought to be dismissed as ga-ga, la-la nonsensical.

[JRKH]

Originally Posted by PRmerger

Sadly, krahnicles got himself banned.

I only posted my comment above for the lurkers--in case any of them were influenced by his post into thinking, "Oh, I never knew the Church added the 7 sacraments and that in the 11th century there were only (3,5, 6, whatever number proposed)".

Unless some sort of documentation can be provided that the Church taught something in the 11th century about there being (3, 5, 6, whatever number) sacraments, then that statement ought to be dismissed as ga-ga, la-la nonsensical.

I am very sorry to hear that he got banned. I never rally found him to be offensive - but then I didn't read all of his postings everywhere....

As for the rest, I completely agree that when people make such assertions we are quite justified in asking for documentation - some sort of source material.

Peace
James

[PRmerger]

Originally Posted by JRKH

I am very sorry to hear that he got banned. I never rally found him to be offensive - but then I didn't read all of his postings everywhere....

As for the rest, I completely agree that when people make such assertions we are quite justified in asking for documentation - some sort of source material.

Peace
James

Yes, I am always saddened when non-Catholic posters get themselves banned. It is so important for them to be here, to be able to dialogue with thoughtful, knowledgeable Catholics able to provide apologia for their [often nonsensical] arguments against the Church.

I hope that they are still able to read the threads and that it causes them, at some level, to go

[Robert Bay]

For privacy reasons, the moderating staff cannot discuss actions taken with any account.

Thank you for your concern.