A SIGN of the TIMES ?
Posted on 12/31/2012 9:21:49 PM PST by narses
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.
Religion Forum threads labeled “Ecumenical”
Ecumenical threads are closed to antagonism.
To antagonize is to incur or to provoke hostility in others.
Unlike the “caucus” threads, the article and reply posts of an “ecumenical” thread may discuss more than one belief, but antagonism is not tolerable.
More leeway is granted to what is acceptable in the text of the article than to the reply posts. For example, the term “gross error” in an article will not prevent an ecumenical discussion, but a poster should not use that term in his reply because it is antagonistic. As another example, the article might be a passage from the Bible which would be antagonistic to Jews. The passage should be considered historical information and a legitimate subject for an ecumenical discussion. The reply posts however must not be antagonistic.
Contrasting of beliefs or even criticisms can be made without provoking hostilities. But when in doubt, only post what you are “for” and not what you are “against.” Or ask questions.
Ecumenical threads will be moderated on a “where there’s smoke, there’s fire” basis. When hostility has broken out on an “ecumenical” thread, I’ll be looking for the source.
Therefore “anti” posters must not try to finesse the guidelines by asking loaded questions, using inflammatory taglines, gratuitous quote mining or trying to slip in an “anti” or “ex” article under the color of the “ecumenical” tag.
bkmk
Catholics, Orthodox, and Protestants who affirm, explicitly or implicitly, the doctrines of the Nicene Creed (we can debate filioque another time :> ) may differ in numerous ways--many of which might be considered adiaphora--but when it comes to the heresies as listed in this article, they are just as anathema to the "orthodox" outside of the Catholic Church as to those inside.
Jews who keep the law, would, in theory, not be in need of divine grace.
Pelagius had a list of Biblical characters who were free from sin. That included the Virgin Mary, Enoch who was translated, and a few others.
Do the Eastern Orthodox maintain belief in the notion of original sin?
I am pinging TheReader to this, as he is so learned.
I have a notion that original sin comes from the teachings of St Augustine, and is not in the Eastern Church. They believe baptism is entry into the community of faith, rather than a washing away of original sin. At least, that is what I have heard.
I think the notion of killing heretics, as in the crusade against the Cathars was a heresy imported from Islam.
A military leader asked how he could determine if a Cathar was a heretic.
“Neco es omnes, Dio se agnoscet”. was reportedly the response that the learned monk gave.
Kill them all, G-d knows his own.
That’s not a heresy “in post modern dress” or otherwise today - not in the Church anyway.
Today, heretics are given TV shows..
:)
Long on gossip short on facts.
Not that i disagree with anything in particular but it is easy to see the reason for the disagreements on the God head.
But i think i will just read the Bible and not get caught up in Church doctrine.
Jesus tells me in plain and few words what i need to know and do be saved and i have a hard time even doing that much.
You wrote:
“I think the notion of killing heretics, as in the crusade against the Cathars was a heresy imported from Islam.”
False. Christians - and secular states like the Roman Empire - were killing violent heretics before Islam existed.
“A military leader asked how he could determine if a Cathar was a heretic. “Neco es omnes, Dio se agnoscet”. was reportedly the response that the learned monk gave. Kill them all, G-d knows his own.”
Actually, no. You made two mistakes: 1) Your first mistake is believing it ever happened. No contemporary source supports the story. Caesarius of Heisterbach probably invented the quote for dramatic effect. 2) You also have the quote wrong. It is “Caedite eos. Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius.” http://gahom.ehess.fr/relex/dialogusmiraculorum1/CdH-Dialog.mir.-Vol1/CdH-Dialog.mir.-Volume1-308.html Even the version of the quote you use is odd in that it appears in several different spellings on the internet. That leads me to believe it is made up, phony quote made up by people sitting online with a Cassel’s dictionary and little knowledge about history. Don’t be fooled.
Good information, but it’s unfortunate the author misunderstands the origin and purpose of the Society of St. Pius X.
The Jehovah’s Witnesses hold to some variation of the Arian heresy.
The Buddha said ‘The things of God are unknown, and unknowable, so why argue?’
Every heresy can find its root in one of the three lies Satan told Eve to tempt her.
The Eastern Orthodox practice a Mass that holds much in common with how it was practiced in the 5th century, including the Creed from that time. The separation between Eastern and Western parts of the Church were more due to politics than doctrine, i.e. where the legitimate seat of the Church should be, since at the time of the Great Schism the active heart of the Empire was in Constantinople and Rome was in decline. That is why it is called a schism, not a heresy.
Also, the Eastern Orthodox practice all the sacraments of initiation (Baptism, Confirmation, Communion) all at once. In the West, bishops wanted to keep control of Confirmation, and they could not get around fast enough to keep up with the demand for Baptisms, so they allowed priests to Baptize and waited for the bishop to do his annual tour for Confirmation. In the seminary, I was taught that because of this history, Confirmation is a sacrament without a clear theology. That is also why bishops in different dioceses hold Confirmation at different ages today in the U.S.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
