I Am Confused By Titles

[ChristinaTherese]

Titles are confusing me... how come some people have the tag "Very likeable non catholic" while others are "St. Hasa Perm" with a description under saying nondenominational or something like that? And what does St. Hasa Perm mean anyway???

 

And what does the Phishy tag mean?

Also (to add to what Oremoose said), some people (CatholicsAreKewl, Vee8, probably others) have just messed with their religion fields even though they're Catholics.

 

And when people were coming in together, they/we were already having a conversation elsewhere.... Hence coming in and being confusing as a group.

[Anastasia13]

Phishy is when you say you are Catholic and say things that are really messed up for a Catholic.

 

St. Hasa Perm is every member until/unless they make a big deal about being a non-Catholic or seem uber smart as Catholics (church militant) or are a religious vocation or something (clergy or religious titles).

 

~A non-Hindu.

Edited May 28, 2013 by Light and Truth

[Apotheoun]

The one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church becomes present - whole and entire - wherever the Eucharist is truly celebrated, and the orthodox faith professed, under the presidency of a bishop in Apostolic Succession (that is, the one Catholic Church becomes fully present in the various local Churches and groupings of Churches - e.g., the Roman Catholic Church, the Melkite Catholic Church, the Ruthenian Catholic Church, etc., and in the various Eastern Orthodox Churches and the Oriental Orthodox Churches). To put it another way, one and the same Catholic Church is made present in all the many local Churches, and all the many local Churches individually realize and manifest the one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church in a given location.

 

This ecclesial reality is an icon of the communion of nature found within the Godhead among the three divine persons, who although they are personally distinct from each other, are in their distinct hypostatic mode of existence individually - whole and entire - the one God.

 

And so just as there can be no "parts" to God, so too there can be no "parts" to the Church.

[Little Flower]

Also (to add to what Oremoose said), some people (CatholicsAreKewl, Vee8, probably others) have just messed with their religion fields even though they're Catholics.

 

And when people were coming in together, they/we were already having a conversation elsewhere.... Hence coming in and being confusing as a group.

Oh okay..

 

Phishy is when you say you are Catholic and say things that are really messed up for a Catholic.

 

St. Hasa Perm is every member until/unless they make a big deal about being a non-Catholic or seem uber smart as Catholics (church militant) or are a religious vocation or something (clergy or religious titles).

 

~A non-Hindu.

I get it. Thanks :)

[Little Flower]

An award for all the helpful people!  :winner:

 

(FP and The171 are of course excluded :P )

[Apotheoun]

The one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church becomes present - whole and entire - wherever the Eucharist is truly celebrated, and the orthodox faith professed, under the presidency of a bishop in Apostolic Succession (that is, the one Catholic Church becomes fully present in the various local Churches and groupings of Churches - e.g., the Roman Catholic Church, the Melkite Catholic Church, the Ruthenian Catholic Church, etc., and in the various Eastern Orthodox Churches and the Oriental Orthodox Churches). To put it another way, one and the same Catholic Church is made present in all the many local Churches, and all the many local Churches individually realize and manifest the one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church in a given location.

 

This ecclesial reality is an icon of the communion of nature found within the Godhead among the three divine persons, who although they are personally distinct from each other, are in their distinct hypostatic mode of existence individually - whole and entire - the one God.

 

And so just as there can be no "parts" to God, so too there can be no "parts" to the Church.

A person private messaged me about the above post thinking that I had placed it in the wrong thread, but I did not. I posted the above information here simply to highlight that the Phatmass titles are theologically inaccurate because they fail to take into account the fact that the one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church is made fully manifest wherever the Eucharist is truly celebrated. That being said, a Phatmasser like "Light and Truth" as a member of the Armenian Orthodox Church is Catholic (not Roman Catholic of course) but truly Catholic because the Church of which she is a member is a real Church (unlike the various communities that arose out of the Reformation).

[Byzantine]

A person private messaged me about the above post thinking that I had placed it in the wrong thread, but I did not. I posted the above information here simply to highlight that the Phatmass titles are theologically inaccurate because they fail to take into account the fact that the one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church is made fully manifest wherever the Eucharist is truly celebrated. That being said, a Phatmasser like "Light and Truth" as a member of the Armenian Orthodox Church is Catholic (not Roman Catholic of course) but truly Catholic because the Church of which she is a member is a real Church (unlike the various communities that arose out of the Reformation).

 

However cf. Communionis Notio regarding the fact that the Church does not subsist in these Churches, but (only?) becomes present in the celebration of the Eucharist.

[Apotheoun]

However cf. Communionis Notio regarding the fact that the Church does not subsist in these Churches, but (only?) becomes present in the celebration of the Eucharist.

You are incorrect. The document Communionis Notio states that, "'through the celebration of the Eucharist of the Lord in each of these Churches, the Church of God is built up and grows in stature', for in every valid celebration of the Eucharist the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church becomes truly present." If the one Church is made present in the Orthodox Churches during the liturgical rites it follows that the one Church subsists (i.e., exists) in them.

 

Nevertheless, it is true that the Roman Church sees the communion already existing between itself and the Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox Churches as being wounded, but it still exists because of the Eucharist and because the fact that those Churches possess a valid priesthood. But even if one buys into the concept of "wounded communion," which is actually a modern novelty, that does not effect the fact that the Eastern Orthodox and the Oriental Orthodox Churches are real Catholic Churches.

Edited May 28, 2013 by Apotheoun

[Apotheoun]

However cf. Communionis Notio regarding the fact that the Church does not subsist in these Churches, but (only?) becomes present in the celebration of the Eucharist.

You do know that the word "subsist" is just another way of saying "exist" or "made present."

 

For example, a person can say that Christ subsists in the Eucharistic elements after their consecration.

Edited May 28, 2013 by Apotheoun

[Byzantine]

You do know that the word "subsist" is just another way of saying "exist" or "made present."

 

For example, a person can say that Christ subsists in the Eucharistic elements after their consecration.

It also means "remain," "continue," etc.

 

My apologies, I thought it was CN but it was actually Dominus Iesus (16, nearly 17, to be precise):

 

With the expression subsistit in, the Second Vatican Council sought to harmonize two doctrinal statements: on the one hand, that the Church of Christ, despite the divisions which exist among Christians, continues to exist fully only in the Catholic Church, and on the other hand, that “outside of her structure, many elements can be found of sanctification and truth”,⁵⁵ that is, in those Churches and ecclesial communities which are not yet in full communion with the Catholic Church.⁵⁶ But with respect to these, it needs to be stated that “they derive their efficacy from the very fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Catholic Church”.⁵⁷

 

Edited May 28, 2013 by Byzantine

[Apotheoun]

It also means "remain," "continue," etc.

 

My apologies, I thought it was CN but it was actually Dominus Iesus (16, nearly 17, to be precise):

And it does remain and continue in the Orthodox Churches, because a Church cannot be a little bit Church any more than a woman can be a little bit pregnant.

Moreover, Communionis Notio speaks of "unity" as subsisting in the Catholic Church, but it says this just after it admits that the Orthodox Churches are Catholic in that they have valid priesthood and sacraments.

 

Anyone familiar with the Patristic teaching on the Church will notice the tension in the CDF document referenced above, because the document is trying (quite unsuccessfully I might add) to combine the Eucharistic ecclesiology of the Church Fathers with the late medieval philosophical approach of the Scholastics (thankfully with the major emphasis upon the Fathers). Nevertheless, even though Communionis Notio is a bit schizophrenic on the issues being discussed, it does emphasize the fact that the Orthodox Church are true Churches, and it follows from this that the one Church subsists in them, which is why the authors of Communionis Notio introduce the novel idea of "woundedness" in order to account for the schism that exists between the Roman Church and the Orthodox Churches.

[Byzantine]

Double post. Here's a cute video for your trouble:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWDc9oyBj5Q

 

Edited May 28, 2013 by Byzantine

[Byzantine]

I think I'm gonna stick with Dominus Iesus, k? After all, 2 out of 3 popes I've been contemporaries with had a role in its production.

[Apotheoun]

It also means "remain," "continue," etc.

 

My apologies, I thought it was CN but it was actually Dominus Iesus (16, nearly 17, to be precise):

Yes, but I can refute your interpretation of Dominus Jesus by simply re-stating what the CDF admitted in Communionis Notio, that is, that the one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church is made fully present in the Orthodox Churches, and that those Churches are real Churches unlike the communities that arose out of the Protestant Reformation. And so it follows - that is, unless a man wants to argue that a different Catholic Church (and of course there is no such thing) is made present in the Orthodox Churches - that the one Catholic Church exists in the Orthodox Churches (Eastern and Oriental) even though they are not in full communion (another modern Western idea) with the Roman Church.

 

Why do you think the Roman Church abandoned the idea of proselytizing the Orthodox in the Balamand Declaration? I will tell you why, because Rome recognizes the Orthodox Churches as truly Catholic Church even though they are not in communion with Rome at the present time.

Edited May 28, 2013 by Apotheoun

[Apotheoun]

I think I'm gonna stick with Dominus Iesus, k? After all, 2 out of 3 popes I've been contemporaries with had a role in its production.

I think I will stick with Dominus Iesus too, while rejecting your faulty interpretation of it.