What makes an Orthodox Catholic

[Myles Domini]

When can someone be safely held to be an Orthodox Catholic? This is a question that I feel is important to have answered at this current juncture since we, as Church, really need to band together and fortify our position to fight the apostasy of this age. Accordingly, we can no longer continue to fight amongst ourselves but we must turn our energies outwards and put out into deep so that we can take in a good catch of fish. The politicisation of our religion by [i]commentators[/i] has carved up the Catholica into camps like liberal, moderate and conservative but these classifications are--as we all know--completely inept at describing our credo from an insiders pespective. Once and for all we need to jettison these classifications and stand united against outsiders and their labels.

However, that is impossible if we are unable to agree on what we mean by 'Traditionalist', 'Orthodox' and so on and so forth. There needs to be [b]one[/b] form of idenification employed by all those who assent to the magisterium of the Church that is unambigious and clear. Synonyms aside the world needs to see us standing firm, kitted out in the same colours, ready to take on all comers. That the words 'Traditional' and 'Orthodox' have come to mean different things in our own time should be a cause of shame to all of us as Catholics! We should adamantly and without hesitation refuse point blank to accept that they mean different things in discussions with non-Catholics, at the same time seeking resolution on the issues that underpin those connotations amongst ourselves.

No longer can we stand behind invisible lines shouting infidelity at one another. The time for slating Vatican II is over, in for a penny, in for a pound. The time for berating those who dislike the council is over, if they assent to it who cares what they opine about it? If someone says they thinks the Pioline Mass is better than the new let them hold to that view and on the contrary if a person loves the Pauline Mass amen! If one person believes in allowing married men to become priests lets not fear it as the first symtoms of asebia and on the contrary let us not become too attached to disciplines subject to the whim of the Papacy.

Let us not push our preferences above the Orthodoxy of Mother Church and let us always be [b]clear[/b] ourselves about what that Orthodoxy involves so as to avoid unncessary disagreement and to allow for legitimate diversity of opinion within the Catholica.

It is time to take control of our own destiny's, time to implement the universal call of Vatican II and the new evangelisation [b]demanded[/b] by the late great John Paul II. Lets pull together and start feeding the flock of the lost sheep of the 12 apostles of the King of Israel, only He knows how much they need it and above all else my fellow knights of Christ...

...[b]BEAU SEANT!![/b]

[img]http://zhurnal.lib.ru/img/s/shatt_i_a/00004-12/tampliery_1.jpg[/img]

[MC Just]

To me Orthodoxy means obedience to Christ and his Vicar on Earth, the Pope. It is to believe in the teachings of the Church, the 2000 year old Catholic Church, not just the Catholic church after the second Vatican council. I consider myself "ultramontane".

Everyone who follows the Pope is a Ultramontane. As for liberal and conservative, i tried to explain this before but no one seems to understand.

Take a look at the definitions, there are catholics who fall under the definition of liberal, and there are catholics who fall under the definition of conservative, the conservative ones happen to be the Orthodox ones.

Personally im real tired of how we "catholics" here on Phatmass think so differently, so much for unity.

[Cam42]

[quote]When can someone be safely held to be an Orthodox Catholic? This is a question that I feel is important to have answered at this current juncture since we, as Church, really need to band together and fortify our position to fight the apostasy of this age. Accordingly, we can no longer continue to fight amongst ourselves but we must turn our energies outwards and put out into deep so that we can take in a good catch of fish. The politicisation of our religion by commentators has carved up the Catholica into camps like liberal, moderate and conservative but these classifications are--as we all know--completely inept at describing our credo from an insiders pespective. Once and for all we need to jettison these classifications and stand united against outsiders and their labels.

However, that is impossible if we are unable to agree on what we mean by 'Traditionalist', 'Orthodox' and so on and so forth. There needs to be one form of idenification employed by all those who assent to the magisterium of the Church that is unambigious and clear. Synonyms aside the world needs to see us standing firm, kitted out in the same colours, ready to take on all comers. That the words 'Traditional' and 'Orthodox' have come to mean different things in our own time should be a cause of shame to all of us as Catholics! We should adamantly and without hesitation refuse point blank to accept that they mean different things in discussions with non-Catholics, at the same time seeking resolution on the issues that underpin those connotations amongst ourselves.

No longer can we stand behind invisible lines shouting infidelity at one another. The time for slating Vatican II is over, in for a penny, in for a pound. The time for berating those who dislike the council is over, if they assent to it who cares what they opine about it? If someone says they thinks the Pioline Mass is better than the new let them hold to that view and on the contrary if a person loves the Pauline Mass amen! If one person believes in allowing married men to become priests lets not fear it as the first symtoms of asebia and on the contrary let us not become too attached to disciplines subject to the whim of the Papacy.

Let us not push our preferences above the Orthodoxy of Mother Church and let us always be clear ourselves about what that Orthodoxy involves so as to avoid unncessary disagreement and to allow for legitimate diversity of opinion within the Catholica.

It is time to take control of our own destiny's, time to implement the universal call of Vatican II and the new evangelisation demanded by the late great John Paul II. Lets pull together and start feeding the flock of the lost sheep of the 12 apostles of the King of Israel, only He knows how much they need it and above all else my fellow knights of Christ...[/quote]

Orthodoxy (orthodoxeia) signifies right belief or purity of faith. Right belief is not merely subjective, as resting on personal knowledge and convictions, but is in accordance with the teaching and direction of an absolute extrinsic authority. This authority is the Church founded by Christ, and guided by the Holy Ghost. He, therefore, is orthodox, whose faith coincides with the teachings of the Catholic Church. As divine revelation forms the deposit of faith entrusted to the Church for man's salvation, it also, with the truths clearly deduced from it, forms the object and content of orthodoxy.

Consistent with the teachings and method of Christ and the Apostles, the Fathers point out the necessity of preserving pure and undefiled the deposit of revelation. "Neither in the confusion of paganism", says St. Augustine, "nor in the defilement of heresy, nor in the lethargy of schism, nor yet in blindness of Judaism is religion to be sought; but among those alone who are called Catholic Christians, or the orthodox, that is, the custodians of sound doctrine and followers of right teaching" (De Vera Relig., cap. v). Fulgentius writes: "I rejoice that with no taint of perfidy you are solicitous for the true faith, without which no conversion is of any avail, nor can at all exist" (De Vera Fide ad Petrum, Proleg).

The Church, likewise, in its zeal for purity of faith and teaching, has rigorously adhered to the example set by the Apostles and Early Fathers. This is manifest in its whole history, but especially in such champions of the faith as Athansius, in councils, condemnations of heresy, and its definitions of revealed truth. That orthodox faith is requisite for salvation is a defined doctrine of the Church. "Whosoever wishes to be saved", declares the Athanasian Creed, "must first of all hold integral and inviolate the Catholic faith, without which he shall surely be eternally lost". While truth must be intolerant of error (2 Corinthians 6:14, 15), the Church does not deny the possibility of salvation of those earnest and sincere persons outside her fold who live and die in invincible ignorance of the true faith (cf. Council of the Vatican, Sess. III, cp. iii, Denz., 1794; S Aug., Ep.xliii ad Galerium).

That just about sums it up.

[MC Just]

[quote name='Cam42' date='Nov 12 2005, 07:06 PM']Orthodoxy (orthodoxeia) signifies right belief or purity of faith. Right belief is not merely subjective, as resting on personal knowledge and convictions, but is in accordance with the teaching and direction of an absolute extrinsic authority. This authority is the Church founded by Christ, and guided by the Holy Ghost. He, therefore, is orthodox, whose faith coincides with the teachings of the Catholic Church. As divine revelation forms the deposit of faith entrusted to the Church for man's salvation, it also, with the truths clearly deduced from it, forms the object and content of orthodoxy.

Consistent with the teachings and method of Christ and the Apostles, the Fathers point out the necessity of preserving pure and undefiled the deposit of revelation. "Neither in the confusion of paganism", says St. Augustine, "nor in the defilement of heresy, nor in the lethargy of schism, nor yet in blindness of Judaism is religion to be sought; but among those alone who are called Catholic Christians, or the orthodox, that is, the custodians of sound doctrine and followers of right teaching" (De Vera Relig., cap. v). Fulgentius writes: "I rejoice that with no taint of perfidy you are solicitous for the true faith, without which no conversion is of any avail, nor can at all exist" (De Vera Fide ad Petrum, Proleg).

The Church, likewise, in its zeal for purity of faith and teaching, has rigorously adhered to the example set by the Apostles and Early Fathers. This is manifest in its whole history, but especially in such champions of the faith as Athansius, in councils, condemnations of heresy, and its definitions of revealed truth. That orthodox faith is requisite for salvation is a defined doctrine of the Church. "Whosoever wishes to be saved", declares the Athanasian Creed, "must first of all hold integral and inviolate the Catholic faith, without which he shall surely be eternally lost".  While truth must be intolerant of error (2 Corinthians 6:14, 15), the Church does not deny the possibility of salvation of those earnest and sincere persons outside her fold who live and die in invincible ignorance of the true faith (cf. Council of the Vatican, Sess. III, cp. iii, Denz., 1794; S Aug., Ep.xliii ad Galerium).

That just about sums it up.
[right][snapback]786708[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


sweet.

[Myles Domini]

Naturally I agree with you Cam and that was the thrust of my post. Adherence to the Magisterium is the sole criteria for eusebia. I was attempting however to underscore that point so as to redraw the battle lines and get rid of these silly labels like 'post-conciliar Church', uneccessary criticism of Vatican II, and on the other hand unneccesary shots being fired at those who prefer the Tridentine Mass and prefer 'Baroque' theology. However, if there are those out there who want to challenge Cam's definition by all means do so and lets clear the air once and for all.

[cmotherofpirl]

Since political terms such as liberal and conservative really don't belong in church, I'll stick with being called faithful.

Edited November 13, 2005 by cmotherofpirl

[Cam42]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' date='Nov 12 2005, 08:26 PM']Since political terms such as liberal and conservative really don't belong in church, I'll stick with being called faithdul.
[right][snapback]786739[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

is that a boring way to say "faithful?"

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='Cam42' date='Nov 12 2005, 09:55 PM']is that a boring way to say "faithful?"
[right][snapback]786756[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

it happens when you break your reading glasses.
Don't worry, God willing, you will get old someday as well. :

[Myles Domini]

:

[Nathan]

Orthodoxy, to me, is being faithful to the teachings of the Church in belief and action. Simply, it is accepting Church teaching as [i]truth[/i].

[photosynthesis]

"...faith of our fathers, holy faith! we will be true to Thee till death."

[tojo]

[quote name='Nathan' date='Nov 12 2005, 10:21 PM']Orthodoxy, to me, is being faithful to the teachings of the Church in belief and action. Simply, it is accepting Church teaching as [i]truth[/i].
[right][snapback]786813[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

What he said.

[rkwright]

I'm not sure anyone is going to debate on what it means to be an Orthodox Catholic, it seems like everyone is pretty much in agreement, that is to follow the teaching's of the Church. The real debate is trying to apply the teaching of the Church to the problems of our world today.

You call for unity amoung Catholics to fight the wars outside the faith. I agree somewhat, I think I'll clarify in a minute. I don't enjoy getting in squabbles over the Trindentine Mass, personally both Masses have much to offer and neither one is less sacramental than the other. It is silly to debate and fight, and even break off from the Church on these issues. However!!!! I think there is a serious battle within the Church that CANNOT be overlooked or simiply brushed aside for the sake of unity. For me the movements behind Modernism are a real threat to the morality of the Church and thus the teachings of the Church. I have heard a modernist priest say that the resurection did not really happen, this is to deny Christ's mission here on earth! We must fight the problems in our world today (abortion, capital punishment, ect ect) but never sacrifice Christ's message or the Church in the process.

[philothea]

[quote name='Myles' date='Nov 12 2005, 07:38 PM']Naturally I agree with you Cam and that was the thrust of my post. Adherence to the Magisterium is the sole criteria for eusebia. I was attempting however to underscore that point so as to redraw the battle lines and get rid of these silly labels like 'post-conciliar Church', uneccessary criticism of Vatican II, and on the other hand unneccesary shots being fired at those who prefer the Tridentine Mass and prefer 'Baroque' theology. However, if there are those out there who want to challenge Cam's definition by all means do so and lets clear the air once and for all.
[right][snapback]786726[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Pretty sure everyone is going to agree with Cam's definition. (Me too.)

And I'd like to take this opportunity to say, if any of you ever see me say anything with even the slightest possibility of seeming disobedient to the Church, please reprimand me!

Because I don't want to, ever.

Thank you.

[photosynthesis]

[quote name='philothea' date='Nov 13 2005, 10:18 PM']Pretty sure everyone is going to agree with Cam's definition.  (Me too.)

And I'd like to take this opportunity to say, if any of you ever see me say anything with even the slightest possibility of seeming disobedient to the Church, please reprimand me! 

Because I don't want to, ever.

Thank you.
[right][snapback]787698[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
me too. or else I'll send you to the Photosynthesis School of Assertiveness Training bwahahahahahaha...