This reinforces the importance of faith.  He'd be in a better state if it turned out that he had several dozen illegitimate children by as many women.

Ironically, the Orthodox take this seriously by making him renounce his "errors".  Too bad we don't do the same, when it is we who have the true faith.

Let the Orthodox now enjoy this possibly-invalid "priest" -- servers them right for corrupting him and bringing him to Satan.

Also, let us use this as an occasion to reject the sentimental nonsense promoted by the Novus Ordo and also bought into by many Trad Catholics that the Orthodox are merely in material error and are well-meaning but a little confused.  They are about as bad as the get despite the superficial veneer of Traditional Liturgical Rites.

Also, let this be a reminder that the fight is primarily about the faith and not the Liturgy, for the Orthodox have the latter but could hardly be further from the true faith, and their use of these Liturgies which belong to the One True Church are nothing but sacrileges.

So we can learn much from this man's dramatic corruption.

It seems likely to me that many of the EO could be only material and not formal heretics.  Presumably that would’ve been the case for almost all the laypeople in pre modern times.
Obviously its not very likely at all in the case of this priest.

He is definitely in the apostate group, he had every opportunity to 'join' any number of orthodox churches and they wouldn't make him 'do' public abjuration. He chose the group no one forced him.

Aren't you Byzantine Catholic as well?  If so, I'm really curious as to your opinion of EOs in general (you can PM me if you'd prefer.)

Honestly, I admire the Russian Orthodox for insisting on abjuration.  Obviously I think we're right, and they're wrong, and while I probably have a way more charitable assessment of EOs in general than anyone else here, I definitely don't think making this kind of abjuration is good for one's soul.

But my biggest issue here, again, is the sheer dishonesty.  I really dislike dishonesty, and saying we see the Pope as the head of the Church "instead of Christ" is a lie.  Catholics don't teach that. 

Ah, here we go.  Just watch that video.  Do these people have the Catholic faith?  They explicitly reject the true rule of faith.

If you do not have the proper formal motive of faith, then you have no supernatural faith ... whether this be lacking by your own fault or by simple absence.

Even if they happen to have some material beliefs in common with Catholics, they hold them with a completely false rule, a non-infallible rule insufficient for supernatural faith.

You are blinded into believing that simply because there's a bigger overlap in the Venn diagram that charts the objective beliefs of the two groups, i.e. because they're closer to us materially than other groups are, that they have the formal motive of supernatural faith.  They do not.

That's why a person who denies a single truth of faith becomes a formal heretic ... even if he continues to hold every other truth ... because in doing so he rejects the rule behind them ALL, and the truths he continues to hold materially he does not hold with the proper formal motive.  FORMAL vs. MATERIAL heresy have nothing to do with "sincerity".

:applause: :applause: :applause:

To make a public abjuration of the Catholic religion constitutes a formal act of apostasy which places one outside the Church (and therefore salvation).

That being the case, the issue of heresy becomes moot.

Is there a distinction between formal apostasy and material apostasy?  

Ah, here we go.  Just watch that video.  Do these people have the Catholic faith?  They explicitly reject the true rule of faith.

If you do not have the proper formal motive of faith, then you have no supernatural faith ... whether this be lacking by your own fault or by simple absence.

Even if they happen to have some material beliefs in common with Catholics, they hold them with a completely false rule, a non-infallible rule insufficient for supernatural faith.

You are blinded into believing that simply because there's a bigger overlap in the Venn diagram that charts the objective beliefs of the two groups, i.e. because they're closer to us materially than other groups are, that they have the formal motive of supernatural faith.  They do not.

That's why a person who denies a single truth of faith becomes a formal heretic ... even if he continues to hold every other truth ... because in doing so he rejects the rule behind them ALL, and the truths he continues to hold materially he does not hold with the proper formal motive.  FORMAL vs. MATERIAL heresy have nothing to do with "sincerity".

I was talking about EOs in general, not those particular people.  That said, what would you define as the "true rule of faith?"

I'm guessing you're gonna say something like believing something because the Catholic Church teaches it, which gets really really confusing when it comes to the Orthodox, since they also call themselves Catholic (even though of course they're wrong about which Church is the Catholic Church.) 

At any rate, lying about the Catholic Church certainly seems like obstinate heresy to me.

As a general statement, would you refrain from making any distinctions between false religions?  ie. being an EO is just as bad as being a fundamentalist Muslim?  Or do you say so in this particular case particularly because this priest knew what he was turning his back on and did it anyway?

Is a Protestant who converts to Eastern Orthodoxy taking a step in the right direction?  Is a Muslim who converts to Protestantism taking a step in the right direction?  Is an atheist who concludes that God exists taking a step in the right direction?  Why or why not?

If I tell you to turn right at the corner go 3 blocks until spoonour street, go right 5 blocks to micgillicutty liquors and get me a bottle of Knob Creek, but you stop at the local gas station, "liquor, Guns and Ammo" (real place in Columbia MO by the way) and yhou get a bottle of Am. Dist Bourbon Supreme, do I have a bottle of Knob Creek?  nuf said

Is there a distinction between formal apostasy and material apostasy?  

Let me answer with a question?  When my grandma died, did she formally or materially die?  She's just gone far as I can tell.  One day I'm gonna die.  I like teo remember that I am dust and to dust I shall return.  why split hairs, Stay Catholic!!

This reinforces the importance of faith.  He'd be in a better state if it turned out that he had several dozen illegitimate children by as many women.

Ironically, the Orthodox take this seriously by making him renounce his "errors".  Too bad we don't do the same, when it is we who have the true faith.

Let the Orthodox now enjoy this possibly-invalid "priest" -- servers them right for corrupting him and bringing him to Satan.

Also, let us use this as an occasion to reject the sentimental nonsense promoted by the Novus Ordo and also bought into by many Trad Catholics that the Orthodox are merely in material error and are well-meaning but a little confused.  They are about as bad as the get despite the superficial veneer of Traditional Liturgical Rites.

Also, let this be a reminder that the fight is primarily about the faith and not the Liturgy, for the Orthodox have the latter but could hardly be further from the true faith, and their use of these Liturgies which belong to the One True Church are nothing but sacrileges.

So we can learn much from this man's dramatic corruption.

Having known several Orthodox priests who have converted from Vatican II Catholicism and/or virulent anti-Catholic Protestant sects, I have witnessed their prideful rabid satanic anti-Catholicism. It is not of God.

If you are ever introduced to an Orthodox priest find out immediately what his background is. Stay far away from anyone who has left the Vatican II new church or Protestantism, because these apostate priests have become so consumed and overtaken with a diabolical passion to convert other Catholics and Protestants to their newly accepted idealized religion that they have become blind and deafened to the hedonistic statements of their own Moscow Patriarch (MP) and/or the Ecuмenical Patriarch (EP), both of whom have capitulated with the post-Vatican II modernism and anti-Christ ecuмenism of the Vatican.

Witness: all the recent Moscow Patriarchs have been members of the KGB who continue to persecute and raid the Russian churches of Traditional Catholics who are not under Rome. The current Ecuмenical Patriarch is also no friend of Traditional Catholicism. In addition, he has issued statement allowing abortions, birth control, etc.

These apostate priests have eyes but see not, ears but hear not, thus they preach the lie of Satan.