Author Topic: Who are the schismatics? (Read 3719 times)

Gimli · « **on:** October 17, 2013, 05:17:03 PM »

Why do we call the orthodox schismatic's and why does the orthodox Christians consider them to be the first and original Christians? I once asked a SSPX-priest this but he gave a quite weird and avoiding answer. I felt that he did not really know and had an answer. I once asked a priest within the Christ the King institute ( a liberal trendy-traditional catholic club) but he could not give me an answer either. Can someone explain to me like I was a six year old or so? I just do not get it. Are we not the first and the Bona Fide originals?

Hobbledehoy · « **Reply #1 on:** October 17, 2013, 06:38:48 PM »

It is a misnomer to name the Oriental schismatic "Orthodox" but it is so widely used that it has crept into many Catholics' lexicon. They are schismatics by judgment of the Apostolic See and by their own obstinacy and contumacy.

The Oriental schismatics have always regarded themselves as "orthodox" in order to distinguish themselves from the Roman Church and the Churches of Latin Occident subject to the Pope. For they audaciously accused the Roman Church of being novel and heterodox in supposedly "changing" the Symbol of the Œcuмenical Councils of Nicaea and Constantinople by adding the "Filioque" clause wherein the dogma that Holy Ghost proceeds from both the Father and Son is professed, which the Oriental schismatics deny and were therefore subject to the censure of formal heresy.

They are also both schismatic and heretical in denying the dogmas of the infallibility and primacy of the Supreme Pontiff and refuse to acknowledge the Œcuмenical Councils and Sacred Canons that obliged the assent of the faithful after the Second Œcuмenical Council of Nicaea.

They also refuse to acknowledge the dogmas defined by the Roman Pontiffs merely because they were defined by the Roman Pontiffs: the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom and the other sacred Rites of Oriental Christendom clearly proclaim Our Lady to be immaculate from all sin, and yet the Oriental schismatics refused to assent to the dogma of the Immaculate Conception as defined by Pope Pius IX.

Yes, the Catholics are "the first and the Bona Fide originals" because St. Peter himself established the Roman Church as his See and Our Lord had given unto St. Peter and his successors the plenitude of magisterial and disciplinary primacy; as the rock whereupon the edifice of His Church was to be established. The other Apostles did not have successors who "inherited" their personal charisms of dogmatic infallibility and extraordinary jurisdiction. Therefore all Bishops could claim and prove to be successors of the Apostles only through the successors of St. Peter who are the Roman Pontiffs.

2Vermont · « **Reply #2 on:** October 17, 2013, 06:57:38 PM »

Oh darn. I thought this was going to be another "sedes are schismatics and are going to Hell" thread.

Gimli · « **Reply #3 on:** October 18, 2013, 01:26:21 AM »

Quote from: 2Vermont

Oh darn. I thought this was going to be another "sedes are schismatics and are going to Hell" thread.

No, don´t worry.

Thanks Vermont.

Gimli · « **Reply #4 on:** October 18, 2013, 01:51:44 AM »

No, I meant Hobbledehoy :sign-surrender:

poche · « **Reply #5 on:** October 18, 2013, 05:53:35 AM »

They are the schismatics. They are known as Russian Orthodox, Bulgarian Orthodox, Serbian Orthodox, etc................. While we are Catholic, which means universal.

IllyricumSacrum · « **Reply #6 on:** October 18, 2013, 12:15:12 PM »

Quote from: Hobbledehoy

It is a misnomer to name the Oriental schismatic "Orthodox" but it is so widely used that it has crept into many Catholics' lexicon. They are schismatics by judgment of the Apostolic See and by their own obstinacy and contumacy.

The Oriental schismatics have always regarded themselves as "orthodox" in order to distinguish themselves from the Roman Church and the Churches of Latin Occident subject to the Pope. For they audaciously accused the Roman Church of being novel and heterodox in supposedly "changing" the Symbol of the Œcuмenical Councils of Nicaea and Constantinople by adding the "Filioque" clause wherein the dogma that Holy Ghost proceeds from both the Father and Son is professed, which the Oriental schismatics deny and were therefore subject to the censure of formal heresy.

They are also both schismatic and heretical in denying the dogmas of the infallibility and primacy of the Supreme Pontiff and refuse to acknowledge the Œcuмenical Councils and Sacred Canons that obliged the assent of the faithful after the Second Œcuмenical Council of Nicaea.

They also refuse to acknowledge the dogmas defined by the Roman Pontiffs merely because they were defined by the Roman Pontiffs: the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom and the other sacred Rites of Oriental Christendom clearly proclaim Our Lady to be immaculate from all sin, and yet the Oriental schismatics refused to assent to the dogma of the Immaculate Conception as defined by Pope Pius IX.

Yes, the Catholics are "the first and the Bona Fide originals" because St. Peter himself established the Roman Church as his See and Our Lord had given unto St. Peter and his successors the plenitude of magisterial and disciplinary primacy; as the rock whereupon the edifice of His Church was to be established. The other Apostles did not have successors who "inherited" their personal charisms of dogmatic infallibility and extraordinary jurisdiction. Therefore all Bishops could claim and prove to be successors of the Apostles only through the successors of St. Peter who are the Roman Pontiffs.

Let's not forget the Indissolubility of Marriage where even a married secular priest can get divorced (not sure if he can remarry, but his wife can - up to 3x!), caesero-papism , deification of ethnicity, support of some nationalist hierarchs for religious and ethnic genocide, long histories of collaborating with the infidel ("better the turban than the Tiara"), etc.

Hyperdox Nick · « **Reply #7 on:** October 24, 2013, 08:32:28 PM »

I'm a convert from Roman Catholicism to Orthodoxy and I'm comfortable answering any questions regarding Faith or ecclesiology here.

To answer the question of universality, yes the Orthodox are Catholic in the fullest, deepest sense of Faith. Faith, not hierarchical affiliation, is what's considered to be the most substantive, unifying thing. Communion is based on a mutual recognition of a person/group/church sharing the same Faith, and is not on adherence to the hierarchy of one specific church. This same unity doesn't exist, as you probably already know, within the Roman realm, since you have Traditionalist, N.O., Charismatic, Eastern-Rite, Opus Dei, etc etc RC's. Within each group, different practices of prayer and Liturgy form the Faith of people differently, and the RC unity (based simply on "Communion with the Pope") is therefore only skin-deep. A person formed in one of these environments is likely to not be comfortable at a Faith-level with one or more of the other environments. How could the Pope be everywhere at all times to ensure that unity is maintained?

On the Orthodox side, I'll be comfortable at a deep level with most everything in the Russian/Serbian/Polish/Romanian/OCA/Ukrainian/Greek/Coptic churches, even if I can't speak the same language as all of them, and if we're not within the same hierarchy. The Orthodox Faith is universal.

Mabel · « **Reply #8 on:** October 24, 2013, 08:50:27 PM »

Quote from: Hyperdox Nick

I'm a convert from Roman Catholicism to Orthodoxy and I'm comfortable answering any questions regarding Faith or ecclesiology here.

To answer the question of universality, yes the Orthodox are Catholic in the fullest, deepest sense of Faith. Faith, not hierarchical affiliation, is what's considered to be the most substantive, unifying thing. Communion is based on a mutual recognition of a person/group/church sharing the same Faith, and is not on adherence to the hierarchy of one specific church. This same unity doesn't exist, as you probably already know, within the Roman realm, since you have Traditionalist, N.O., Charismatic, Eastern-Rite, Opus Dei, etc etc RC's. Within each group, different practices of prayer and Liturgy form the Faith of people differently, and the RC unity (based simply on "Communion with the Pope") is therefore only skin-deep. A person formed in one of these environments is likely to not be comfortable at a Faith-level with one or more of the other environments. How could the Pope be everywhere at all times to ensure that unity is maintained?

On the Orthodox side, I'll be comfortable at a deep level with most everything in the Russian/Serbian/Polish/Romanian/OCA/Ukrainian/Greek/Coptic churches, even if I can't speak the same language as all of them, and if we're not within the same hierarchy. The Orthodox Faith is universal.

I have no need to ask any questions of you. If I want to know what the Church teaches about Oriental schismatics and heretics, I will seek out a book published under Her authority by Her theologians. As a Catholic, I would fear for my soul to be taught by those outside the unity of the True Faith, so I have nothing to say to you or learn from you regarding Faith or History.

If you want to discuss weather, kittens, or recipes, maybe then we can chat.

Hobbledehoy · « **Reply #9 on:** October 24, 2013, 09:35:41 PM »

Quote from: Hyperdox Nick

I'm a convert from Roman Catholicism to Orthodoxy and I'm comfortable answering any questions regarding Faith or ecclesiology here.

Correction: you are a lapsed Catholic who has apostatized to the Oriental schism that embraces the various Eastern, national Churches who have no central authority nor uniformity of Creed or liturgical practice, and have denied the dogmas defined by the Roman Pontiff to the peril of eternal reprobation. They have always been under the yoke of barbarian tyrants (be it the Turks and Islamists or the Communists), have been retarded by historical and racial prejudices (against the "Franks") and have never been able to develop a coherent systematic body of dogmatic theology.

It is as Rev. Fr. Adrian Fortescue wrote when the Anglo-Catholics and Oxfordists were hyper-idealizing the Oriental schismatics - as if there were purer and superior to the Latin Occident - the so-called "Eastern Orthodox" have exhibited a continual pattern of cultural decay, philosophical fragmentation, dogmatic error, pastoral failure and missionary infecundity. The only reason why the Oriental schismatics are growing now is because of the sorry situation of the apostate Occident, which had given itself over to materialism, indifferentism, syncretism, (and all the heresies and errors of the Masonic, anti-Christian experiment known as the "Enlightenment" and the French revolution, culminating in modernism and the various mutations thereof), long before the present day crises of Holy Mother Church began.

Whatever is sacred that the Oriental schismatics glory in possessing (ancient Liturgies, valid Sacraments and Orders) are pilfered treasures that they have taken from Holy Mother Church, who alone is the sole custodian of these treasures.

IllyricumSacrum · « **Reply #10 on:** October 25, 2013, 08:04:00 AM »

Quote from: Hyperdox Nick

I'm a convert from Roman Catholicism to Orthodoxy and I'm comfortable answering any questions regarding Faith or ecclesiology here.

To answer the question of universality, yes the Orthodox are Catholic in the fullest, deepest sense of Faith. Faith, not hierarchical affiliation, is what's considered to be the most substantive, unifying thing. Communion is based on a mutual recognition of a person/group/church sharing the same Faith, and is not on adherence to the hierarchy of one specific church. This same unity doesn't exist, as you probably already know, within the Roman realm, since you have Traditionalist, N.O., Charismatic, Eastern-Rite, Opus Dei, etc etc RC's. Within each group, different practices of prayer and Liturgy form the Faith of people differently, and the RC unity (based simply on "Communion with the Pope") is therefore only skin-deep. A person formed in one of these environments is likely to not be comfortable at a Faith-level with one or more of the other environments. How could the Pope be everywhere at all times to ensure that unity is maintained?

On the Orthodox side, I'll be comfortable at a deep level with most everything in the Russian/Serbian/Polish/Romanian/OCA/Ukrainian/Greek/Coptic churches, even if I can't speak the same language as all of them, and if we're not within the same hierarchy. The Orthodox Faith is universal.

Gosh, you left out Albanian.

IllyricumSacrum · « **Reply #11 on:** October 25, 2013, 08:05:58 AM »

Quote from: Hobbledehoy

Quote from: Hyperdox Nick
I'm a convert from Roman Catholicism to Orthodoxy and I'm comfortable answering any questions regarding Faith or ecclesiology here.

Correction: you are a lapsed Catholic who has apostatized to the Oriental schism that embraces the various Eastern, national Churches who have no central authority nor uniformity of Creed or liturgical practice, and have denied the dogmas defined by the Roman Pontiff to the peril of eternal reprobation. They have always been under the yoke of barbarian tyrants (be it the Turks and Islamists or the Communists), have been retarded by historical and racial prejudices (against the "Franks") and have never been able to develop a coherent systematic body of dogmatic theology.

It is as Rev. Fr. Adrian Fortescue wrote when the Anglo-Catholics and Oxfordists were hyper-idealizing the Oriental schismatics - as if there were purer and superior to the Latin Occident - the so-called "Eastern Orthodox" have exhibited a continual pattern of cultural decay, philosophical fragmentation, dogmatic error, pastoral failure and missionary infecundity. The only reason why the Oriental schismatics are growing now is because of the sorry situation of the apostate Occident, which had given itself over to materialism, indifferentism, syncretism, (and all the heresies and errors of the Masonic, anti-Christian experiment known as the "Enlightenment" and the French revolution, culminating in modernism and the various mutations thereof), long before the present day crises of Holy Mother Church began.

Whatever is sacred that the Oriental schismatics glory in possessing (ancient Liturgies, valid Sacraments and Orders) are pilfered treasures that they have taken from Holy Mother Church, who alone is the sole custodian of these treasures.

That about sums it up.

Hyperdox Nick · « **Reply #12 on:** October 25, 2013, 12:50:57 PM »

You know what? I actually like you guys and feel at home on this forum! 90% of the people in the Roman Catholic Church today have an understanding of God that equates to a smiley face in the sky who wants people to be nice to each other, and we have something deeper.

As for the schism, at least none of us are relativists here, so we can have a much more solid discussion than the "different traditions, let's hold hands and sing and be nice to each other" crap. You say I'm lapsed and schismatic, and you can back it up with rhetoric. I say that your church, the Roman Church is both schismatic and heretical, both the cause and perpetuation of the Great Schism, and I can back it up with logic and historical fact.

Anyone want to propose a good starting point for a discussion, assuming you'd like to have one? Papal primacy immediately comes to mind, as does the role of the Church (ie. passing on Faith)...

oh yes... I left out Albanian, as well as Georgian and Finnish... there may be more too...

Capt McQuigg · « **Reply #13 on:** October 25, 2013, 04:25:29 PM »

HyperDox Nick,

Two questions, both general.

1) Why did you convert? It would be nice to hear the story of your conversion.

2) Where do you live?

PereJoseph · « **Reply #14 on:** October 25, 2013, 05:06:22 PM »

Quote from: Gimli

I just do not get it. Are we not the first and the Bona Fide originals?

Yes.