It's good to be a Melkite
#71
(02-14-2012, 04:03 PM)GottmitunsAlex Wrote:
(02-14-2012, 04:01 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote:
(02-14-2012, 03:57 PM)Silouan Wrote: Man you guys really are just like your Protestant progeny, ever the minimalists.

Why are you even here?
THIS


Well I was certainly under no illusion that you guys were welcoming of anyone not of your particular theological opinion. I'm posting in this thread now in defense of Melkite after you guys have gone on for seven pages now criticizing him and his Church's attempt to return to their ancient practices (which far out date the Latin practice in this case).
Reply
#72
(02-14-2012, 04:11 PM)Silouan Wrote: Well I was certainly under no illusion that you guys were welcoming of anyone not of your particular theological opinion.

Matters of salvation are not mere theological opinions. I just wonder how you, an Eastern Orthodox, keep hanging around a Traditional Catholic Forum with no clear intent to learn about the truth but just to throw your little jabs once and a while.

Quote:I'm posting in this thread now in defense of Melkite after you guys have gone on for seven pages now criticizing him and his Church's attempt to return to their ancient practices (which far out date the Latin practice in this case).

Melkite belongs to the Church. You don't.
Reply
#73
(02-14-2012, 03:49 PM)Melkite Wrote:
(02-14-2012, 02:59 PM)TrentCath Wrote: Pretty sure that a practice that is at least 500+ years old is not modern   :P

Pretty sure that it is in comparison to a practice 1500 years older :P

You didn't say modern in comparison, you just said modern which is wrong.
Reply
#74
(02-14-2012, 04:18 PM)TrentCath Wrote:
(02-14-2012, 03:49 PM)Melkite Wrote:
(02-14-2012, 02:59 PM)TrentCath Wrote: Pretty sure that a practice that is at least 500+ years old is not modern   :P

Pretty sure that it is in comparison to a practice 1500 years older :P

You didn't say modern in comparison, you just said modern which is wrong.

The practice of delaying the reception of Confirmation and Holy Communion predates Trent by some centuries.
Reply
#75
(02-14-2012, 04:18 PM)TrentCath Wrote:
(02-14-2012, 03:49 PM)Melkite Wrote:
(02-14-2012, 02:59 PM)TrentCath Wrote: Pretty sure that a practice that is at least 500+ years old is not modern   :P

Pretty sure that it is in comparison to a practice 1500 years older :P

You didn't say modern in comparison, you just said modern which is wrong.

Eh, 500 years is basically modern.
Reply
#76
(02-14-2012, 03:53 PM)Melkite Wrote:
(02-14-2012, 03:04 PM)TrentCath Wrote: Refraining from sexual relations may be laudable but it is not required. Further I was under the impression that priests were bound to live in perfect continency even if married?

I'm not commenting on the rest because I haven't had a chance to read it, but if the Pope has granted a dispensation, then there is nothing to worry about anymore.

Married priests are not required to be continent.

It's not a dispensation, that would imply the universal law was unchanged but an exception was granted, rather any previous requirements to abstain from sex were abolished if they ever existed.

Is there any proof for the second claim?
Reply
#77
(02-14-2012, 04:19 PM)Crusading Philologist Wrote:
(02-14-2012, 04:18 PM)TrentCath Wrote:
(02-14-2012, 03:49 PM)Melkite Wrote:
(02-14-2012, 02:59 PM)TrentCath Wrote: Pretty sure that a practice that is at least 500+ years old is not modern   :P

Pretty sure that it is in comparison to a practice 1500 years older :P

You didn't say modern in comparison, you just said modern which is wrong.

Eh, 500 years is basically modern.

No.
Reply
#78
(02-14-2012, 03:57 PM)Silouan Wrote: Man you guys really are just like your Protestant progeny, ever the minimalists. Why just worry about what's "necessary" for salvation? The question isn't what's the least I have to do make make it to heaven, the question is what is the most I can do to grow in love and communion with God right now.

Why not just confirm and commune infants because they are children of God, members of Christ's body and so they can begin to grow in love and communion with Him right now? That is the reason infants are and should be communed.

It is beyond question that this has been the practice of the Eastern Churches from time immemorial and that the later Latin practice of withholding communion and it's adoption by some Eastern Catholics is an unnatural break from their long established practice. Good for them for returning to this venerable tradition.

I quite agree!
Reply
#79
(02-14-2012, 04:21 PM)TrentCath Wrote:
(02-14-2012, 04:19 PM)Crusading Philologist Wrote:
(02-14-2012, 04:18 PM)TrentCath Wrote:
(02-14-2012, 03:49 PM)Melkite Wrote:
(02-14-2012, 02:59 PM)TrentCath Wrote: Pretty sure that a practice that is at least 500+ years old is not modern   :P

Pretty sure that it is in comparison to a practice 1500 years older :P

You didn't say modern in comparison, you just said modern which is wrong.

Eh, 500 years is basically modern.

No.

Yes. The Protestant Reformation started about 500 years ago. That's not modern?
Reply
#80
(02-14-2012, 04:23 PM)Crusading Philologist Wrote:
(02-14-2012, 04:21 PM)TrentCath Wrote:
(02-14-2012, 04:19 PM)Crusading Philologist Wrote:
(02-14-2012, 04:18 PM)TrentCath Wrote:
(02-14-2012, 03:49 PM)Melkite Wrote:
(02-14-2012, 02:59 PM)TrentCath Wrote: Pretty sure that a practice that is at least 500+ years old is not modern   :P

Pretty sure that it is in comparison to a practice 1500 years older :P

You didn't say modern in comparison, you just said modern which is wrong.

Eh, 500 years is basically modern.

No.

Yes. The Protestant Reformation started about 500 years ago. That's not modern?

Not in common parlance, besides the practice must be older than 500 years.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)