The Eastern Churches and St. Thomas Aquinas
(02-08-2012, 05:57 PM)Parmandur Wrote:
(02-08-2012, 05:49 PM)TrentCath Wrote:
(02-08-2012, 05:18 PM)Parmandur Wrote: Also, here is the full text of Trent on Purgatory.  No mention of fire, which Florence said specifically was not a required belief of the faithful.  It still stands that you were bashing Melkite on the basis of passing off a pious theological opinion as De Fide dogma:

Decree Concerning Purgatory

Since the Catholic Church, instructed by the Holy Ghost, has, following the sacred writings and the ancient tradition of the Fathers, taught in sacred councils and very recently in this ecumenical council that there is a purgatory,[1] and that the souls there detained are aided by the suffrages of the faithful and chiefly by the acceptable sacrifice of the altar, the holy council commands the bishops that they strive diligently to the end that the sound doctrine of purgatory, transmitted by the Fathers and sacred councils,[2] be believed and maintained by the faithful of Christ, and be everywhere taught and preached. The more difficult and subtle questions, however, and those that do not make for edification and from which there is for the most part no increase in piety, are to be excluded from popular instructions to uneducated people.[3] Likewise, things that are uncertain or that have the appearance of falsehood they shall not permit to be made known publicly and discussed. But those things that tend to a certain kind of curiosity or superstition, or that savor of filthy lucre, they shall prohibit as scandals and stumbling-blocks to the faithful. The bishops shall see to it that the suffrages of the living, that is, the sacrifice of the mass,[4] prayers, alms and other works of piety which they have been accustomed to perform for the faithful departed, be piously and devoutly discharged in accordance with the laws of the Church, and that whatever is due on their behalf from testamentary bequests or other ways, be discharged by the priests and ministers of the Church and others who are bound to render this service not in a perfunctory manner, but diligently and accurately.

Ummm can you read? I did not say fire was required, I said suffering or pain was, until you concede that you are just dealing with a strawman

Yes, I can read.  You attacked Melkite over his not believing in a physical pain being a component of purgatory, or that is how he read you, suggesting that you might not know how you are coming off in your posts.  "Suffering" and "pain" are used in an analogical sense, as we have no experience of the condition disembodied souls in purgatory find themselves in before the Resurrection, and pain as such is a physical phenomenon.  Believing that there is a privation on the road to the Beatific Vision is something Melkite agreed to.  Why are you being so combative about this?

Combative, no, protective of the truth yes.
Reply
(02-08-2012, 05:50 PM)TrentCath Wrote:
(02-08-2012, 05:32 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote: Accusations of heresy shouldn't be thrown around lightly and we must give our brothers in the faith at least the benefit of the doubt.

Melkite is owed an apology.

I did not call Melkite a heretic, I said that in the post he professed a heretical opinion, there is a world of difference and no he is not owed an apology.

You accused him of having professed heresy, which is not true. Don't be obtuse. I understand the use of polemical language during discussions but we're all part of the same spiritual family. Let charity inform our behaviour.

(02-07-2012, 12:08 PM)TrentCath Wrote: Seeing as you just professed heresy it appears that it is you who should be more careful.
Reply
(02-08-2012, 06:08 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote:
(02-08-2012, 05:50 PM)TrentCath Wrote:
(02-08-2012, 05:32 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote: Accusations of heresy shouldn't be thrown around lightly and we must give our brothers in the faith at least the benefit of the doubt.

Melkite is owed an apology.

I did not call Melkite a heretic, I said that in the post he professed a heretical opinion, there is a world of difference and no he is not owed an apology.

You accused him of having professed heresy, which is not true. Don't be obtuse. I understand the use of polemical language during discussions but we're all part of the same spiritual family. Let charity inform our behaviour.

(02-07-2012, 12:08 PM)TrentCath Wrote: Seeing as you just professed heresy it appears that it is you who should be more careful.

This would require an apology if wrong its not, the idea that there are pains, and by that I mean suffering, in purgatory is de fide, it may not be burning fires, but there is pain and it most certainly does not come from 'private revelation' as 'The fundamentals of Catholic Dogma' quite clearly states.
Reply
I don't disagree with you or with Dr. Ott for that matter.

I'm just saying that you acted rashly towards Melkite without due reason.
Reply
(02-08-2012, 06:29 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote: I don't disagree with you or with Dr. Ott for that matter.

I'm just saying that you acted rashly towards Melkite without due reason.

It may have been rash, but it was not false and thus deserves no apology.
Reply
(02-08-2012, 06:32 PM)TrentCath Wrote:
(02-08-2012, 06:29 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote: I don't disagree with you or with Dr. Ott for that matter.

I'm just saying that you acted rashly towards Melkite without due reason.

It may have been rash, but it was not false and thus deserves no apology.

I, like Vetus, don't disagree with you, but you were a jerk to Melktie, speaking rashly and harshly.  Being a jerk is something for which one ought to apologize, perhaps more so if in the right.  Ergo, you ought to apologize to Melkite.
Reply
(02-08-2012, 06:43 PM)Parmandur Wrote:
(02-08-2012, 06:32 PM)TrentCath Wrote:
(02-08-2012, 06:29 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote: I don't disagree with you or with Dr. Ott for that matter.

I'm just saying that you acted rashly towards Melkite without due reason.

It may have been rash, but it was not false and thus deserves no apology.

I, like Vetus, don't disagree with you, but you were a jerk to Melktie, speaking rashly and harshly.  Being a jerk is something for which one ought to apologize, perhaps more so if in the right.  Ergo, you ought to apologize to Melkite.

Thanks for your honesty, but the answer is still no. I have no intention of apologising for stating a fact.
Reply
(02-08-2012, 06:50 PM)TrentCath Wrote:
(02-08-2012, 06:43 PM)Parmandur Wrote:
(02-08-2012, 06:32 PM)TrentCath Wrote:
(02-08-2012, 06:29 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote: I don't disagree with you or with Dr. Ott for that matter.

I'm just saying that you acted rashly towards Melkite without due reason.

It may have been rash, but it was not false and thus deserves no apology.

I, like Vetus, don't disagree with you, but you were a jerk to Melktie, speaking rashly and harshly.  Being a jerk is something for which one ought to apologize, perhaps more so if in the right.  Ergo, you ought to apologize to Melkite.

Thanks for your honesty, but the answer is still no. I have no intention of apologising for stating a fact.

If you had a friend who was fat and not very smart, and you called him a moronic bucket of lard, you would owe him an apology for being a jackass even though, factually, he is fat and unintelligent.  Factuality is not always being in the right when dealing with fellow human beings.

That's leaving aside the fact that Melkite didn't say anything heretical on Purgatory.
Reply
(02-08-2012, 06:53 PM)Parmandur Wrote:
(02-08-2012, 06:50 PM)TrentCath Wrote:
(02-08-2012, 06:43 PM)Parmandur Wrote:
(02-08-2012, 06:32 PM)TrentCath Wrote:
(02-08-2012, 06:29 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote: I don't disagree with you or with Dr. Ott for that matter.

I'm just saying that you acted rashly towards Melkite without due reason.

It may have been rash, but it was not false and thus deserves no apology.

I, like Vetus, don't disagree with you, but you were a jerk to Melktie, speaking rashly and harshly.  Being a jerk is something for which one ought to apologize, perhaps more so if in the right.  Ergo, you ought to apologize to Melkite.

Thanks for your honesty, but the answer is still no. I have no intention of apologising for stating a fact.

If you had a friend who was fat and not very smart, and you called him a moronic bucket of lard, you would owe him an apology for being a jackass even though, factually, he is fat and unintelligent.  Factuality is not always being in the right when dealing with fellow human beings.

That's leaving aside the fact that Melkite didn't say anything heretical on Purgatory.

A) its a very different situation, and
b)
Quote: Even the Orthodox don't reject some kind of intermediary state, so what you have stated are not exact opposites.  Also, it is perfectly acceptable to believe Purgatory is not painful.  The only reason Latins 'know' it is painful is from private revelation, something that can NEVER be required for faith, thus not de fide.
Reply
(02-06-2012, 12:58 AM)formerbuddhist Wrote: In all the studies I've done on Eastern Orthodoxy I have never seen anything but mockery and disdain for St. Thomas Aquinas. I'm not saying every Orthodox or Eastern Catholic individually disdains him and his theology but I have never seen any kind words about him. St. Augustine usually gets the same derision but some like the late Father Seraphim Rose actually had some nice things to say about him (Augustine).

Well, when I was at the Maronite monastery we were studying St. Thomas Aquinas Summa Theologica.

Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)