The Eastern Churches and St. Thomas Aquinas
(02-06-2012, 08:26 PM)Melkite Wrote:
(02-06-2012, 08:22 PM)TrentCath Wrote: Entirely true I'm afraid as I can prove with ample quotes and circumstances  :)

We don't have to understand them the same way you do, only acknowledge the truth in them.  Most of the examples you would cite would probably fall under merely understanding the doctrines differently.

Understanding them in a different way does not mean = complete opposite of what we believe.

'Purgatory exists and those in it suffer pains of some form' and 'Purgatory exists but those in it do not suffer pain' are two irreconcilable statements, the later is heresy, the former is De Fide.

'Since the Roman pontiff, by the divine right of the apostolic primacy, governs the whole church, we likewise teach and declare that

    he is the supreme judge of the faithful [52] , and that
    in all cases which fall under ecclesiastical jurisdiction recourse may be had to his judgment [53] .
    The sentence of the apostolic see (than which there is no higher authority) is not subject to revision by anyone,
    nor may anyone lawfully pass judgment thereupon [54] . And so
    they stray from the genuine path of truth who maintain that it is lawful to appeal from the judgments of the Roman pontiffs to an ecumenical council as if this were an authority superior to the Roman pontiff.

So, then,

    if anyone says that
        the Roman pontiff has merely an office of supervision and guidance, and
            not the full and supreme power of jurisdiction over the whole church, and this
            not only in matters of
                faith and morals, but also in those which concern the
                discipline and government of the church dispersed throughout the whole world; or that
        he has only the principal part, but not the absolute fullness, of this supreme power; or that
        this power of his is not ordinary and immediate both over all and each of the churches and over all and each of the pastors and faithful:
    let him be anathema. '

is not reconcilable with 'its a primacy of honour only' or 'he can only interfere when the bishops ask him to' or 'he can only interfere when the bishop is grossly incompetent or a heretic'

'There are 22 ecumenical councils' is not reconcilable with 'there are only 7 ecumenical councils'

'Original sin is death' is not reconcilable with 'whoever says Original sin is only death is...anathema'

'The beatific vision is not immediate, there is an intermediate period' is not reconcilable with 'The just immediately after death perceive the beatific vision'

The list goes on.

One cannot hide blatant contradiction under the disguise of 'different interpretations' and expect people to believe it.


Messages In This Thread
Re: The Eastern Churches and St. Thomas Aquinas - by TrentCath - 02-07-2012, 05:37 AM

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)