The Eastern Churches and St. Thomas Aquinas
#65
(02-06-2012, 08:28 PM)Silouan Wrote:
(02-06-2012, 07:09 PM)TrentCath Wrote:
(02-06-2012, 03:13 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote:
(02-06-2012, 01:52 PM)Scriptorium Wrote: One Church.

This.

I still have trouble thinking of the Church as west and east to this very day. These are concepts that reflect a distant political reality, that of the divided Roman Empire, much more than a supposed ecclesiastical and spiritual division that was already present at the Apostolic age. Not quite: the "eastern" Church and the "western" Church are simply historical developments. On one hand we have those who followed the court of Rome and on the other hand we have those who followed the court of Constantinople. The main rites of the universal church became progressively harmonised along these lines which, at their core, are just accidental and were the produce of political division more than anything. No matter how many different approaches to spirituality and theology the Church might legitimately harbour, we must all still confess "one Lord, one faith, one baptism" (Eph. 4:5).

When I see 21st century Catholics value their faith on the basis of geography and rite and talk about fellow Catholics of the roman rite as "Latins," almost as if it were a dirty word, I cannot help feeling that something huge is being lost on us all here. The use of such outdated polemical language and needless antagonism mirrors the use some Protestants do of 16th century inflamed accusations against "Romish superstition" as if history and the development of theology hadn't taught them anything. The Church is not western or eastern, neither roman or byzantine, but catholic, truly universal in time and space. "I believe in the one, holy, catholic and apostolic church." The Doctors of the Church aren't property of any rite but of the whole Church. Their work and their teachings are applicable to us ALL: I cannot conceive of St. John Chrysostom or St. Basil being just for the easterners as if they were part of a different church. They aren't. Rites are venerable and sundry but wholly dependent upon the faith which is one and irreformable.

I understand the expediency that Rome has used in trying to keep Eastern Catholics in communion but I feel something should be done about this constant divisionism in the future.

Indeed Vatican 2 has only worsened the situation by turning or allowing many eastern catholics to turn into de facto eastern orthodox heretics, i.e rejecting papal supremacy, purgatory etc..


Those cheeky Melkites! What audacity to maintain the faith they have always held! What an outrage!  :LOL:

If they have always been heretics, then I fear for those who approved them, but I doubt it
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Re: The Eastern Churches and St. Thomas Aquinas - by TrentCath - 02-07-2012, 05:39 AM



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)