The Eastern Churches and St. Thomas Aquinas
#66
Understanding them in a different way does not mean = complete opposite of what we believe.

Uh, we don't believe completely opposite things.

'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.

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.

'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 is a difference between he can only interfere and he should only interfere.  The fact that he has authority does not mean it is always prudent that he exercise it.

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

well, they're not really ecumenical if they don't pertain to everybody, do they?  A general council can still be binding on the whole Church without actually being ecumenical.

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

apparently, you are either incapable of understanding what I said or refuse to correwt yourself.  For the fifth time, I never said original sin is death.  The curse of Adam is death.  The curse of Adam and Original sin (are you paying attention?) ARE NOT the same thing.

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

I don't know of any Eastern Catholics who believe the former.  Silouan has stated that may be the case, but he is Orthodox, not Catholic.  The Orthodox have canonized saints as well, so that would seem to indicate they believe the just are already in heaven.

The list goes on.

again, when you find a list of actual issues, get back to me.  For now, why don't you go back and study actual differences so you won't make careless mistakes next time.

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



Reply


Messages In This Thread
Re: The Eastern Churches and St. Thomas Aquinas - by Melkite - 02-07-2012, 11:00 AM



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)