The Eastern Churches and St. Thomas Aquinas
(02-10-2012, 11:43 PM)Silouan Wrote:
(02-10-2012, 06:19 AM)TrentCath Wrote: A) that is ignorant and a statement that can only be made in bad faith or by one who does not understand st Thomas

Well it most certainly is not bad faith and I never claimed to understand St Thomas. I was simply answering the OP.

(02-10-2012, 06:19 AM)TrentCath Wrote: B) the nationalisation of the orthodox churches is a result of separation from Rome.

There were national Churches long before the Schism. The Church has been organized along political boundaries from time immemorial. Perhaps you should brush up on your Church history my friend.  :)

(02-10-2012, 06:19 AM)TrentCath Wrote: C) the obsession with small t traditions and the stagnant theology is for the same reason

I have to say I agree in some way with Su, eastern orthodox theology is stagnant because of the very nature of eastern orthodox faith and so of course they are 'jealous' of someone like St Thomas

Says the traditionalist Catholic without a whiff of irony. I have to say statements like this illustrate for me a fascinating aspect of traditional Catholicism. You believe that we are "stagnant" (whatever that means), and that doctrine "develops" over time. You do this all while criticizing the Catholic Church's development at Vatican II. Would that your Church had been more stagnant!

It seems that you want to eat your cake and have it too. If you are going to start the freight train of developing doctrine you shouldn't be surprised if it develops in a way you don't agree with. What makes one development legitimate and another illegitimate? It appears all Catholics agree that development of doctrine occurs, the disagreement is in which century the development should stop.

The whole thing makes me wonder. Do Catholics criticize us as stagnant out of envy? After all, we have managed to maintain (without a Pope) for all these centuries, while you have lost so much of what you hold dear, most likely to never be regained. I could understand why someone in that position might lash out.

Please don't be coy you and I both know that having a church split on national lines is not healthy, in fact the obsession with national churches was declared a heresy by the orthodox church itself, in the 19th century I believe, surely you know about this? And no one denies there were national or provincial synods, what is denied is that churches were set up on the basis of nationality not region and these churches then further fragmented amongst themselves.

That doctrine develops is beyond question, the additions to the creeds and indeed the very fact there are different creeds proves this. The same with the greater clarity and teachings brought about after ecumenical councils. The issue is whether the development is legitimate or not, illegitimate development is nothing but a perversion, Vatican 2 is a good example of this. The best explanation on the matter is provided by Bl cardinal Newman.

As for jealously no, concern and pity, yes though it has to be said I feel much the same for many NO catholics today. But no stagnation is not something to be jealous of.

Messages In This Thread
Re: The Eastern Churches and St. Thomas Aquinas - by TrentCath - 02-11-2012, 06:16 AM

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)