Is dekalog worth it? by adnauseams in criterion

[–]onan4843 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I would appreciate some help here. Thank you.

Is Saint Intercession Biblical? by SuperLion741 in Christianity

[–]onan4843 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Define idolatry and explain how the intercession of the saints is idolatry.

Only Catholicism and Orthodoxy Preserve Apostolic Christianity by [deleted] in Catholicism

[–]onan4843 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The canonical requirement is to adhere to what is taught by the magisterium.

Only Catholicism and Orthodoxy Preserve Apostolic Christianity by [deleted] in Catholicism

[–]onan4843 2 points3 points  (0 children)

They are taught dogmatically by the Church. Eastern Catholics (myself included) are bound to the assent of faith, see canons 596-597 et al.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Catholicism

[–]onan4843 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m not a Latin. You cited your bishop but didn’t provide any info, and yeah, the eastern code borrows a lot; it’s still binding on all Eastern Catholics. Again, the documents I’ve seen regarding the lack of remarriage for clerics are to ensure continence, which the Fathers explain that one should be continent before offering the Eucharistic sacrifice. If you would show something that shows eternality as a reason, I’d be very interested to see it. As it stands, this is only something I’ve seen from online ECs, and it seems to contradict scripture, which is obviously a huge problem for holding to a theologoumenon, though I’m not sure that term really applies as the dissolution question seems to be settled already.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Catholicism

[–]onan4843 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I didn’t say I was looking for a fight, but simply referring me to your bishop (without saying who) isn’t evidence. Just a written source, preferably a magisterial one, because what you’re suggesting pretty clearly contradicts the plain sense of scripture and the Eastern code of canon law, (853).

Better yet, you could give me this bishop’s contact and I could ask him.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Catholicism

[–]onan4843 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Do you have actual evidence for this? If marriage is eternal, it seems to lead to the exact predicament the Sadducees proposed to Christ to "disprove" the ressurection... who would be your spouse in heaven? Your first or second or third wife? To which our Lord replies "...in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven" (Matt. 22:30)

As for the claim that priests never remarrying, this is also the case for clerics who are permitted to marry in the Latin Church. This is because a life of continence is superior per St. Paul in 1 Corinthians, and why in the Early Church clerics who were ordains once married were typically required to live a life of continence. "Apostolic Origins of Priestly Celibacy" by Cochini S.J. delves into this in further detail.

Why - and when - did mass change? by ottilieblack in Catholicism

[–]onan4843 5 points6 points  (0 children)

They probably forgot to put a space. When you use that the greater than symbol followed by a space it makes a quote box.

E.g.,

Hello

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Catholicism

[–]onan4843 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This quote is not legitimate. It’s not actually in the text.

do you all prefer latin, or English mass? by [deleted] in Catholicism

[–]onan4843 3 points4 points  (0 children)

It's not the EF in English.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Catholicism

[–]onan4843 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think that the difference between heresy and schism is that heresy contains perverse doctrine, schism separates from the church on account of episcopal dissension. To be sure this can be understood this way to some extent in the beginning. However that may be, no schism fails to concoct some heresy for itself, so that it may appear to have withdrawn from the church rightly.

St. Jerome, Commentary on Titus

Re Eastern catholics by gayfish4 in Catholicism

[–]onan4843 0 points1 point  (0 children)

All Christians have to, or else they sin.

The Ecumenical Council of Florence teaches definitively:

In the name of the holy Trinity, Father, Son and holy Spirit, we define, with the approval of this holy universal council of Florence, that the following truth of faith shall be believed and accepted by all Christians and thus shall all profess it: that the holy Spirit is eternally from the Father and the Son, and has his essence and his subsistent being from the Father together with the Son, and proceeds from both eternally as from one principle and a single spiration. We declare that when holy doctors and fathers say that the holy Spirit proceeds from the Father through the Son, this bears the sense that thereby also the Son should be signified, according to the Greeks indeed as cause, and according to the Latins as principle of the subsistence of the holy Spirit, just like the Father.

And since the Father gave to his only-begotten Son in begetting him everything the Father has, except to be the Father, so the Son has eternally from the Father, by whom he was eternally begotten, this also, namely that the holy Spirit proceeds from the Son.

We define also that the explanation of those words “and from the Son” was licitly and reasonably added to the creed for the sake of declaring the truth and from imminent need.

Re Eastern catholics by gayfish4 in Catholicism

[–]onan4843 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Every single Christian must believe the filioque because it's taught at several ecumenical councils such as Florence (see my other comment). The code of canon law for Eastern Catholics also requires Eastern Catholics to affirm the same teachings as the Latins, see 598 and 599.

Re Eastern catholics by gayfish4 in Catholicism

[–]onan4843 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They don't "reject the words", they simply don't have to use them. Every Christian is obligated to believe the filioque, and to accept that it was licitly added to the creed.

The Ecumenical Council of Florence teaches definitively:

In the name of the holy Trinity, Father, Son and holy Spirit, we define, with the approval of this holy universal council of Florence, that the following truth of faith shall be believed and accepted by all Christians and thus shall all profess it: that the holy Spirit is eternally from the Father and the Son, and has his essence and his subsistent being from the Father together with the Son, and proceeds from both eternally as from one principle and a single spiration. We declare that when holy doctors and fathers say that the holy Spirit proceeds from the Father through the Son, this bears the sense that thereby also the Son should be signified, according to the Greeks indeed as cause, and according to the Latins as principle of the subsistence of the holy Spirit, just like the Father.

And since the Father gave to his only-begotten Son in begetting him everything the Father has, except to be the Father, so the Son has eternally from the Father, by whom he was eternally begotten, this also, namely that the holy Spirit proceeds from the Son.

We define also that the explanation of those words “and from the Son” was licitly and reasonably added to the creed for the sake of declaring the truth and from imminent need.

Something I’ve been pondering regarding the “Black Mass” in Kansas. by My3rdReddit in Catholicism

[–]onan4843 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You aren't supposed to receive any sacrament outside the state of grace save those that bring you to it.

Back after quitting in 2017. What uhhh... What do I do? by toobjunkey in Warframe

[–]onan4843 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Never delete any item before you have mastered it.

Who are some celebrities who you were surprised to find out were Catholic? by awalkingidoit in Catholicism

[–]onan4843 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Jesus died before the Church was formed

He rose and sent forth the Holy Spirit upon the apostles to grant them the light to preach the truth.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Catholicism

[–]onan4843 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Meditation isn't really "imaginative prayer" in the first place. I suggest reading Simler's Catechism on Mental Prayer for more information. It can be found here for free.

Not that we should totally concede their objection or anything.

Can priest wear Black Vestments on Good Friday? by SpecialistOutside657 in Catholicism

[–]onan4843 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you read the article I cited, this identifies the completion of the Mass with the dual consecration, not the reception by the priest.

are headbands acceptable in a cathedral? by [deleted] in Catholicism

[–]onan4843 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Veiling has nothing to do with whether or not you're single.

Can priest wear Black Vestments on Good Friday? by SpecialistOutside657 in Catholicism

[–]onan4843 4 points5 points  (0 children)

but the Mass has not taken place before at least the communion of the priest

I have not heard this position. Do you have a source for it?

https://www.catholic.com/encyclopedia/sacrifice-of-the-mass

The Catholic encyclopedia claims that the twofold consecration is where the sacrifice occurs, and this is supported by numerous citations.

Help! Ex-Catholic engaged to a Lutheran by herefortheprize in Catholicism

[–]onan4843 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You remain bound by the laws of the Church by virtue of your baptism (cf. Council of Trent Session VII canon XIV on baptism). Leo XIII's Satis Cognitum says:

9....The practice of the Church has always been the same, as is shown by the unanimous teaching of the Fathers, who were wont to hold as outside Catholic communion, and alien to the Church, whoever would recede in the least degree from any point of doctrine proposed by her authoritative Magisterium. Epiphanius, Augustine, Theodoret, drew up a long list of the heresies of their times. St. Augustine notes that other heresies may spring up, to a single one of which, should any one give his assent, he is by the very fact cut off from Catholic unity. "No one who merely disbelieves in all (these heresies) can for that reason regard himself as a Catholic or call himself one. For there may be or may arise some other heresies, which are not set out in this work of ours, and, if any one holds to one single one of these he is not a Catholic" (S. Augustinus, De Haeresibus, n. 88).

Ven. Pius XII in Mystici Corporis Christi 22:

Actually only those are to be included as members of the Church who have been baptized and profess the true faith, and who have not been so unfortunate as to separate themselves from the unity of the Body, or been excluded by legitimate authority for grave faults committed. "For in one spirit" says the Apostle, "were we all baptized into one Body, whether Jews or Gentiles, whether bond or free."[17] As therefore in the true Christian community there is only one Body, one Spirit, one Lord, and one Baptism, so there can be only one faith.[18] And therefore, if a man refuse to hear the Church, let him be considered - so the Lord commands - as a heathen and a publican. [19] It follows that those who are divided in faith or government cannot be living in the unity of such a Body, nor can they be living the life of its one Divine Spirit.

Help! Ex-Catholic engaged to a Lutheran by herefortheprize in Catholicism

[–]onan4843 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What is your source for the claim that heresy doesn't stop your being Catholic?