Talk:Roman Catholic Church

From OrthodoxWiki
(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
m
 
(One intermediate revision by one user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 +
Affirm that there is a difference between the orthodox conception of orthodox sin and the roman catholic one, wrongly understood as the men would inherit the Adam's guilty, is a form of modernism heresy. There is no difference, as Roman Catholic Catecism confirm:
 +
 +
" 400 The harmony in which they had found themselves, thanks to original justice, is now destroyed: the control of the soul's spiritual faculties over the body is shattered; the union of man and woman becomes subject to tensions, their relations henceforth marked by lust and domination.282 Harmony with creation is broken: visible creation has become alien and hostile to man.283 Because of man, creation is now subject "to its bondage to decay".284 Finally, the consequence explicitly foretold for this disobedience will come true: man will "return to the ground",285 for out of it he was taken. Death makes its entrance into human history. (...)
 +
 +
By yielding to the tempter, Adam and Eve committed a personal sin, but this sin affected the human nature that they would then transmit in a fallen state.294 It is a sin which will be transmitted by propagation to all mankind, that is, by the transmission of a human nature deprived of original holiness and justice. And '''that is why original sin is called "sin" only in an analogical sense: it is a sin "contracted" and not "committed" - a state and not an act'''.
 +
 +
405 Although it is proper to each individual,295 '''original sin does not have the character of a personal fault''' in any of Adam's descendants. It is a '''deprivation of original holiness and justice''', but human nature has not been totally corrupted: it is wounded in the natural powers proper to it, subject to ignorance, suffering and the dominion of death, and inclined to sin - an inclination to evil that is called concupiscence". Baptism, by imparting the life of Christ's grace, erases original sin and turns a man back towards God, but the consequences for nature, weakened and inclined to evil, persist in man and summon him to spiritual battle."
 +
 +
Having been exposed that, the wrong affirmation of the article was deleted.
 +
 +
--[[User:Philippe Gebara|Philippe Gebara]] 15:56, February 13, 2007 (PST)Philippe Gebara
 +
 
'''A note for editors of this article:''' Although it is common for Orthodox to refer to the RCC as "the Roman church," as we might say, "the Greek church" or "the Antiochian church," it is commonly considered discourteous and derogatory to use ''Roman'' as an adjective (cf. style guides such as the ''AP Stylebook''). Although the preferred adjective is, of course, ''Catholic'', there is a dispute between our two communions over that word. I recommend ''Roman Catholic'' as a standard and courteous adjectival form.  
 
'''A note for editors of this article:''' Although it is common for Orthodox to refer to the RCC as "the Roman church," as we might say, "the Greek church" or "the Antiochian church," it is commonly considered discourteous and derogatory to use ''Roman'' as an adjective (cf. style guides such as the ''AP Stylebook''). Although the preferred adjective is, of course, ''Catholic'', there is a dispute between our two communions over that word. I recommend ''Roman Catholic'' as a standard and courteous adjectival form.  
  

Latest revision as of 16:56, February 13, 2007

Affirm that there is a difference between the orthodox conception of orthodox sin and the roman catholic one, wrongly understood as the men would inherit the Adam's guilty, is a form of modernism heresy. There is no difference, as Roman Catholic Catecism confirm:

" 400 The harmony in which they had found themselves, thanks to original justice, is now destroyed: the control of the soul's spiritual faculties over the body is shattered; the union of man and woman becomes subject to tensions, their relations henceforth marked by lust and domination.282 Harmony with creation is broken: visible creation has become alien and hostile to man.283 Because of man, creation is now subject "to its bondage to decay".284 Finally, the consequence explicitly foretold for this disobedience will come true: man will "return to the ground",285 for out of it he was taken. Death makes its entrance into human history. (...)

By yielding to the tempter, Adam and Eve committed a personal sin, but this sin affected the human nature that they would then transmit in a fallen state.294 It is a sin which will be transmitted by propagation to all mankind, that is, by the transmission of a human nature deprived of original holiness and justice. And that is why original sin is called "sin" only in an analogical sense: it is a sin "contracted" and not "committed" - a state and not an act.

405 Although it is proper to each individual,295 original sin does not have the character of a personal fault in any of Adam's descendants. It is a deprivation of original holiness and justice, but human nature has not been totally corrupted: it is wounded in the natural powers proper to it, subject to ignorance, suffering and the dominion of death, and inclined to sin - an inclination to evil that is called concupiscence". Baptism, by imparting the life of Christ's grace, erases original sin and turns a man back towards God, but the consequences for nature, weakened and inclined to evil, persist in man and summon him to spiritual battle."

Having been exposed that, the wrong affirmation of the article was deleted.

--Philippe Gebara 15:56, February 13, 2007 (PST)Philippe Gebara

A note for editors of this article: Although it is common for Orthodox to refer to the RCC as "the Roman church," as we might say, "the Greek church" or "the Antiochian church," it is commonly considered discourteous and derogatory to use Roman as an adjective (cf. style guides such as the AP Stylebook). Although the preferred adjective is, of course, Catholic, there is a dispute between our two communions over that word. I recommend Roman Catholic as a standard and courteous adjectival form.

Agreed. --Rdr. Andrew

BTW, is "Polemics" for Roman Catholic polemics against Orthodox, vice versa, or both? --Basil 18:04, 25 Jan 2005 (CST)

Both, I'd think. --Rdr. Andrew
Both are fine. Of course, we're not out to polemicize against ourselves, but a good descriptive overview of points of perceived weakness, etc., would, I think, be helpful. Some history of anti-Orthodox polemics would be good too -- things have softened quite a bit from the good old days! FrJohn
Personal tools
Namespaces
Variants
Actions
Navigation
interaction
Donate

Please consider supporting OrthodoxWiki. FAQs

Toolbox