Jump to content

- - - - -

When did Catholic Church begin to err?

  • Please log in to reply
5 replies to this topic

#1 Guest_Augustine Martin

Guest_Augustine Martin
  • Guests

Posted 22 October 2012 - 06:24 PM

At 1054, how similar was the Western Church in doctrine to today's Catholic Church? Did they change much afterward?

#2 YvetteC



  • Members
  • Pip
  • 24 posts
  • Orthodox Christian Member

Posted 23 December 2013 - 02:16 PM

Wow, no responses to this one.  As a cradle Catholic, I was curious.  Perhaps the original question was too broad?

#3 Kusanagi


    Very Frequent Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 719 posts

Posted 07 January 2014 - 02:29 PM

I just finished reading the book My exodus from Roman Catholicism by Bishop Paul de Ballester. In Greek the title is My Journey into Orthodoxy.

He mentioned in the in the Councils that the Church has had Ecumenical and others the Pope has been anathemise for heretical beliefs.

#4 Christophoros


    Frequent Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 405 posts
  • Orthodox Christian Member

Posted 08 January 2014 - 03:56 PM

I have seen dates as early as 800 AD, with the crowning of Charlemagne as emperor by Pope Leo III of Rome. I think that's a fair date for the *beginning*, since it was Rome asserting more authority than the Church ever recognized, which ultimately culminated in Rome asserting jurisdictional primacy over the entire Church and its infallibility in proclaiming Christian dogma.


However, it should be recognized that a complete severing of communion with Rome took many centuries to develop.

#5 Richard A. Downing

Richard A. Downing

    Frequent Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 240 posts
  • Orthodox Christian Member

Posted 08 January 2014 - 09:13 PM

I was struck, reading other threads here today, how important language is in describing doctrine.  There is an interesting discussion elsewhere about sarx/soma - flesh/body - as expressed in the Gospels.  Language also expresses culture, so when translating words from one language to another the 'side-values' of the word are easily lost.  I mean 'side-values' to mean the little cultural nuances that native speakers feel, but we don't easily get as adult learners of a language, and the little differences in meaning that crop up between cities.


What seems to have happened between the Greek-speaking Eastern Church, and the Latin-speaking Western Church is that this became the source of too many issues.  The expression of the dogma at the time of translation was precise and correct, but over time words change their nuances.  This also seems to have been the issue between the Eastern Orthodox and the Oriental Orthodox at the time of Chalcedon (451).


It's something we all have to guard against, and can be the source of terrible errors.


The direct political causes of the schism with Rome are much better understood, but the drift in dogma after the split is less clear.

#6 Paul Cowan

Paul Cowan

    Very Frequent Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,064 posts
  • Orthodox Christian Member

Posted 08 January 2014 - 11:40 PM

I am reading Orthodoxy and Heterdoxy. it has a very good section on the RC.

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users