I know it's TIA but how can you deny the pics?
Church Revolution in Pictures
Photo of the Week
http://traditioninaction.org/RevolutionPhotos/A521-Mono.htm
(https://www.suscipedomine.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ftraditioninaction.org%2FRevolutionPhotos%2FImages%2520%28501-600%29%2F521-Mono01.jpg&hash=88a592db3d3c5be2e9e537849d245eb3b4a90070)
Pope Francis receives Monophysite award
As it is known, Monophysitism or Monophysism is an old heresy that denies Our Lord Jesus Christ has two natures, a divine nature hypostatically united to a human nature. Their followers profess that Christ has only one nature, the divine nature, which supposedly entirely absorbed the human nature. From this comes the name of their heresy: mono = one, single; physis = nature.
Pope Honorius, who adhered to a formula containing the errors of Monoenergism, a variant of Monophysitism, was declared a heretic by Pope Leo II and the Third Council of Constantinople. He became the classical case of a heretic Pope, which sets the precedent for the study of the present day crisis where we see Progressivism devastating the Papacy.
Today the heresy of Monophysitism exists principally in Egypt among the Copts. Their followers calling themselves "orthodox copts," although the name orthodox is an evident misnomer since they profess a clear heresy.
In the picture above, you see Pope Francis, on May 10, 2013, holding a picture of the Risen Christ along with two Monophysite hierarchs, as if the three were in agreement that He has only one nature. Below, first row, Tawadros II, the "pope" of that heretical sect offering a chain with a icon medallion to Francis, an award only given to those in communion of doctrine with the Monophysites. Third row, Francis euphorically thanks the heretic for his bequest with a warm two-handed clasp.
Fourth row, Francis and Tawadros in the papal library at the Vatican, seated in equal chairs, as if the Catholic Pope and the heretic had the same rank. Fifth row, Francis delivers a speech to the Monophysitist delegation in a newly decorated carnival-style room in the Vatican. He proposed that every May 10, the Monophysitist "pope" and the Progressivist Pope should meet at the Vatican... Sixth row, he humbly receives the "blessing" Tawadros gives to those present at the meeting.
Given these manifestations of communion in the "same faith," it seems impossible to avoid this question: If Pope Honorius was rightly considered a heretic by Pope Leo II, the Third Council of Constantinople and several other Popes for professing errors linked to Monophysitism, why should the conciliar Popes - who do more than that - not be included in the same qualification?
(https://www.suscipedomine.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ftraditioninaction.org%2FRevolutionPhotos%2FImages%2520%28501-600%29%2F521-Mono02.jpg&hash=845cb176731f7e7cbab97dfaace9a6fc2e0a9119)
(https://www.suscipedomine.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ftraditioninaction.org%2FRevolutionPhotos%2FImages%2520%28501-600%29%2F521-Mono03.jpg&hash=ed63d349cbd3bc978f30c5f62220bf1dbb38b354)
Photos from Foro Catolico & L'Osservatore Romano
Monophysites? Couldn't His Humbleness pick a more relevant bunch of heretics to throw in with?
Oh, and the list grows:
Quote from: Francis"Today's visit," Pope Francis said, "strengthens the bonds of friendship and brotherhood that already exist between the See of Peter and the See of Mark, heir to an inestimable heritage of martyrs, theologians, holy monks and faithful disciples of Christ, who have borne witness to the Gospel from generation to generation, often in situations of great adversity."
Besides praising a freemasonic sentiment of 'friendship and brotherhood' between the Catholic Church and an heretical Church, Francis claims this heretical church heir to 'an inestimable heritage of martyrs, theologians, holy monks and faithful disciples of Christ, etc. etc..
Quote"We are glad to be able to confirm today what our illustrious predecessors solemnly declared, we are glad to recognize that we are united by one Baptism, of which our common prayer is a special expression, and we long for the day when, in fulfilment of the Lord's desire, we will be able to communicate from the one chalice."
Quote"I am convinced that – under the guidance of the Holy Spirit – our persevering prayer, our dialogue and the will to build communion day by day in mutual love will allow us to take important further steps towards full unity," the Holy Father said.
http://www.zenit.org/en/articles/historic-meeting-takes-place-between-pope-francis-and-coptic-pope-tawadros-ii
Francis' full address:
http://www.zenit.org/en/articles/pope-francis-address-to-coptic-pope-tawadros-ii
(I have not read through the full address yet)
What is more, they do not possess the See of St. Mark and the Coptic leader does not sit on the Cathedra of St. Mark. Same thing with the "Patriarch" of Constantinople. They are heretics, outside the Catholic Church, having no jurisdiction. This ecumenical garbage is nauseating.
Quote from: VeraeFidei on May 14, 2013, 09:56:40 PM
This ecumenical garbage is nauseating.
Modernists hijacked the word "ecumenism" just as sodomites hijacked "gay." Before VII, "ecumensim" meant the return of heretics and schismatics to the Faith. I think "syncretism" is much more appropriate.
Quote from: Charlemagne on May 14, 2013, 10:17:20 PM
Quote from: VeraeFidei on May 14, 2013, 09:56:40 PM
This ecumenical garbage is nauseating.
Modernists hijacked the word "ecumenism" just as sodomites hijacked "gay." Before VII, "ecumensim" meant the return of heretics and schismatics to the Faith. I think "syncretism" is much more appropriate.
I think you are being unfair. It is exponentially more difficult to have the return of anybody to the Catholic Faith if your starting point is one of hostility.
Quote from: poche on May 14, 2013, 11:34:12 PM
Quote from: Charlemagne on May 14, 2013, 10:17:20 PM
Quote from: VeraeFidei on May 14, 2013, 09:56:40 PM
This ecumenical garbage is nauseating.
Modernists hijacked the word "ecumenism" just as sodomites hijacked "gay." Before VII, "ecumensim" meant the return of heretics and schismatics to the Faith. I think "syncretism" is much more appropriate.
I think you are being unfair. It is exponentially more difficult to have the return of anybody to the Catholic Faith if your starting point is one of hostility.
Ha. It is exponentially useless to have the return of anybody to the Catholic Faith if your starting point is not doctrine.
Quote from: Mithrandylan on May 14, 2013, 09:28:14 PM
Monophysites? Couldn't His Humbleness pick a more relevant bunch of heretics to throw in with?
Well at least they are "traditional" heretics going all the way back to the 5th/6th century. It's a step in the right direction, no? :D
Quote from: poche on May 14, 2013, 11:34:12 PM
Quote from: Charlemagne on May 14, 2013, 10:17:20 PM
Quote from: VeraeFidei on May 14, 2013, 09:56:40 PM
This ecumenical garbage is nauseating.
Modernists hijacked the word "ecumenism" just as sodomites hijacked "gay." Before VII, "ecumensim" meant the return of heretics and schismatics to the Faith. I think "syncretism" is much more appropriate.
I think you are being unfair. It is exponentially more difficult to have the return of anybody to the Catholic Faith if your starting point is one of hostility.
There is something wrong with this. Sounds like a militant Novus Ordite way of thinking. Feminine, even.
I thought they weren't monophysites, but were Miaphysites?
It's really, to my mind , an academic distinction. Monophysitism is the heresy that Our Lord has one, divine nature. Miaphysitism is the slightly more subtle heresy that His One Nature is both human and divine. Both are gravely heretical.
Quote from: Heinrich on May 15, 2013, 06:20:22 AM
Quote from: poche on May 14, 2013, 11:34:12 PM
Quote from: Charlemagne on May 14, 2013, 10:17:20 PM
Quote from: VeraeFidei on May 14, 2013, 09:56:40 PM
This ecumenical garbage is nauseating.
Modernists hijacked the word "ecumenism" just as sodomites hijacked "gay." Before VII, "ecumensim" meant the return of heretics and schismatics to the Faith. I think "syncretism" is much more appropriate.
I think you are being unfair. It is exponentially more difficult to have the return of anybody to the Catholic Faith if your starting point is one of hostility.
There is something wrong with this. Sounds like a militant Novus Ordite way of thinking. Feminine, even.
Yes it is, starting with the employment of the liberal concept of
fair which is about giving to each the same, as opposed to the traditional concept of
justice, which is giving to each it' due. It is
fair to treat all religions with reverence, it is
just to only treat Catholicism with reverence.
And then seeing difficulty in converting heretics, schismatics and non believers as something that must be overcome by not being 'hostile.' Well, difficulties in conversion are overcome with God's grace, which inspires men to testify the Truth, and on the end of the heretic, to accept, acknowledge, believe and in turn profess the Truth. The practice of the Catholic Church has always been to never compromise on doctrine when it came to ecumenism, because doctrine is precisely the reason that a heretic is a heretic in the first place. Ecumenism without a focus on doctrine is like open heart surgery performed on someone's leg.
Quote from: poche on May 14, 2013, 11:34:12 PM
Quote from: Charlemagne on May 14, 2013, 10:17:20 PM
Quote from: VeraeFidei on May 14, 2013, 09:56:40 PM
This ecumenical garbage is nauseating.
Modernists hijacked the word "ecumenism" just as sodomites hijacked "gay." Before VII, "ecumensim" meant the return of heretics and schismatics to the Faith. I think "syncretism" is much more appropriate.
I think you are being unfair. It is exponentially more difficult to have the return of anybody to the Catholic Faith if your starting point is one of hostility.
You're probably right. In fact, my children's favorite story from Scripture is Our Lord sitting down with the Pharisees and hypocrites and engaging in dialogue with them. "Read it again, Daddy!" They love it.
Quote from: Mithrandylan on May 15, 2013, 08:46:34 AM
Quote from: Heinrich on May 15, 2013, 06:20:22 AM
Quote from: poche on May 14, 2013, 11:34:12 PM
Quote from: Charlemagne on May 14, 2013, 10:17:20 PM
Quote from: VeraeFidei on May 14, 2013, 09:56:40 PM
This ecumenical garbage is nauseating.
Modernists hijacked the word "ecumenism" just as sodomites hijacked "gay." Before VII, "ecumensim" meant the return of heretics and schismatics to the Faith. I think "syncretism" is much more appropriate.
I think you are being unfair. It is exponentially more difficult to have the return of anybody to the Catholic Faith if your starting point is one of hostility.
There is something wrong with this. Sounds like a militant Novus Ordite way of thinking. Feminine, even.
Yes it is, starting with the employment of the liberal concept of fair which is about giving to each the same, as opposed to the traditional concept of justice, which is giving to each it' due. It is fair to treat all religions with reverence, it is just to only treat Catholicism with reverence.
And then seeing difficulty in converting heretics, schismatics and non believers as something that must be overcome by not being 'hostile.' Well, difficulties in conversion are overcome with God's grace, which inspires men to testify the Truth, and on the end of the heretic, to accept, acknowledge, believe and in turn profess the Truth. The practice of the Catholic Church has always been to never compromise on doctrine when it came to ecumenism, because doctrine is precisely the reason that a heretic is a heretic in the first place. Ecumenism without a focus on doctrine is like open heart surgery performed on someone's leg.
This right here. How can we convert if we don't focus on the truth of the faith. How can others be convinced if we ourselves seem to be dismissive of our own faith?
Quote from: Mithrandylan on May 15, 2013, 04:05:57 AM
Quote from: poche on May 14, 2013, 11:34:12 PM
Quote from: Charlemagne on May 14, 2013, 10:17:20 PM
Quote from: VeraeFidei on May 14, 2013, 09:56:40 PM
This ecumenical garbage is nauseating.
Modernists hijacked the word "ecumenism" just as sodomites hijacked "gay." Before VII, "ecumensim" meant the return of heretics and schismatics to the Faith. I think "syncretism" is much more appropriate.
I think you are being unfair. It is exponentially more difficult to have the return of anybody to the Catholic Faith if your starting point is one of hostility.
Ha. It is exponentially useless to have the return of anybody to the Catholic Faith if your starting point is not doctrine.
That is true. Doctrine is importanty. However an ambiance of mutual hatred and hostility is counterproductive.
Quote from: poche on May 17, 2013, 10:06:04 PM
Quote from: Mithrandylan on May 15, 2013, 04:05:57 AM
Quote from: poche on May 14, 2013, 11:34:12 PM
Quote from: Charlemagne on May 14, 2013, 10:17:20 PM
Quote from: VeraeFidei on May 14, 2013, 09:56:40 PM
This ecumenical garbage is nauseating.
Modernists hijacked the word "ecumenism" just as sodomites hijacked "gay." Before VII, "ecumensim" meant the return of heretics and schismatics to the Faith. I think "syncretism" is much more appropriate.
I think you are being unfair. It is exponentially more difficult to have the return of anybody to the Catholic Faith if your starting point is one of hostility.
Ha. It is exponentially useless to have the return of anybody to the Catholic Faith if your starting point is not doctrine.
That is true. Doctrine is importanty. However an ambiance of mutual hatred and hostility is counterproductive.
Poche, doctrine isn't just important, it's essential.
As to 'mutual hatred and hostility,' that is just a tremendous Novus Ordo strawman. A shameful thing to say. As if it were one or the other. Do you cringe when you hear about the Catholic Church before the great springtime of VII?
Quote from: Mithrandylan on May 17, 2013, 10:18:09 PM
Quote from: poche on May 17, 2013, 10:06:04 PM
Quote from: Mithrandylan on May 15, 2013, 04:05:57 AM
Quote from: poche on May 14, 2013, 11:34:12 PM
Quote from: Charlemagne on May 14, 2013, 10:17:20 PM
Quote from: VeraeFidei on May 14, 2013, 09:56:40 PM
This ecumenical garbage is nauseating.
Modernists hijacked the word "ecumenism" just as sodomites hijacked "gay." Before VII, "ecumensim" meant the return of heretics and schismatics to the Faith. I think "syncretism" is much more appropriate.
I think you are being unfair. It is exponentially more difficult to have the return of anybody to the Catholic Faith if your starting point is one of hostility.
Ha. It is exponentially useless to have the return of anybody to the Catholic Faith if your starting point is not doctrine.
That is true. Doctrine is importanty. However an ambiance of mutual hatred and hostility is counterproductive.
Poche, doctrine isn't just important, it's essential.
As to 'mutual hatred and hostility,' that is just a tremendous Novus Ordo strawman. A shameful thing to say. As if it were one or the other. Do you cringe when you hear about the Catholic Church before the great springtime of VII?
I join you in your affirmation as to the importance of doctrine. However it is almost imopssible to get to that point in an ambiance of hatred and hostility.
What good does it do to be right when you go to hell for being hateful In Northern Ireland the IRA killed innocent people in hte name of the Catholic religion. How many Protestants do you think were edified when they hear of another IRA attack? How many non-Catholics do you think would become interested in Catholic doctrine when this sort of thing happens?
Then let us look at Lebanon. How many Moslems do you think were inspired to become interested in conversion after the massacres at Sabra and Shatilla? Overt hatred and gratuitous rudeness does nothing to help thecause of Catholic evangelization.
Thebn there is the case of the Assyrian Church of the East. In 2003 the Katholikos (their version of Pope) met with Pope John Paul II and signed a renunciation of the heresy of Nestorianism. This is one of the fruits of the ecumenical movement.
:) :) :)
Quote from: poche on May 17, 2013, 11:14:51 PM
In 2003 the Katholikos (their version of Pope) met with Pope John Paul II and signed a renunciation of the heresy of Nestorianism. This is one of the fruits of the ecumenical movement.
:) :) :)
But JPII also approved of the "Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification" with the lutherans. What kind of rotten fruit is that? It's analogous to the U.S. giving away the Panama Canal and then saying, "Hey, but we got Noriega!"
Poche, no one here or anywhere else is proposing hate and hostility. They are proposing doctrine, which you claim to agree with, yet can't without making sure to bring up hate and hostility. Francis' address to the monophysites had nothing to do with the faith. That's a problem. Furthermore, he confirms their faith, even though it's been separated from the Catholic Church for more than a thousand years due to a Christological heresy.
As to JPII and the Assyrians, I don't think you have your dates right. In 1994, JPII and Mar Dinkha IV drafted something that could neither be seen as a renunciation or a profession of Nesotorianism, since it never actually made any claim on behalf of the Assyrians believing that Christ has two natures. Instead, it said that there was a thousand plus year misunderstanding, that the Assyrians are sister churches with Catholic churches, though not in full communion. Right.
Quote from: Charlemagne on May 17, 2013, 11:35:37 PM
Quote from: poche on May 17, 2013, 11:14:51 PM
In 2003 the Katholikos (their version of Pope) met with Pope John Paul II and signed a renunciation of the heresy of Nestorianism. This is one of the fruits of the ecumenical movement.
:) :) :)
But JPII also approved of the "Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification" with the lutherans. What kind of rotten fruit is that? It's analogous to the U.S. giving away the Panama Canal and then saying, "Hey, but we got Noriega!"
That was a clarification on the question of semantics. There is a sense that justification by faith in compatible with the Catholic Faith. We are justified by faith. However this Faith has to be lived out.
Of course. ::) We are justified by faith and works by the grace of God. Why can't the Conciliar Church state anything unambiguously?
EDITED FOR CONTENT