tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5712729947700372149.post5278059646399976206..comments2023-07-02T08:52:28.676-07:00Comments on New Christendom: Letter to GSPCPCADavid Meyerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06181838722750428356noreply@blogger.comBlogger88125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5712729947700372149.post-72269878546719480482013-05-20T04:55:02.743-07:002013-05-20T04:55:02.743-07:00Hi Mick,
No need to talk in the third person, I a...Hi Mick,<br /><br />No need to talk in the third person, I am here and listening. ;-)<br /><br />Just to be clear, whatever issues made me start to question the truth of the Reformed system, only the truth of Catholicism induced me to convert. And I fully admit that many of those same issues are present in Catholicism. Both groups involve sinful men. But I did and do maintain that the Catholic Church has a definitive way of determining what is and is not of the apostolic faith. They might be wrong (for sake of argument), but at least they have it. Reformed theology does not even claim to have that. <br /><br />"...and others have the fantasy of perfect Rome and must mock, condemn others who do not accept as they accept."<br /><br />The Catholic Church is by no means perfect, because she is comprised of human beings, which are (with few exceptions) not perfect. But as we would both (I assume) say in the creed, the Church is holy. I have read much of both the men you cite, and I don't think either one is living in a fantasy world. I think they believe (as I do) that the Catholic Church is the Church Christ founded on this earth. That it is the one true Church. That is not arrogant if it is true. And we believe it is true. <br /><br />"They advocate that Catholics marry only Catholics..."<br /><br />What is your point here? When I was a Presbyterian, I only wanted my children to marry Calvinists... because I believed that was the truth. Even now, that seems to be a very reasonable expectation for your kids... that they marry within their faith. It doesnt mean they should be shunned or not loved if they dont do so, but there is nothing wrong with having that expectation. Many Protestants have that expectation (PARTICULARLY in regards to their children marrying specifically Catholics), so I find it odd that you single that out as a problem you have with the Catholics you mention.<br /><br />"I pray David Meyers will be different, meaning that in leaving the Presbyterian church, he will understand that others can stay, continue to wish them well, and celebrate his conversion."<br /><br />I realize that others can stay, and I certainly with them well. And in our current cultural climate (Minnesota just passed gay marriage) I feel more kinship with my conservative Calvinist former churchmates than the vast majority of Minnesotans. <br />But slouching toward relativism (as I believe your comment does.. perhaps I misread you?) is not the answer. When I was a Presbyterian, I did not believe the Catholic Church led to salvation for Christians. I believed Catholics could be "saved" <i>in spite</i> of their Catholicism, and I tried to respect the positive and truthful aspects of their faith, while clearly rejecting what I saw as error. And certainly I would never have wanted one of my daughters to marry a Catholic. Anyone who understands the Reformation doctrine (sola Fide and Sola Scriptura) and (if true) its implications would never want their children to marry a Catholic, as they could only see that as dangerous to their childs faith.<br /><br />I pray for unity of Christians, and certainly we (all christians, including Catholics) are not doing enough to bring that about. But the first step has to be honesty about where we stand in relation to one another, and trying to find common ground. Having our children marry each other does not work towards that goal. Having a reasoned respectful conversation between adult adherents can work towards that goal however. <br /><br />I wish you nothing but the best Mick. If you would like to talk further I am game. Peace to you and yours!<br /><br />-David MeyerDavid Meyerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06181838722750428356noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5712729947700372149.post-4095714867050413772013-05-19T06:24:14.092-07:002013-05-19T06:24:14.092-07:00I suppose in a perfect world, folks would change f...I suppose in a perfect world, folks would change for only positive reasons. David Meyers (and his family's) is mixed. He writes that the origin is difficulty with folks leaving his Presbyterian church, lack of submission, etc. Maybe he will find positives in the Roman Church, and yet he acknowledges there are aspects of Roman Church he has criticized and will find difficult to accept when he converts: that is realistic. I find that the converts to Roman Catholicism like Thomas Storck (former everything & Episcopalian), Steve Ray (former Baptist)and others have the fantasy of perfect Rome and must mock, condemn others who do not accept as they accept. They advocate that Catholics marry only Catholics, and in Catholic states/countries, non-Catholics must follow Catholic rules or get out of the country. I pray David Meyers will be different, meaning that in leaving the Presbyterian church, he will understand that others can stay, continue to wish them well, and celebrate his conversion. mickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10274365951803865571noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5712729947700372149.post-11146471643973373222013-05-19T06:22:17.648-07:002013-05-19T06:22:17.648-07:00I suppose in a perfect world, folks would change f...I suppose in a perfect world, folks would change for only positive reasons. David Meyers (and his family's) is mixed. He writes that the origin is difficulty with folks leaving his Presbyterian church, lack of submission, etc. Maybe he will find positives in the Roman Church, and yet he acknowledges there are aspects of Roman Church he has criticized and will find difficult to accept when he converts: that is realistic. I find that the converts to Roman Catholicism like Thomas Storck (former everything & Episcopalian), Steve Ray (former Baptist)and others have the fantasy of perfect Rome and must mock, condemn others who do not accept as they accept. They advocate that Catholics marry only Catholics, and in Catholic states/countries, non-Catholics must follow Catholic rules or get out of the country. I pray David Meyers will be different, meaning that in leaving the Presbyterian church, he will understand that others can stay, continue to wish them well, and celebrate his conversion. mickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10274365951803865571noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5712729947700372149.post-49774536254925824212011-11-08T07:39:14.396-08:002011-11-08T07:39:14.396-08:00Yesterday, on the Reformed site Beggars-all James ...Yesterday, on the Reformed site Beggars-all James Swan from the Alpha omega ministries, re-posted a piece he did on my letter to my Church. The original was from 16 months ago (July 2010), and I only saw it a few months ago(!) because he neglected to inform me he had written it. (I thought that was weird) <br /><br />Anyway, I commented in the beggars all combox (Alpha Omega has no comments) and I thought I would link to it for reference purposes. The first commenter brings up a on topic point about perspicuity and seems to genuinly want to understand where I am coming from.<br /><br />http://beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com/2011/11/reformed-tiber-swimmers.html<br /><br />Perhaps I will do a response to the original 7-1-10 article at some point.David Meyerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06181838722750428356noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5712729947700372149.post-21050287845070935342011-03-14T04:17:34.264-07:002011-03-14T04:17:34.264-07:00Debbie,
Did you read my reply?Debbie,<br />Did you read my reply?David Meyerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06181838722750428356noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5712729947700372149.post-46651310898401969982011-03-09T11:26:06.815-08:002011-03-09T11:26:06.815-08:00Debbie, thanks for commenting, I made a long reply...Debbie, thanks for commenting, I made a long reply so I did a whole post out of it.<br /><br />http://newchristendom.blogspot.com/2011/03/how-do-i-deal-with-catholicisms.html<br /><br />-DavidDavid Meyerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06181838722750428356noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5712729947700372149.post-70715080979687298492011-03-09T11:23:44.666-08:002011-03-09T11:23:44.666-08:00This comment has been removed by the author.David Meyerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06181838722750428356noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5712729947700372149.post-58418810700411940572011-03-08T15:36:58.411-08:002011-03-08T15:36:58.411-08:00Hi David,
This response is regrettably very,very l...Hi David,<br />This response is regrettably very,very late in coming. Please forgive me for letting you and your family leave GSPC and first reading this very thoughtful post without responding. It's hard to believe that you have been gone since July.<br /><br />The reason I am writing now is that after another family has left for what I understand are reasons similar to yours, I wanted to read your post again to try to understand the issue.<br />I'm not sure that I'm any closer to comprehending your decisions, but this I know: you love the Lord and did not make this decision lightly.<br /><br />My main question is how do you handle the many differences between Reformed and Catholic doctrines? I'm not being judgmental, I'm seriously wondering how this happens.<br /><br />God bless you and Bridget and the children as you continue to love and serve Him.<br /><br />Debbie S.Debbie Snoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5712729947700372149.post-39892930748865484812010-12-08T03:39:44.716-08:002010-12-08T03:39:44.716-08:00Thanks Russ! I was just informed by my Priest yest...Thanks Russ! I was just informed by my Priest yesterday that I will be recieved into the Church and my wife and I will be confirmed on the 19th of this month! I am preparing for my confession as well. So the time is fast aproaching.David Meyerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06181838722750428356noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5712729947700372149.post-71596596248167625032010-12-07T14:24:42.561-08:002010-12-07T14:24:42.561-08:00Dear David;
Just read of your conversion. God bles...Dear David;<br />Just read of your conversion. God bless you. Advent will be even more wonderful this year as the mystery of the Incarnation is revealed through the beautiful liturgy of the Church.<br />Russ Rentler, M.D<br />Tiber Swim Team 2004<br />www.crossedthetiber.comRuss Rentler, M.D.https://www.blogger.com/profile/00659833542780220795noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5712729947700372149.post-88750049522885146172010-12-01T10:19:48.889-08:002010-12-01T10:19:48.889-08:00Anonymous:
First off, why are you anonymous?
Sec...Anonymous:<br />First off, why are you anonymous? <br /><br />Second, I could quote the same scripture to you and say it refers to you. Because it does. Your itching ears have led you to reject Christ's Church for a religion of your own making. Quoting it might make you feel better, but it elicits a *yawn* from me. Try to explain yourself better perhaps.<br /><br />Third, you make it sound as if I rejected sola Scriptura and in doing so I rejected the faith. That really is a bit odd. It is Protestants who have wandered off the path and accepted a new doctrine like Paul warned against. Show me sola Scriptura in the Bible. You cant. I mean come on, the doctrine is self defeating. Show it to me in the early Church. Oops. not there either. <br /><br />It is you, my anonymous friend, who have strayed away from the Bishops of the Church Christ founded. As Peter said of Pauls writings (which you have quoted wrongly) in 2 Peter 3:16:<br /><br />"as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures."<br /><br />Let me ask you one simple question:<br /><br />In Luke 10:16 Jesus, our great God and Saviour said this concerning those He sent out to preach His gospel: "The one who hears you hears me, and the one who rejects you rejects me, and the one who rejects me rejects him who sent me."<br /><br />So my question is: How would you know if you have rejected the ones Christ sent? I mean, what would look different from that rejection of the true faith and your current situation. <br /><br />For me the answer is a no brainer: Apostolic succession. For you it cannot be answered without being totally subjective, which in that case does not answer the question. So please, go ahead and try to answer.<br /><br />Peace,<br /><br />David MeyerDavid Meyerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06181838722750428356noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5712729947700372149.post-60610144459399995602010-11-29T17:38:06.133-08:002010-11-29T17:38:06.133-08:00So another soul rejects sola scriptura for sola ec...So another soul rejects sola scriptura for sola ecclesia. The Apostle Paul prophesied that things such as this would come when he wrote; "For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires, and will turn away their ears from the truth and will turn aside to myths."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5712729947700372149.post-43474881665619543922010-10-03T07:08:26.677-07:002010-10-03T07:08:26.677-07:00Thanks for that Cheryl!
Your story is great. I am...Thanks for that Cheryl!<br /><br />Your story is great. I am always amazed how many different roads to Rome there are! The "Journey Home" on EWTN is my favorite tv show for that reason. <br />Mormons are certainly some great people, I am sure breaking those ties was hard. Thanks for the encouragement and for sharing!David Meyerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06181838722750428356noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5712729947700372149.post-36187136511039348132010-10-02T21:19:11.595-07:002010-10-02T21:19:11.595-07:00Hello, David.
I came across these posts when my d...Hello, David.<br /><br />I came across these posts when my daughter sent me the link, and I didn't intend to comment, especially so many months after your initial post. But after reading the sincere comments left here, I've changed my mind.<br /><br />It takes great courage to study as you have and conclude that you are in the wrong place. May God bless you richly for that. <br /><br />I speak from experience. I grew up as a Protestant, but by my mid-teens I had questions my pastor could not answer. <br /><br />I drifted through several Protestant denominations in my twenties, and then I was approached by Mormon missionaries (The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints), and found more truth there, I thought. I joined their organization and was very active for many years. But as one who is a compulsive learner, I also continued to study, and to think, and to pray. And to my shock and sorrow, I came face to face with that organization's errors. Because I did love so much about that organization and its people, the pain of that recognition was almost unbearable and humbling in the extreme. I knew that I could no longer support their teachings, and would have to leave. That meant upsetting friends and very close family members, and has caused lingering damage to those relationships, despite my continued love for them.<br /><br />In time, like you, after more study and prayer, I was led to Catholicism, where I will contentedly remain.<br /><br />My real point in writing is to simply say that we all learn much as did St. Paul. With God's grace, we slowly or suddenly awaken to rays of new light. We grasp and act upon what we can understand, truth by truth, growing in stages more aware of God's presence and love. The development of our faith in and knowledge of God is a difficult birth, I think, for most of us.<br /><br />My love goes out to you and your family as you begin this part of your journey home. And at the same time, my love goes out to those at Good Shepherd and the others who commented here. We are all working our way home to God. I love knowing that you are all out there, caring enough to want knowledge of God and discourse to help increase your faith! And what great joy to know that He loves each of us every step of the way on our journeys!<br /><br />His Peace and His blessings to you all.<br /><br />CherylAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5712729947700372149.post-88708386164301758362010-09-04T20:57:05.106-07:002010-09-04T20:57:05.106-07:00David,
I am on a similar journey, after years of ...David,<br /><br />I am on a similar journey, after years of pious trappings in the Baptist faith, we started searching for a new home. We traveled through both Luther and Calvin and finally ended up in the Anglican faith. But we still had questions and though we loved the church we couldn't quite settle. Then we tried a Mass, 2 years ago I would have not even considered stepping into a Catholic church. We loved the service and the more I study, the more I feel God calling me to Rome. I'm still struggling with some of the doctrine, and it's going to take time. <br /><br />But I know it's the right decision...<br /><br />There are some great books out there for people who are converting and address a number of the issues head on. <br /><br />God Bless and Congratulations.<br /><br />P.S. And don't let others try and guilt you with legalism, you have to do what God is calling you to do. He isn't constrained by legal commitments, and whose to say your family is not fulfilling them to it's fullest by doing this.<br /><br />-Paul-Paul Davishttp://newskeptics.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5712729947700372149.post-63423916638810625942010-09-01T17:37:57.767-07:002010-09-01T17:37:57.767-07:00great answer - you are already a great apologist :...great answer - you are already a great apologist :)<br />Sola Scriptura is indeed the Achilles Heel of Protestantism, and it's what made me decide that I couldn't remain Protestant, but it took a while after that for me to realize what you did, that the Catholic Church is the only option<br />---toddTMhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01550682162539502048noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5712729947700372149.post-32322757232969967612010-08-18T06:24:25.844-07:002010-08-18T06:24:25.844-07:00The link to the article on sola Scriptura I mentio...The link to the article on sola Scriptura I mentioned is <a href="http://www.calledtocommunion.com/2009/11/solo-scriptura-sola-scriptura-and-the-question-of-interpretive-authority/" rel="nofollow">here.</a> It is a devastating argument for anyone who chooses to listen to it.David Meyerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06181838722750428356noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5712729947700372149.post-18221883118605586212010-08-18T06:14:04.710-07:002010-08-18T06:14:04.710-07:00Daviel D'Paz,
Thanks for your concern. You sai...Daviel D'Paz,<br />Thanks for your concern. You said my problem is one of epistemology which is true in the sense that that is everyone's problem. But it is untrue in this case. You are mistaking my desire to find the Church which Christ intended His people to belong to with a desire for <i>epistemic</i> certainty concerning the identity of that Church. The former should be the desire of all believers in Christ, the latter is not possible for anyone, including the Pope. So you have misconstrued my motives in choosing Catholicism. (no doubt because I explain myself poorly) <br />My motive is not total epistemic certainty that I am part of the Church Christ founded or of the content of divine revelation. My motive is the same as (I assume) yours is; to find the Truth, <i>wherever</i> that search may lead. If you studied and found sola Scriptura to be self contradictory, and at the same time found Catholicism’s claims to be consistent and surprisingly true, what would you do Daviel? Would you admit you had been wrong and seek communion with Rome, or just stick with what you know to be false? <br />So my “problem” is not a desire for <i>epistemic</i> certainty concerning the content of divine revelation. That can never be found by anyone this side of the veil. My problem was trying to at least see sola Scriptura as making some coherent sense. If it does not make sense, and is found to be <i>self-contradictory</i> then wouldn’t you agree it <i>cannot</i> be true? Should I hang on to a doctrine that is internally inconsistent? Why? <br />I have spoken with and corresponded with a very many Protestants such as you who say I have not solved my problem by going to Rome. I have interacted with them <i>as a fellow Protestant</i> earnestly, honestly, sincerely wanting them to answer a single question which they cannot answer. <br />I will ask it to you, and I suspect you also will not answer it. <br /><br />Here is the question: Within the sola Scriptura framework, how can I tell the difference between human opinion and divine revelation?<br /><br />If you (or anyone else) can answer my question I will become a Protestant again. <br />I will include the definition of sola Scriptura that I used as a Protestant: <br /><br />“Scripture is the sole source of revelation, it is the final authoritative norm of doctrine and practice, it is to be interpreted in and by the church, and that it is to be interpreted according to the regula fidei.”<br /><br />Below I quote Brian Cross in his article about sola Scriptura. I realized this described me. <br /><br />“The indirect way of making oneself one’s own ultimate interpretive and magisterial authority is more complicated and subtle. In this case the individual, based upon his own interpretation of Scripture, either establishes or chooses an ecclesial community that conforms to his own interpretation in matters he considers to be essential or important. Then, he ’submits’ to this institution so long as it continues to speak and act in accordance with his own interpretation of Scripture. If it deviates from his own interpretation of Scripture in matters he deems important, he repeats the process of either establishing or choosing an institution or congregation that conforms to his own interpretation in matters he considers to be essential or important.”<br /><br />Does this or does this not describe you? Don’t point at anyone else yet. Does it describe YOU.<br /><br />Peace to you brother.<br /><br />David MeyerDavid Meyerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06181838722750428356noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5712729947700372149.post-30215780466132264072010-08-17T23:08:00.725-07:002010-08-17T23:08:00.725-07:00David:
I just read the reasons why you are leavin...David:<br /><br />I just read the reasons why you are leaving the PCA for the Roman Catholic Church. Let me tell you that you HAVE NOT solve the problem yet in making that decision. Your problem is essencially epistemological: you want to be sure that you are in the correct church. <br /><br />You argue against private judgments, but you are doing exactly the SAME THING: you are exercising your own decision(which is fallible) for something apparently INFALLIBLE (which by the way, IT IS NOT). So, I will pray that you reconsider your decision and ask Jesus to show you that Rome CANNOT give you the CERTAINTY you are looking for.<br /><br />Thank you and God bless you.Daviel D'Pazhttp://www.reforma2.orgnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5712729947700372149.post-89533447333979556412010-07-20T11:40:43.591-07:002010-07-20T11:40:43.591-07:00c matt,
Forgive me, I was away at camp for three ...c matt,<br /><br />Forgive me, I was away at camp for three weeks without internet access and see you posed a question for me, which may be of interest to other readers and commentators. <br /><br />I think we might differ as to what an Ecumenical Council is. Though the Church is conciliar, it is not democratic. Council are not designed to see which side has a majority. Truth is not determined by majority. Rather, a Council is a microcosm of the Church. It is a gathering of people, in love and humility, struggling to find the mind of the Church as originally preached by the Apostles and "traditioned" from generation to generation. <br /><br />Councils that we know regard as ecumenical were, of course, rejected in their own time. Sometimes, literally only one or two people in positions of authority were properly in the Church when heresies gained strength. That those councils were subsequently generally accepted is a testament to the Holy Spirit acting in the Church as Christ promised us. <br /><br />Councils are not courts of ultimate authority. The Supreme Court is not the US, it is a body within the US which makes. The CEO of a corporation, with ultimate authority, is not the corporation. No Bishop is the Church, insofar as no one person can be the Church (excepting Christ, as the Church is His Body). A Council is not just a gathering within the Church but should be the Church. <br /><br />These matters cannot be quantified. The Holy Spirit cannot be manipulated by our fidelity to process. The Church does not run on magic, with councils being ecumenical or not depending on the ingredients we add to them or on the precise prayers we read. These are deep mysteries because they concern the intersection of our freedom and God's freedom. Freedom, by its nature, cannot be quantified. <br /><br />As for how often councils should be called, thank God I'm not in position to call councils so I can't answer that question. I do know that local councils happen all the time. I also know that Orthodoxy is not preparing for a general council, though only time and prayer will tell if it is properly ecumenical.<br /><br />Forgive me.Steven CCnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5712729947700372149.post-19277623496372307862010-07-14T10:00:05.509-07:002010-07-14T10:00:05.509-07:00I'm always happy to welcome a fellow convert t...I'm always happy to welcome a fellow convert to the Catholic Church - however I know how difficult and bittersweet it can be - I will be praying for you and your family<br />---toddTMhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01550682162539502048noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5712729947700372149.post-43655607721112082312010-07-08T12:06:10.656-07:002010-07-08T12:06:10.656-07:00To anonymous: Thank you for responding to my lette...To anonymous: Thank you for responding to my letter! It means a lot to me. I could not post my lengthy response to you in this comment box so I made a new post. It is here:<br />http://newchristendom.blogspot.com/2010/07/reply-to-anonymous-good-shepherd-member.html<br /><br />Thanks!<br /><br />-DavidDavid Meyerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06181838722750428356noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5712729947700372149.post-3176657199360960862010-07-07T06:33:43.604-07:002010-07-07T06:33:43.604-07:00John, you can entertain multiple ideas representin...John, you can entertain multiple ideas representing different events comprising the complex whole.<br /><br />The Pope, who was embattled on all sides, decided that the most prudent course was to accept the rehabilitation of Photius and preserve unity in spite of Photius' deceptive conduct.<br /><br />Here's an excerpt from the wikipedia article on the affair (note that the article seems to have a pro-Orthodox bias as a whole):<br /><br />"According to [Protestant historian] Philip Schaff, "To the Greek acts was afterwards added a (pretended) letter of Pope John VIII to Photius, declaring the Filioque to be an addition which is rejected by the church of Rome, and a blasphemy which must be abolished calmly, and by degrees."<br /><br />Whether the council was confirmed by Pope John VIII is also a matter of dispute: The council was held in the presence of papal legates, who approved of the proceedings, Roman Catholic historian Francis Dvornik argues that the Pope accepted the acts of the council and annulled those of the Council of 869-870. Other Roman Catholic historians, such as Warren Carroll, dispute this view, arguing that the pope rejected the council. Philipp Schaff opines that the Pope, deceived by his legates about the actual proceedings, first applauded the Emperor but later denounced the council."<br /><br />The pope can be conned, at least for some time, as has occurred occasionally over the course of history, but ultimately the power to endorse, ignore, or repudiate the canons of a particular council remain the pope's.<br /><br />John, your tone is combative and comes across as acrimonious. I would assume that we both desire the unity of our Churches as Christ prayed we would be perfectly one, in John 17. This will be my last reply to you, so feel free to have the last word, but I encourage you to let old grudges die so that Catholics and Orthodox can follow Christ to unity.<br /><br />In Christ,<br />DevinDevin Rosehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13706894435441471620noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5712729947700372149.post-5428902881009874852010-07-06T17:08:40.516-07:002010-07-06T17:08:40.516-07:00I don't see why I should even entertain the id...I don't see why I should even entertain the idea that Photius changed some letters to make himself look good since it has nothing to do with whether the West accepted the council. If the council wasn't accepted then the East West schism would have started around 879AD, but since it didn't...Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02977287092917957220noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5712729947700372149.post-67318717483591799072010-07-06T10:59:15.602-07:002010-07-06T10:59:15.602-07:00John,
Time presses for me, so last comment for no...John,<br /><br />Time presses for me, so last comment for now. I reference Dvornik's book for the text of the two letters--do you dispute that Photius changed the letter? Dvornik has his opinions about how the situation happened--that's fine, but his is not the only opinion, there are lots, which is why Carroll calls this an "endless debate."<br /><br />But what is the point of the debate? This council occurred centuries prior to the schism. gotta runDevin Rosehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13706894435441471620noreply@blogger.com