Author Topic: Disagreement on the October meeting of the Catholic-Orthodox Dialogue  (Read 24294 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Orthodoc

  • Supporter & Defender Of Orthodoxy
  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,526
  • Those who ignore history tend to repeat it.
Re: Disagreement on the October meeting of the Catholic-Orthodox Dialogue
« Reply #45 on: October 05, 2009, 05:14:59 PM »
I'll just add that no WRO has confiscated all the Churches, monasteries, etc. of an area, executed "competing clergy," and that Antioch and Alexandria have several "Catholic" patriarchs each.

No, your church just steals Catholic Churches in Ukraine.  >:(

I know that there were some Churches that the Polish King stole from the Orthodox for the Vatican, that have been restored to us.  I know that there are some properties that were built from resources that the Polish King stole from the Orthodox for the Vatican that have been restored to us.  I know that there are some Churces that the Polish King stole from the Orthodox for the Vatican which were demolished and new churches built on the Orthodox site, which have been restored to us.  Are those the ones you are talking about?
No. I am only speaking of the ones in Unkraine that were stolen from the Catholic Church by communists, given to the Eastern Orthodox Churches, and have yet to be returned. Those are the ones that I am talking about.

On the bright side.... look at the information provided by the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Priest Fr Serge Kelleher, that during these awful decades, the Russian Orthodox Church quietly trained and ordained 500 Greek Catholic Ukrainian priests.  To confirm this I can put you in touch with Fr Serge if you like; he writes on another Forum.
And stole our churches. Could you please further explain this statement? Were they trained for the Catholic Church or were they defecting to the EO Church because of communist pressure.


You seem to think that any sin will be washed away by some strange time element.  If it was done against the Orthodox a century ago it is now washed away because it happened in the past?  I suggest you read some history of that area before you come in here to pontificate on a matter you know nothing about.  Regarding the 500 trained priests - They were educated in Russian Orthodox seminaries during the time the Greek Catholic Church was made nonexistant by the government.  It was the ROC that trained them for the priesthood and paid for their education.  When the Greek Catholic Church was again made legal they turned around and bit the hand the fed them, educated,  and sustained them!  Where do you think the UGC would have gotten 500 priests to take their place? 

Here how the Greek Catholic Church was created in Ukraine -

The Orthodox Church In The History Of Russia - by * Professor Dimitry Pospielovsky

(*)  Dimitry Pospielovsky is Professor Emeritus of History at the University of Western Ontario.  He is the author of The Russian Church Under The Soviet Regime, 1917-1982v (SVS Press, 1984) and is one of the foremost authorities on Russian Church History.

Page 93

The laity, the parish clergy, and particularly the brotherhoods refused to accept the union with Rome.  The protest movement developed and spread quickly, joined at first by a single bishop, Gideon (Bolodan) of Lvov.  The Polish King gave in to these pressures and authorized the convening of a local council of those bishops, clergy and laity of the Roman and Greek Church who accepted the papacy --i.e. those who did not accept the Unia were not invited.

The Council met in the city of Brest on October 6, 1596.  In order to prevent a parallel Orthodox council in any of the numerious Orthodox Churches in the city, the now Uniate Metropolitan of Kiev sealed all Orthodox Churches  on the day before the Council was to begin, except for the cathedral where the Council was to take place.  The Orthodox, nevertheless, converged on Brest as well, with prince Ostrozhskii and his private  army at the head.  Failing to find an open church, and after waiting in vain for an invitation from the Uniates, they accepted an offer of a Protestant church school for a separate Orthodox  Council.  The Uniate Council passed a resolution excommunicating all the Orthodox clergy and laity participating in the Orthodox Council.  The Orthodox in turn suspended all the clergy and lay participants in the Uniate Council and addressed a petition to the King, asking him to deprive "the traitors" of their dioceses and parishes.  But the Polish  King decided otherwise:  his edict of October 15, LEGALIZED ONLY THOSE BYZANTINE RITE CHRISTIANS WHO JOINED THE UNIA;  IT DECREED THE ORTHODOX CHURCH NULL AND VOID AND ALL ITS CLERGY EXCOMMUNICATED; WHILE CONTINUING MEMBERSHIP IN THE ORTHODOX CHURCH WAS DECLARED TO BE AN ACT OF TREASON AGAINST THE STATE.

====================

Orthodoc

 
Oh Lord, Save thy people and bless thine inheritance.
Grant victory to the Orthodox Christians over their adversaries.
And by virtue of thy Cross preserve thy habitation.

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
Re: Disagreement on the October meeting of the Catholic-Orthodox Dialogue
« Reply #46 on: October 05, 2009, 05:47:04 PM »
[On the bright side.... look at the information provided by the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Priest Fr Serge Kelleher, that during these awful decades, the Russian Orthodox Church quietly trained and ordained 500 Greek Catholic Ukrainian priests.  To confirm this I can put you in touch with Fr Serge if you like; he writes on another Forum.
And stole our churches. Could you please further explain this statement? Were they trained for the Catholic Church or were they defecting to the EO Church because of communist pressure.

I don't know the details sufficiently to speak with any certainty.  However, you could contact Fr Serge Kelleher.  He presented the information about the 500 priests on the other Forum for Byzantine Catholics just recently and said he had made a study of it.

Offline Papist

  • Patriarch of Pontification
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,771
Re: Disagreement on the October meeting of the Catholic-Orthodox Dialogue
« Reply #47 on: October 05, 2009, 06:28:51 PM »
I'll just add that no WRO has confiscated all the Churches, monasteries, etc. of an area, executed "competing clergy," and that Antioch and Alexandria have several "Catholic" patriarchs each.

No, your church just steals Catholic Churches in Ukraine.  >:(

I know that there were some Churches that the Polish King stole from the Orthodox for the Vatican, that have been restored to us.  I know that there are some properties that were built from resources that the Polish King stole from the Orthodox for the Vatican that have been restored to us.  I know that there are some Churces that the Polish King stole from the Orthodox for the Vatican which were demolished and new churches built on the Orthodox site, which have been restored to us.  Are those the ones you are talking about?
No. I am only speaking of the ones in Unkraine that were stolen from the Catholic Church by communists, given to the Eastern Orthodox Churches, and have yet to be returned. Those are the ones that I am talking about.

On the bright side.... look at the information provided by the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Priest Fr Serge Kelleher, that during these awful decades, the Russian Orthodox Church quietly trained and ordained 500 Greek Catholic Ukrainian priests.  To confirm this I can put you in touch with Fr Serge if you like; he writes on another Forum.
And stole our churches. Could you please further explain this statement? Were they trained for the Catholic Church or were they defecting to the EO Church because of communist pressure.


You seem to think that any sin will be washed away by some strange time element.  If it was done against the Orthodox a century ago it is now washed away because it happened in the past?  I suggest you read some history of that area before you come in here to pontificate on a matter you know nothing about.  Regarding the 500 trained priests - They were educated in Russian Orthodox seminaries during the time the Greek Catholic Church was made nonexistant by the government.  It was the ROC that trained them for the priesthood and paid for their education.  When the Greek Catholic Church was again made legal they turned around and bit the hand the fed them, educated,  and sustained them!  Where do you think the UGC would have gotten 500 priests to take their place? 

Here how the Greek Catholic Church was created in Ukraine -

The Orthodox Church In The History Of Russia - by * Professor Dimitry Pospielovsky

(*)  Dimitry Pospielovsky is Professor Emeritus of History at the University of Western Ontario.  He is the author of The Russian Church Under The Soviet Regime, 1917-1982v (SVS Press, 1984) and is one of the foremost authorities on Russian Church History.

Page 93

The laity, the parish clergy, and particularly the brotherhoods refused to accept the union with Rome.  The protest movement developed and spread quickly, joined at first by a single bishop, Gideon (Bolodan) of Lvov.  The Polish King gave in to these pressures and authorized the convening of a local council of those bishops, clergy and laity of the Roman and Greek Church who accepted the papacy --i.e. those who did not accept the Unia were not invited.

The Council met in the city of Brest on October 6, 1596.  In order to prevent a parallel Orthodox council in any of the numerious Orthodox Churches in the city, the now Uniate Metropolitan of Kiev sealed all Orthodox Churches  on the day before the Council was to begin, except for the cathedral where the Council was to take place.  The Orthodox, nevertheless, converged on Brest as well, with prince Ostrozhskii and his private  army at the head.  Failing to find an open church, and after waiting in vain for an invitation from the Uniates, they accepted an offer of a Protestant church school for a separate Orthodox  Council.  The Uniate Council passed a resolution excommunicating all the Orthodox clergy and laity participating in the Orthodox Council.  The Orthodox in turn suspended all the clergy and lay participants in the Uniate Council and addressed a petition to the King, asking him to deprive "the traitors" of their dioceses and parishes.  But the Polish  King decided otherwise:  his edict of October 15, LEGALIZED ONLY THOSE BYZANTINE RITE CHRISTIANS WHO JOINED THE UNIA;  IT DECREED THE ORTHODOX CHURCH NULL AND VOID AND ALL ITS CLERGY EXCOMMUNICATED; WHILE CONTINUING MEMBERSHIP IN THE ORTHODOX CHURCH WAS DECLARED TO BE AN ACT OF TREASON AGAINST THE STATE.

====================

Orthodoc

 

I said in a previous post that I was fine with returning Churches taken during the Renaissance to the EOs. I would just like the EOs to return Churches that they have stolen during the twentieth century.
"For, by its immensity, the divine substance surpasses every form that our intellect reaches. Thus we are unable to apprehend it by knowing what it is. Yet we are able to have some knowledge of it by knowing what it is not." - St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra gentiles, I, 14.

Offline Orthodoc

  • Supporter & Defender Of Orthodoxy
  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,526
  • Those who ignore history tend to repeat it.
Re: Disagreement on the October meeting of the Catholic-Orthodox Dialogue
« Reply #48 on: October 05, 2009, 06:39:05 PM »
I'll just add that no WRO has confiscated all the Churches, monasteries, etc. of an area, executed "competing clergy," and that Antioch and Alexandria have several "Catholic" patriarchs each.

No, your church just steals Catholic Churches in Ukraine.  >:(

I know that there were some Churches that the Polish King stole from the Orthodox for the Vatican, that have been restored to us.  I know that there are some properties that were built from resources that the Polish King stole from the Orthodox for the Vatican that have been restored to us.  I know that there are some Churces that the Polish King stole from the Orthodox for the Vatican which were demolished and new churches built on the Orthodox site, which have been restored to us.  Are those the ones you are talking about?
No. I am only speaking of the ones in Unkraine that were stolen from the Catholic Church by communists, given to the Eastern Orthodox Churches, and have yet to be returned. Those are the ones that I am talking about.

On the bright side.... look at the information provided by the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Priest Fr Serge Kelleher, that during these awful decades, the Russian Orthodox Church quietly trained and ordained 500 Greek Catholic Ukrainian priests.  To confirm this I can put you in touch with Fr Serge if you like; he writes on another Forum.
And stole our churches. Could you please further explain this statement? Were they trained for the Catholic Church or were they defecting to the EO Church because of communist pressure.


You seem to think that any sin will be washed away by some strange time element.  If it was done against the Orthodox a century ago it is now washed away because it happened in the past?  I suggest you read some history of that area before you come in here to pontificate on a matter you know nothing about.  Regarding the 500 trained priests - They were educated in Russian Orthodox seminaries during the time the Greek Catholic Church was made nonexistant by the government.  It was the ROC that trained them for the priesthood and paid for their education.  When the Greek Catholic Church was again made legal they turned around and bit the hand the fed them, educated,  and sustained them!  Where do you think the UGC would have gotten 500 priests to take their place? 

Here how the Greek Catholic Church was created in Ukraine -

The Orthodox Church In The History Of Russia - by * Professor Dimitry Pospielovsky

(*)  Dimitry Pospielovsky is Professor Emeritus of History at the University of Western Ontario.  He is the author of The Russian Church Under The Soviet Regime, 1917-1982v (SVS Press, 1984) and is one of the foremost authorities on Russian Church History.

Page 93

The laity, the parish clergy, and particularly the brotherhoods refused to accept the union with Rome.  The protest movement developed and spread quickly, joined at first by a single bishop, Gideon (Bolodan) of Lvov.  The Polish King gave in to these pressures and authorized the convening of a local council of those bishops, clergy and laity of the Roman and Greek Church who accepted the papacy --i.e. those who did not accept the Unia were not invited.

The Council met in the city of Brest on October 6, 1596.  In order to prevent a parallel Orthodox council in any of the numerious Orthodox Churches in the city, the now Uniate Metropolitan of Kiev sealed all Orthodox Churches  on the day before the Council was to begin, except for the cathedral where the Council was to take place.  The Orthodox, nevertheless, converged on Brest as well, with prince Ostrozhskii and his private  army at the head.  Failing to find an open church, and after waiting in vain for an invitation from the Uniates, they accepted an offer of a Protestant church school for a separate Orthodox  Council.  The Uniate Council passed a resolution excommunicating all the Orthodox clergy and laity participating in the Orthodox Council.  The Orthodox in turn suspended all the clergy and lay participants in the Uniate Council and addressed a petition to the King, asking him to deprive "the traitors" of their dioceses and parishes.  But the Polish  King decided otherwise:  his edict of October 15, LEGALIZED ONLY THOSE BYZANTINE RITE CHRISTIANS WHO JOINED THE UNIA;  IT DECREED THE ORTHODOX CHURCH NULL AND VOID AND ALL ITS CLERGY EXCOMMUNICATED; WHILE CONTINUING MEMBERSHIP IN THE ORTHODOX CHURCH WAS DECLARED TO BE AN ACT OF TREASON AGAINST THE STATE.

====================

Orthodoc

 

I said in a previous post that I was fine with returning Churches taken during the Renaissance to the EOs. I would just like the EOs to return Churches that they have stolen during the twentieth century.

And once again the people have no say or vote in what church THEY WANT TO BELONG TO?  It's all about absolute power, authority, and money.  I'm assuming you are speaking of churches that were built as Greek Catholic rather than those who were stolen from the Orthodox originally.  Did the Vatican pay for the building of these churches and the contents therein?  If the answer is NO then how does the Vatican lay claim to them if the parishioners vote to remain Orthodox?

Orthodoc
Oh Lord, Save thy people and bless thine inheritance.
Grant victory to the Orthodox Christians over their adversaries.
And by virtue of thy Cross preserve thy habitation.

Offline Papist

  • Patriarch of Pontification
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,771
Re: Disagreement on the October meeting of the Catholic-Orthodox Dialogue
« Reply #49 on: October 05, 2009, 07:25:32 PM »
I'll just add that no WRO has confiscated all the Churches, monasteries, etc. of an area, executed "competing clergy," and that Antioch and Alexandria have several "Catholic" patriarchs each.

No, your church just steals Catholic Churches in Ukraine.  >:(

I know that there were some Churches that the Polish King stole from the Orthodox for the Vatican, that have been restored to us.  I know that there are some properties that were built from resources that the Polish King stole from the Orthodox for the Vatican that have been restored to us.  I know that there are some Churces that the Polish King stole from the Orthodox for the Vatican which were demolished and new churches built on the Orthodox site, which have been restored to us.  Are those the ones you are talking about?
No. I am only speaking of the ones in Unkraine that were stolen from the Catholic Church by communists, given to the Eastern Orthodox Churches, and have yet to be returned. Those are the ones that I am talking about.

On the bright side.... look at the information provided by the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Priest Fr Serge Kelleher, that during these awful decades, the Russian Orthodox Church quietly trained and ordained 500 Greek Catholic Ukrainian priests.  To confirm this I can put you in touch with Fr Serge if you like; he writes on another Forum.
And stole our churches. Could you please further explain this statement? Were they trained for the Catholic Church or were they defecting to the EO Church because of communist pressure.


You seem to think that any sin will be washed away by some strange time element.  If it was done against the Orthodox a century ago it is now washed away because it happened in the past?  I suggest you read some history of that area before you come in here to pontificate on a matter you know nothing about.  Regarding the 500 trained priests - They were educated in Russian Orthodox seminaries during the time the Greek Catholic Church was made nonexistant by the government.  It was the ROC that trained them for the priesthood and paid for their education.  When the Greek Catholic Church was again made legal they turned around and bit the hand the fed them, educated,  and sustained them!  Where do you think the UGC would have gotten 500 priests to take their place? 

Here how the Greek Catholic Church was created in Ukraine -

The Orthodox Church In The History Of Russia - by * Professor Dimitry Pospielovsky

(*)  Dimitry Pospielovsky is Professor Emeritus of History at the University of Western Ontario.  He is the author of The Russian Church Under The Soviet Regime, 1917-1982v (SVS Press, 1984) and is one of the foremost authorities on Russian Church History.

Page 93

The laity, the parish clergy, and particularly the brotherhoods refused to accept the union with Rome.  The protest movement developed and spread quickly, joined at first by a single bishop, Gideon (Bolodan) of Lvov.  The Polish King gave in to these pressures and authorized the convening of a local council of those bishops, clergy and laity of the Roman and Greek Church who accepted the papacy --i.e. those who did not accept the Unia were not invited.

The Council met in the city of Brest on October 6, 1596.  In order to prevent a parallel Orthodox council in any of the numerious Orthodox Churches in the city, the now Uniate Metropolitan of Kiev sealed all Orthodox Churches  on the day before the Council was to begin, except for the cathedral where the Council was to take place.  The Orthodox, nevertheless, converged on Brest as well, with prince Ostrozhskii and his private  army at the head.  Failing to find an open church, and after waiting in vain for an invitation from the Uniates, they accepted an offer of a Protestant church school for a separate Orthodox  Council.  The Uniate Council passed a resolution excommunicating all the Orthodox clergy and laity participating in the Orthodox Council.  The Orthodox in turn suspended all the clergy and lay participants in the Uniate Council and addressed a petition to the King, asking him to deprive "the traitors" of their dioceses and parishes.  But the Polish  King decided otherwise:  his edict of October 15, LEGALIZED ONLY THOSE BYZANTINE RITE CHRISTIANS WHO JOINED THE UNIA;  IT DECREED THE ORTHODOX CHURCH NULL AND VOID AND ALL ITS CLERGY EXCOMMUNICATED; WHILE CONTINUING MEMBERSHIP IN THE ORTHODOX CHURCH WAS DECLARED TO BE AN ACT OF TREASON AGAINST THE STATE.

====================

Orthodoc

 

I said in a previous post that I was fine with returning Churches taken during the Renaissance to the EOs. I would just like the EOs to return Churches that they have stolen during the twentieth century.

And once again the people have no say or vote in what church THEY WANT TO BELONG TO?  It's all about absolute power, authority, and money.  I'm assuming you are speaking of churches that were built as Greek Catholic rather than those who were stolen from the Orthodox originally.  Did the Vatican pay for the building of these churches and the contents therein?  If the answer is NO then how does the Vatican lay claim to them if the parishioners vote to remain Orthodox?

Orthodoc
No, I'm talking about the temples that your Church stole. I'm thinking about a story of parish in Ukraine that my old pastor (from when I attended a byzantine church) visited. Their parish Church was stolen from them by the local Eastern Orthodox Congregation. In the process of attempting to build themselves a new modest Church, an ederly gentleman who wanted so desperately to help his people was working on the roof and fell to his death. I'm talking about churches like that.
"For, by its immensity, the divine substance surpasses every form that our intellect reaches. Thus we are unable to apprehend it by knowing what it is. Yet we are able to have some knowledge of it by knowing what it is not." - St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra gentiles, I, 14.

Offline Orthodoc

  • Supporter & Defender Of Orthodoxy
  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,526
  • Those who ignore history tend to repeat it.
Re: Disagreement on the October meeting of the Catholic-Orthodox Dialogue
« Reply #50 on: October 05, 2009, 08:13:48 PM »

No, I'm talking about the temples that your Church stole. I'm thinking about a story of parish in Ukraine that my old pastor (from when I attended a byzantine church) visited. Their parish Church was stolen from them by the local Eastern Orthodox Congregation. In the process of attempting to build themselves a new modest Church, an ederly gentleman who wanted so desperately to help his people was working on the roof and fell to his death. I'm talking about churches like that.
[/quote]

Can you provide proof that this church was never originally Orthodox and taken when theGreek Catholic Church was forced on the people?  Can you show proof that the majority of people were in favor of remaining Greek Catholic?

I'm providing historical references and you reply stating what an old priest said and no written facts to back it up.  Once again, its amazing how you are willing to go back  in history that takes in only the last century.

Orthodoc



Orthodoc
Oh Lord, Save thy people and bless thine inheritance.
Grant victory to the Orthodox Christians over their adversaries.
And by virtue of thy Cross preserve thy habitation.

Offline stanley123

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 3,814
Re: Disagreement on the October meeting of the Catholic-Orthodox Dialogue
« Reply #51 on: October 05, 2009, 08:59:42 PM »

No, I'm talking about the temples that your Church stole. I'm thinking about a story of parish in Ukraine that my old pastor (from when I attended a byzantine church) visited. Their parish Church was stolen from them by the local Eastern Orthodox Congregation. In the process of attempting to build themselves a new modest Church, an ederly gentleman who wanted so desperately to help his people was working on the roof and fell to his death. I'm talking about churches like that.


Can you provide proof that this church was never originally Orthodox and taken when theGreek Catholic Church was forced on the people?  Can you show proof that the majority of people were in favor of remaining Greek Catholic?

I'm providing historical references and you reply stating what an old priest said and no written facts to back it up.  Once again, its amazing how you are willing to go back  in history that takes in only the last century.

Orthodoc



Orthodoc
Dear Orthodoc:
   Hello and greetings to you.
With reference to the question as to whether or not there were Greek Catholic Churches taken from the Catholics and given to the Orthodox during or after WWII – I was personally in an Orthodox Church in Eastern Europe where I noticed that the architecture was very much different from the architecture of other Orthodox Churches in the area. There was a definite western influence and style  with the columns and other features inside the Church. Later on, this particular  Orthodox Church came up in a conversation that I had with a Greek Catholic and he informed me that this was one of many Greek Catholic Churches which were taken over by the Orthodox, toward the end of WWII.  I found that some Greek Catholics and Orthodox are friendly, whereas others are not so charitable toward one another. 
« Last Edit: October 05, 2009, 09:00:19 PM by stanley123 »

Offline MLPB

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 78
Re: Disagreement on the October meeting of the Catholic-Orthodox Dialogue
« Reply #52 on: October 06, 2009, 09:37:09 AM »
The truly sad thing about this thread is that it so clearly shows that Satan has been and is at work, and we all cooperate with him.  The very sad history of the Ukraine during WWII continues to be a source of resentment, hate and accusation.  The very sad history of the conflicts between the Poles and Russian and Ukrainians in centuries before continues to be a source of resentment, hate and accusation. 

To know even a little history of the Ukraine is to know that politics, greed, self-righteousness and sectarianism were rife on both sides.  No one people or religious group in that history, Catholic or Orthodox, (and let's not even consider what was done to the Jews) has a lock on virtue or vice. 

Love of money is the root of all evil.  Church property is simply a substitute for money.  It's just too bad we all can't see that the Communists, the Nazis and other political leaders down through time have abused all of us.  Must we continue to hate in the name of Christ when all have suffered and all are guilty?

Fr.Ambrose, am I not mistaken that you are of Irish ancestry?  How long must Catholics and Protestants hate given the sad history of that nation?  What of the French and Germans?  Lutherans and Catholics?  Italians and Greeks?  Spanish and Portuguese.  And so often religious differences only highlight and make permanent the hatred.

Why can't we learn the lessons of the past, and not repeat them?  Yes, Catholics when they had power were SOBs.  So were the Orthodox when they had power as any honest reading of Byzantine and Russian history will show. 

Let's try loving the "Samaritan" and let's be careful of those beams in our own eyes!

Offline Orthodoc

  • Supporter & Defender Of Orthodoxy
  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,526
  • Those who ignore history tend to repeat it.
Re: Disagreement on the October meeting of the Catholic-Orthodox Dialogue
« Reply #53 on: October 06, 2009, 11:48:23 AM »
The truly sad thing about this thread is that it so clearly shows that Satan has been and is at work, and we all cooperate with him.  The very sad history of the Ukraine during WWII continues to be a source of resentment, hate and accusation.  The very sad history of the conflicts between the Poles and Russian and Ukrainians in centuries before continues to be a source of resentment, hate and accusation. 

To know even a little history of the Ukraine is to know that politics, greed, self-righteousness and sectarianism were rife on both sides.  No one people or religious group in that history, Catholic or Orthodox, (and let's not even consider what was done to the Jews) has a lock on virtue or vice. 

Love of money is the root of all evil.  Church property is simply a substitute for money.  It's just too bad we all can't see that the Communists, the Nazis and other political leaders down through time have abused all of us.  Must we continue to hate in the name of Christ when all have suffered and all are guilty?

Fr.Ambrose, am I not mistaken that you are of Irish ancestry?  How long must Catholics and Protestants hate given the sad history of that nation?  What of the French and Germans?  Lutherans and Catholics?  Italians and Greeks?  Spanish and Portuguese.  And so often religious differences only highlight and make permanent the hatred.

Why can't we learn the lessons of the past, and not repeat them?  Yes, Catholics when they had power were SOBs.  So were the Orthodox when they had power as any honest reading of Byzantine and Russian history will show. 

Let's try loving the "Samaritan" and let's be careful of those beams in our own eyes!

What a beautiful post.  Thank you for reminding (both Orthodox Catholic & Roman Catholic) that we still share a love for, and belief inO our Lord Jesus Christ.

I have only belonged to two Orthodox Churches my entire life.  The first one was made up of those who identified themselves as Russians, Ukrainians, Carpatho Russians.  Not once in the 30+ years I belonged to that parish did I ever hear such hatred or arguments over politics as I do here.  That also goes for the other parish as well.  The parish I attend now is pan Orthodox it is also made up of those who identify themselves from various ethnic backgrounds plus about 1/3 are converts.  Same thing.  Never once did I ever hear any argument over old country ethnic idents or politics.  Our Liturgy is entirely in English but our young priest (38 yrs old) was born and raised in Kiev.  We are lucky to have a main church and a chapel which hold about 80 people.  So on Sundays Father has a Typica in Slavonic for the immigrants from 8:30 to 9:30 in the Chapel before the 10:00 Liturgy.  Once a month another priest comes down from the seminary to serve in Slavonic.  Not once in the 26 years I have been a member of this parish have I ever heard one discussion or argument about ethnic rivalry or hatred.  Even with the new immigrants that sit side by side for the Slavonic services and send their younger kids to the English Liturgy and Sunday School. Russian and Ukrainian sit side by side.  Why?  Because we are all Orthodox Catholics and love each other as such.  We didn't create nor were we part of what went on before or after WWII.  I have a love for all Orthodox including those who I may consider in a TEMPORARY noncanonical position.  And believe we all will be judged equally when we meet our maker.  I even love the ones that have threatened to spit on me!  GOD BLESS HOLY ORTHODOXY (canonical & noncanonical)!!!

Orthodoc
Oh Lord, Save thy people and bless thine inheritance.
Grant victory to the Orthodox Christians over their adversaries.
And by virtue of thy Cross preserve thy habitation.

Offline NorthernPines

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 934
Re: Disagreement on the October meeting of the Catholic-Orthodox Dialogue
« Reply #54 on: October 07, 2009, 11:39:17 AM »
The truly sad thing about this thread is that it so clearly shows that Satan has been and is at work, and we all cooperate with him.  The very sad history of the Ukraine during WWII continues to be a source of resentment, hate and accusation.  The very sad history of the conflicts between the Poles and Russian and Ukrainians in centuries before continues to be a source of resentment, hate and accusation. 


This thread also shows that there are those within the Church, East and even in the West to this day, who use the Church and it's power to fight ancient tribal and ethnic proxy wars via politics, money and power. We see this pretty often within Orthodoxy, (the last year has made that pretty clear within the "Diaspora" but I'm truly disheartened to see that the so called "enlightened" Western Church is still doing this and allowing this.

 Who the h*** are we to go around preaching to the world, be they Palestinians and Jews, Muslims and Jews, Sunnis and Shia's, Hindus and Bhuddists to all "get along" when our Churches are still maintaining ancient tribal disputes, squeezing them into the Church and then using the Church to continue some "war" that no one truly remembers why or how it started to begin with? Do these people really believe it's all because, "you stole my Church/no, YOU stole MY Church?" Please! Such "belief" of who started what, when and how, and how centuries of hatred have festered comes down to someone stealing a Church? I don't buy that at all! It seems to be just an excuse to continue some war, albeit for the time being without weapons, into the next generation. The Hatfields and the McCoys have stopped fighting over the stolen pig....so they have nothing on Christians, particularly Eastern Christians (be they Orthodox or Eastern Catholic)...and sadly I have a feeling if the Latin Rite had the power they once did, and the right "leaders" were in control, it too would devolve into this game as well. And we wonder why people like Richard Dawkins don't believe, and in fact think religion in general is an evolutionary delusion we need to grow out of? We all should stop wondering because it's perfectly clear why those argument holds water with so many people. Heck, they're beginning to hold water (maybe a drop...lol!) with me.

What strikes me as so odd, is this desire to hold century long grudges when we ourselves were NEVER involved in the problem. I hear some Orthodox talk about the sack of Constantinople as though it happened to THEM yesterday afternoon. To me, THAT is a delusion. Who stole who's Church? Well, since it probably wasn't YOUR Church, nor anyone you know, what's the difference? There's a difference between a general and justified anger about something in the past (for example America's treatment of the Native American nations) and actually blaming people who live TODAY for something that happened 200 years ago. I hear Greeks use terms like "those Latins" or Ultra-Traditionalist Catholics say things like "those Eastern heretics"....or heck Orthodox talk about other Orthodox in negative terms "the Barbarian lands" etc.  Having a justified "anger" for something in history is different than what we Christians tend to do...that is blame people who live today for something a member of their Church did 1000 years ago. Justified "anger" or displeasure, turns into rage and hatred, all in the name of Christ.  It's irrational and for lack of a better term, delusional. it's all very sad that to this day we see other Christians as our enemies rather than our brethren. We might disagree on many things, but this should never lead to hatred. Perhaps Tolkien's The Silmarillion  should be required material for all Christians to read  . . . . it's subject matter about the Elves and their history is quite relevant to the subject of Christian vs Christian.








« Last Edit: October 07, 2009, 11:51:04 AM by NorthernPines »

Offline mike

  • A sexual pervert with limited English reading comprehension
  • Protostrator
  • ***************
  • Posts: 24,872
  • Polish Laser Jesus shooting down schismatics
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Diocese of Białystok and Gdańsk
Re: Disagreement on the October meeting of the Catholic-Orthodox Dialogue
« Reply #55 on: October 07, 2009, 06:13:45 PM »
Did you also realise that Metropolitan of Ioannoupolis aka Johannesburg Seraphim is the very same Hierarch, who has recently proposed to rediscuss woman ordination?
« Last Edit: October 07, 2009, 06:15:48 PM by mike »
Hyperdox Herman, Eastern Orthodox Christian News - fb, Eastern Orthodox Christian News - tt

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Who can watch the watchmen?
"No one is paying attention to your post reports"
Why do posters that claim to have me blocked keep sending me pms and responding to my posts? That makes no sense.

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
Re: Disagreement on the October meeting of the Catholic-Orthodox Dialogue
« Reply #56 on: October 07, 2009, 07:24:24 PM »
1) The Sacred Community of the Holy Mountain has stated its official position regarding the Convention of the Joint Commission for the Dialogue between the Orthodox and the Roman Catholics, which is to take place in Cyprus.
 

http://www.oodegr.com/english/papismos/holy_mountain_on_primacy.htm
 

2) On the recognition of universal primacy for the Pope of Rome during the first millennium,  by Archmandrite George, Abbot of the Sacred Monastery of St. Gregory of the Holy Mountain
 

http://www.oodegr.com/english/papismos/universal_primacy.htm

Offline mike

  • A sexual pervert with limited English reading comprehension
  • Protostrator
  • ***************
  • Posts: 24,872
  • Polish Laser Jesus shooting down schismatics
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Diocese of Białystok and Gdańsk
Re: Disagreement on the October meeting of the Catholic-Orthodox Dialogue
« Reply #57 on: October 07, 2009, 07:51:15 PM »
Where are that gossips about accepting papal primacy from? All those people seem to believe it.
Hyperdox Herman, Eastern Orthodox Christian News - fb, Eastern Orthodox Christian News - tt

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Who can watch the watchmen?
"No one is paying attention to your post reports"
Why do posters that claim to have me blocked keep sending me pms and responding to my posts? That makes no sense.

Offline Alveus Lacuna

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,399
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: OCA
Re: Disagreement on the October meeting of the Catholic-Orthodox Dialogue
« Reply #58 on: October 07, 2009, 07:53:06 PM »
Quote from: The Sacred Community of the Holy Mountain
After having been informed that during the impending Plenary Session of the Joint Commission for the Theological Dialogue in Cyprus, between the Orthodox Church and the Roman Catholics, the subject is to be   «the role of the Bishop of Rome in the communion of the Churches during the first millennium», our Sacred Community, not knowing the exact content of the said Dialogue, is hereby expressing its extreme worry and concern, because the Papal Primacy is foreseen for discussion, before Papism has even begun to cast out its heretic dogmas and its secular character (the Vatican State).  Therefore, the only prerequisite for a discussion of the Primacy to take place is the return of the Roman Catholics to the Orthodox Faith and the Conciliar polity of the Orthodox Church, and not the "unity in diversity" of dogmas.

But doesn't Athos also possess some sort of political autonomy that is internationally recognized?  If so, who are they to criticize the organizational structure of the Vatican as a state?

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
Re: Disagreement on the October meeting of the Catholic-Orthodox Dialogue
« Reply #59 on: October 07, 2009, 08:03:55 PM »

But doesn't Athos also possess some sort of political autonomy that is internationally recognized?  If so, who are they to criticize the organizational structure of the Vatican as a state?

No.   By statute Athos is self-governing internally except in the case of serious crime.  Its foreign policy and also its military defence are in the hands of the Greek Government.

Even spiritually it is not really autonomous since it is expected to bow to the Patriarchate in Constantinople.  When  they don't... well, we see what measures are being taken with regard to Esphigmenou's challenge to the Patriarch where both the Police and the Army and the Greek Courts are making life a misery for the monastery.  No - there is nothing similar to the Vatican.  What protects Athos is 1) the Mother of God, 2) the moral and doctrinal integrity of the monks, 3) the love and veneration of the Orthodox faithful who place their confidence in the purity of the monks' orthodoxy.
« Last Edit: October 07, 2009, 08:04:40 PM by Irish Hermit »

Offline stanley123

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 3,814
Re: Disagreement on the October meeting of the Catholic-Orthodox Dialogue
« Reply #60 on: October 07, 2009, 09:31:26 PM »
1) The Sacred Community of the Holy Mountain has stated its official position regarding the Convention of the Joint Commission for the Dialogue between the Orthodox and the Roman Catholics, which is to take place in Cyprus.
 

http://www.oodegr.com/english/papismos/holy_mountain_on_primacy.htm
 

2) On the recognition of universal primacy for the Pope of Rome during the first millennium,  by Archmandrite George, Abbot of the Sacred Monastery of St. Gregory of the Holy Mountain
 

http://www.oodegr.com/english/papismos/universal_primacy.htm

With reference to the second link, what is meant by the Roman heretic dogma of created grace and how would it differ from the Orthodox teaching on it?

Offline Papist

  • Patriarch of Pontification
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,771
Re: Disagreement on the October meeting of the Catholic-Orthodox Dialogue
« Reply #61 on: October 07, 2009, 09:34:44 PM »
1) The Sacred Community of the Holy Mountain has stated its official position regarding the Convention of the Joint Commission for the Dialogue between the Orthodox and the Roman Catholics, which is to take place in Cyprus.
 

http://www.oodegr.com/english/papismos/holy_mountain_on_primacy.htm
 

2) On the recognition of universal primacy for the Pope of Rome during the first millennium,  by Archmandrite George, Abbot of the Sacred Monastery of St. Gregory of the Holy Mountain
 

http://www.oodegr.com/english/papismos/universal_primacy.htm

With reference to the second link, what is meant by the Roman heretic dogma of created grace and how would it differ from the Orthodox teaching on it?
Oh I love this topic because it depends on to what you are refering to by the word Grace. I hope a thread get's started on this matter.
"For, by its immensity, the divine substance surpasses every form that our intellect reaches. Thus we are unable to apprehend it by knowing what it is. Yet we are able to have some knowledge of it by knowing what it is not." - St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra gentiles, I, 14.

Offline t0m_dR

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 174
Re: Disagreement on the October meeting of the Catholic-Orthodox Dialogue
« Reply #62 on: October 11, 2009, 03:19:16 PM »
1) The Sacred Community of the Holy Mountain has stated its official position regarding the Convention of the Joint Commission for the Dialogue between the Orthodox and the Roman Catholics, which is to take place in Cyprus.
 

http://www.oodegr.com/english/papismos/holy_mountain_on_primacy.htm
 

2) On the recognition of universal primacy for the Pope of Rome during the first millennium,  by Archmandrite George, Abbot of the Sacred Monastery of St. Gregory of the Holy Mountain
 

http://www.oodegr.com/english/papismos/universal_primacy.htm

With reference to the second link, what is meant by the Roman heretic dogma of created grace and how would it differ from the Orthodox teaching on it?

see here:

Offline basilthefool

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 84
Re: Disagreement on the October meeting of the Catholic-Orthodox Dialogue
« Reply #63 on: October 13, 2009, 06:47:04 AM »
I notice that most of the discussion seems to focus on Ukraine and Eastern Europe. What about Catholic groups like the Melkites and the Maronite? Where do they fit in in this discussion? And where would they fit in the upcoming and future dialogues betweeen the Two Churches (Roman and Orthodox)?

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,736
Re: Disagreement on the October meeting of the Catholic-Orthodox Dialogue
« Reply #64 on: October 13, 2009, 09:24:37 AM »
I notice that most of the discussion seems to focus on Ukraine and Eastern Europe. What about Catholic groups like the Melkites and the Maronite? Where do they fit in in this discussion? And where would they fit in the upcoming and future dialogues betweeen the Two Churches (Roman and Orthodox)?

LOL.

The Arabs (i.e. Melkites and at least some of the Maronites) don't fit in this mess: they are the only groups in any numbers who actually submitted in a way that the propaganda says all the "sui juris" churches did, i.e. voluntarily. Only the Russians and Georgians submitted more voluntarily, but they are nearly non-existent the former having no hierarchy and the latter no clergy at all.

The Maronites are in a class by themselves, in that they were not Orthodox, they were Monotheletes. The alliance with the Vatican helped preserve them from the Orthodox and the Muslims.

The Melkites allied with Old Rome to get away from the mismanagement of New Rome, the latter having supressed Antioch's Rites and attempted to Hellenize the Faithful.  The general attitude about both Old and New Rome is a pox on both your houses.  The cardinal for the Melkites as of late (past couple patriarchs) is the most independent of the Eastern ones the Vatican has, often siding with the Orthodox against the Vatican.

As a consequence, there isn't the long list of unresolved grivances as there is in Poland, Ruthenia/Galicia, etc.  In Romania, things had calmed down in the 19th century, when the Orthodox majority were finally able to opperate with some resemblance of freedom.  Things seem to have changed after WWI, when the Romanian constituion made the "Greek Catholic" faith the second Romanian church, with precedence before all others except the Orthodox.  However, the King (himself a Latin rite in communion with the Vatican: like Bulgaria, the Vatican wanted to use the dynasty to get submission from the Orthodox) concluded a concordant which the Patriarch complained put the Vatican church in a position superior to the state Church.  This sort of picked the scabs, and it has been that way ever since.  Romania also shows the other reason why Eastern Europe is the focus of attention, in 1948 the "Union" was undone the way it was done: by state pressure. Same year for Ukraine (ironically, in Romania Brest for the Ukrainians was allowed to continue), in Czechoslovakia in 1950 (it was allowed to reconstitute itself in 1968: not all went back to the Vatican, but CS took all the properties from those who remained Orthodox in 1989 and gave them to the Vatican).  The Bulgarian version was not supressed (which didn't stop the primate from whinning that the "Bulgarian Catholic church was the only church that suffered under Communism."  I saw him make this absurd statement on EWTN).
Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
Re: Disagreement on the October meeting of the Catholic-Orthodox Dialogue
« Reply #65 on: October 15, 2009, 07:46:43 PM »
It would seem that what took place in both Belgrade and Ravenna has indeed woken up some sleeping dogs. 
 
Over the last few weeks as Cyprus has come closer, there have been several expressions of concern, mainly from Greek bishops and the Athonite monasteries.
 
Here are the latest statements of concern, and you can find earlier ones on the same website... including Metropolitan Zizioulas' amazing "threat" (I cannot think of any other word for it) to the Greek metropolitans who are questioning the direction of the dialogue.
 
 
1)The  Pancyprian Union of Greek Theologians expresses its concern regarding the Dialogue with the Latins in Cyprus.
 
http://www.oodegr.com/english/koinwnia/koinwnika/PanCyprian%20Theologians.htm



2) A letter by the clergy to the Hierarchy of the Church of Greece concerning the letter by the Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew.

http://www.oodegr.com/english/koinwnia/koinwnika/letter_clergy2Hierarchy.htm
 
 
P.S.  Don't forget to add *your* voice and your participation to this Meeting on Cyprus which commences today.  Pray for the delegates.
 



Offline Fr. George

  • formerly "Cleveland"
  • Administrator
  • Stratopedarches
  • *******
  • Posts: 21,455
  • May the Lord bless you and keep you always!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Re: Disagreement on the October meeting of the Catholic-Orthodox Dialogue
« Reply #66 on: October 15, 2009, 08:30:10 PM »
Read the book 'Becoming Orthodox' by Fr Gillquest on what happened when they went to Constantinople to ask to be received into Orthodoxy and why they were refused.
IIRC Met. Maximos of Pittsburgh was aghast at what happened.

He was.  But then again, he didn't foresee the problems that cropped up within the group, either (and apparently Metropolitan +PHILIP didn't).  What would have been a better response from Constantinople (and from Englewood) is something more along the lines of "we'll bring you in, but slowly, with a lot of work, because we have concerns."  Oh, well, didn't happen, and yet the Spirit led them to Orthodoxy anyway. 
How in Mor's good name
one hundred fifty four posts
No Rachel Weisz pic

Selam

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
Re: Disagreement on the October meeting of the Catholic-Orthodox Dialogue
« Reply #67 on: October 16, 2009, 07:51:20 AM »
The Struggle between the MP & EP to Represent Orthodoxy

From this
interview of Bishop Hilarion of Vienna.

Moscow, 30 June 2008 (Interfax).

If the Moscow Patriarchate withdrew from the World Council of Churches
today, it would only weaken the position of the MP in the inter-Orthodox
dialogue, according to Bishop Hilarion Alfeyev of Vienna and Austria, the
representative of the MP to the European international institutions.
"Obviously, today, such a withdrawal [from the WCC: Interfax] would only
weaken our position in defending traditional Church teachings that were the
basis of relations between Local Orthodox Churches for many centuries and
which are now disputed by the Ecumenical Patriarchate", Bishop Hilarion said
Monday to our Interfax-Religion correspondent.

He noted that the last Archpastoral Council earnestly discussed "the claims
of the EP to jurisdiction over the entire diaspora" and the EP claims to
hold a position "somewhat analogous to the role of Pope of Rome in the
Catholic Church".  "Today, the MP is the major opponent of the EP's claims,
therefore, the EP wishes to weaken our influence and participation as much
as possible in any organisation with representatives of other Local Orthodox
Churches, including the WCC", Bishop Hilarion stated.

In particular, in his view, the EP wishes that all key posts in the WCC
[occupied by Orthodox] would be filled by its direct representatives "or by
those clerics of Greek nationality who sympathise with the EP and desire to
carry out its policies". For example, Bishop Hilarion mentioned that if the
MP withdrew from the WCC, the EP would then have an easy time of
legitimatising the so-called "Estonian Apostolic Orthodox Church" (a
schismatical and uncanonical body set up by the EP on the canonical
territory of the MP in 1996: editor's note) in that body. "In the context of
this singular and specific situation, I believe that we should think twice
before taking any steps to withdraw from the WCC in particular or any other
organisation in general that represents all or most Orthodox Churches",
Bishop Hilarion said, reminding us that the WCC "is currently one of the few
venues where representatives of different Local Orthodox Churches meet".

 http://02varvara.wordpress.com/2008/07/02/bishop-hilarion-alfeyev-says-that-if-the-mp-immediately-withdrew-from-the-wcc-it-would-only-weaken-the-churchs-position/---

Offline Father H

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,680
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Nea Roma
Re: Disagreement on the October meeting of the Catholic-Orthodox Dialogue
« Reply #68 on: October 16, 2009, 10:43:39 AM »
Read the book 'Becoming Orthodox' by Fr Gillquest on what happened when they went to Constantinople to ask to be received into Orthodoxy and why they were refused.
IIRC Met. Maximos of Pittsburgh was aghast at what happened.

He was.  But then again, he didn't foresee the problems that cropped up within the group, either (and apparently Metropolitan +PHILIP didn't).  What would have been a better response from Constantinople (and from Englewood) is something more along the lines of "we'll bring you in, but slowly, with a lot of work, because we have concerns."  Oh, well, didn't happen, and yet the Spirit led them to Orthodoxy anyway. 

It really was not a problem with the whole group, just one parish (granted, a very large one).  I don't know, we are far from the Apostolic vision of the Jerusalem Church.   How much more slowly should they have taken it?   Christ did not say "go and make disciples of all nations but do it slowly."   They brought the people in, knowing the problems with some of the early proselytes, and yet still obeyed the call to make disciples.   The cradle Jewish Christians caused just as many problems as the convert Greeks/Gentiles.  You had heresies popping up from both and problems were caused from both.   A decade was not enough?

Offline Deacon Lance

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,046
  • Faith: Byzantine Catholic
  • Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Re: Disagreement on the October meeting of the Catholic-Orthodox Dialogue
« Reply #69 on: October 16, 2009, 06:36:32 PM »
Father,

But some EOC parishes did take a longer discernment process and joined the OCA Dioceses of the Midwest and the South but did not do so until 2002, 15 years after the other parishes joined the Antiochians and they seem to have none of the problems that group had.

Fr. Deacon Lance
My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.

Offline Robb

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,537
Re: Disagreement on the October meeting of the Catholic-Orthodox Dialogue
« Reply #70 on: October 17, 2009, 01:56:51 AM »
No one has forced RC believers to join WRO in contrary to Catholics forced EOCs to join the Eastern Catholic Churches.
No one has banned RCC after WRO appeared in contrary to Catholics who banned EOC after the Union of Brest.
Neither of the WRO clergy has declared himself Patriarch of Rome in contrary to Catholic Patriarchs of Antioch/Jerusalem/Alexandria.
Neither of the WRO structures claim to directly come from Western Orthodox Christianity in contrary to f.e. Ukrainian Catholics who claim to be the true descendants of the Baptism of Rus.

Irish Hermit: there are at least two times more WRO Parishes, because you forgot about Philippines and France.
So now the Pope must force Eastern Catholics out of the Church to appease the Eastern Orthodox???

If we are indeed a sister church with valid Sacraments and can provide salvation as the RCC now claims, then there is no more need for them to be separated from the mothers that they were ripped from!  They should be given a choice on what theology they want to abide by and go under the church that  abides by that theology.  Oh wait, that was already tried in the 1990's by the 'Quadripartite Agreement' that was broken only 6 weeks after it was implemented!

Orthodoc


First of all we are most certainly NOT sister Churches. The only Churches that I know to be sister Churches to mine are the Byztantine, Oriental, Chaldean Chatholic Churches. Second, I will repeat my question. Do you expect us to expel Byzantine Catholics from the Catholic Church?

No.  What expected was that the 'Quadripartite Commission'  signed by all parties in the 1990's would have been honored and the people of each parish would have had the freedom to vote on what they wanted to be.  But we know what happened, don't we?  It's why there was never any meeting between the MP and the previous pope.  And it is still the main reason there will be no meeting with this pope until the RCC agrees to put it up for discussion on any joint meeting between pope and patriarch.


==========================

The extract is from a paper delivered on 7 October 2002 at the University of St Thomas (St Paul, Minessota, USA), and repeated on 9 October 2002 at the Catholic University of America (Washington D.C).

Bishop Hilarion Alfeyev: Prospects for Catholic-Orthodox Relations

'However, the end of 1980s was marked by a rapid deterioration in the relations between the Orthodox and the Catholic Churches. The main reason for this was the emergence of the Greek Catholic Church in Western Ukraine. Its presence, which was created after the 1596 Union of Brest, was strong in Western Ukraine until 1946, when it was banned by Stalin. After 1946, many members of this Church were imprisoned and killed and some went into exile. The Greek Catholic Church was declared to be illegal and many church
buildings that belonged to it were given to the Orthodox. A similar process took place in 1948 in Communist Romania, where the Uniate Church was also declared to be illegal and its buildings were either closed or transferred to the Orthodox.

'Now, at the end of 1980s, under the influence of the nationalist movement in Western Ukraine, the Greek Catholics began to re-establish their presence in the region. What may have become a restoration of justice, however, turned out to be a crying injustice, since the revival of the Greek Catholic Church took place at the expense of the Orthodox Church. On 29 October 1989, the Greek Catholics seized the Transfiguration Cathedral of Lvov, after
expelling the Orthodox from it. Shortly thereafter, many similar acts occurred in other parts of the country.

'January 1990 saw the creation of the so-called Quadrennial Commission, which comprised representatives of the Moscow Patriarchate, the Roman Catholic Church, the Ukrainian Orthodox Church and the Eastern Rite Catholics from Western Ukraine. The Commission began to discuss concrete cases of human rights violations during the campaign launched by the Uniates. In March 1990, the Commission developed basic principles for the distribution of the property between the Greek Catholics and the Orthodox. It was agreed that, where there are two churches, one should be given to the Greek Catholics and another one remain Orthodox; where there is only one church, it should belong to the majority group, which must in this case help the minority find or build a suitable place of worship. However, on 13 March 1990, the Greek Catholics unilaterally left the Commission.

From then on the seizure of the Orthodox churches (some of them had belonged to the Orthodox even before the Union of 1596) assumed an avalanche-like character. In many places violent methods were employed by the Greek Catholics as they seized
Orthodox churches and expelled parishioners from their places of worship. Tensions between the Orthodox and the Greek Catholics led to clashes and mass disorders.

By the end of 1990, most churches in Lvov, Ternopol and Ivano-Frankovsk had been captured and by the end of 1991, 597 churches had been taken from the Orthodox...............'

==============

Orthodoc

 
I personally believe that the Quadripartite agreement should have been burned.

So you don't believe in freedom of religion?  Or the fact that every individual parish has the right to determine what faith they want to hold?  Interesting!!!!

Orthodoc

Of course he dosen't beleive in religious freedom.  No "traditionalist Catholic" worth his salt would subscribe to such an idea.  The good traditionalist RC beleives that all should be forced to belong to his Church and those who do not wish to do so should be either imprisoned or put to death.  This is real, I'm not making it up.  I used to be a trad RC and know all about what these people profess to beleive.  Lucky for you, they are not very secret about it so anyone should have no difficulty accessing information from the various traditionalist web sites and publications. 

These horrid beleifs alon e are a reason why traditional Roman Catholicsm and its symbol, the Latin mass, represent the greates thtreat to human civilization and peace loving people the world over then anything else on this planet, witht eh possible exception of militant Islam and Zionism.  Why on the Earth the RC Pop, who claims to beleive int he Vatican Council II and its principles, woul ever allow for these traditionalist to regain an y foothold of power in his Church is beyond my knowledge?  The traditionalist Latin Mass Catholics are crazy people whp would gladly kill us all if they could.  I should know, they almost killed me because I had the blessed forsight to reject their radical ideas and the courage to tell them to their faces what I thought of them and their brainwashing.
« Last Edit: October 17, 2009, 01:57:30 AM by Robb »
Men may dislike truth, men may find truth offensive and inconvenient, men may persecute the truth, subvert it, try by law to suppress it. But to maintain that men have the final power over truth is blasphemy, and the last delusion. Truth lives forever, men do not.
-- Gustave Flaubert

Offline stanley123

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 3,814
Re: Disagreement on the October meeting of the Catholic-Orthodox Dialogue
« Reply #71 on: October 17, 2009, 04:14:26 AM »
  The good traditionalist RC beleives that all should be forced to belong to his Church and those who do not wish to do so should be either imprisoned or put to death.  This is real, I'm not making it up. ..... The traditionalist Latin Mass Catholics are crazy people whp would gladly kill us all if they could.  I should know, they almost killed me because I had the blessed forsight to reject their radical ideas and the courage to tell them to their faces what I thought of them and their brainwashing.
Did you file a police report when these Latin Mass Catholic zombies tried to kill you for your courageous Orthodox beliefs?

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,736
Re: Disagreement on the October meeting of the Catholic-Orthodox Dialogue
« Reply #72 on: October 17, 2009, 10:05:11 AM »
Father,

But some EOC parishes did take a longer discernment process and joined the OCA Dioceses of the Midwest and the South but did not do so until 2002, 15 years after the other parishes joined the Antiochians and they seem to have none of the problems that group had.

Fr. Deacon Lance

The OCA diacese of the Midwest had accepted some of the straglers in the nineties.

The problem was that the Evangelical Orthodox were the first wave of the first mass movement into Orthodox in North America since St. Alexis Toth and the movement which founded ACROD.

Quilquist's group is not the only one of its kind: my present parish was a group of two parishes which both came in the nineties, having had nothing to do with EOC.  They grew out of a Bible Study at Wheaton college.

I am curious: the Vatican has its own growing influx from its Protestant siblings.  Do they ever accept parishes as parishes.  I know that they are considering TAC, but is that the first?
Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth

Offline Father H

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,680
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Nea Roma
Re: Disagreement on the October meeting of the Catholic-Orthodox Dialogue
« Reply #73 on: October 17, 2009, 12:42:32 PM »
Father,

But some EOC parishes did take a longer discernment process and joined the OCA Dioceses of the Midwest and the South but did not do so until 2002, 15 years after the other parishes joined the Antiochians and they seem to have none of the problems that group had.

Fr. Deacon Lance

Yes, and that is fine.   For each is it different.  But that is why I reject a wholesale view that it takes decades or even centuries for a people to become Orthodox and make some sort of uniform rule about it that does not fit with the Church's approach historically.   For example, one writer, although I cannot recall which, and it was probably some 10 or 15 years ago that I read it, argued that America could not possibly have its own Church because it takes a people centuries to "truly" become Orthodox.   That's funny, given that it took 50 days for the early Church to become Orthodox.   That means also that the second century Christians weren't really Orthodox yet, since it takes decades.  Also, the Church of Bulgaria was given for a time autocephaly only 80 years after its conversion to Christianity.   And then all of those "silly" people thinking that they were Orthodox after the Baptism of Rus when really they needed a few more centuries to "truly" become Orthodox.   For some it takes longer and some shorter, but our modern day presuppositions that are not founded on Patristics should be discarded.   Each should be dealt with in God's time, for some longer, for some shorter. 

Offline Father H

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,680
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Nea Roma
Re: Disagreement on the October meeting of the Catholic-Orthodox Dialogue
« Reply #74 on: October 17, 2009, 12:53:01 PM »
Were the Toth and later Rusyn waves "not really Orthodox" because they still had some holdovers from uniatism?   They still had some "Papist thinking," and even without that some "Romish practices which continued their thought patterns in Romish thinking" and therefore they were not "really" Orthodox until they threw it off?   But what about all those who were already in the Orthodox Church who were subject to "western captivity" within the Church.  We are much less critical of them because they are our ancesters?   Those Orthodox temples were also filled with renaissance style artistry and latinized thinking in catechisms and prayer books during the same time period.  We should judge those "always within" by the same standards as those who have "come in." 

Offline Deacon Lance

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,046
  • Faith: Byzantine Catholic
  • Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Re: Disagreement on the October meeting of the Catholic-Orthodox Dialogue
« Reply #75 on: October 17, 2009, 07:02:28 PM »
I am curious: the Vatican has its own growing influx from its Protestant siblings.  Do they ever accept parishes as parishes.  I know that they are considering TAC, but is that the first?

In the US a few Episcopal parishes were accepted and allowed to use a corrected version of the Book of Common Prayer.  There are 4/5 parishes in Texas with own parishes and 6 or so other communities sharing a regular Roman parish.

Fr. Deacon Lance
My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
Re: Disagreement on the October meeting of the Catholic-Orthodox Dialogue
« Reply #76 on: October 18, 2009, 12:18:47 AM »

In the US a few Episcopal parishes were accepted and allowed to use a corrected version of the Book of Common Prayer.  There are 4/5 parishes in Texas with own parishes and 6 or so other communities sharing a regular Roman parish.

Is there not a proviso required from these Anglican-Rite parishes that upon the death of their ex-Anglican pastor they will adopt the regular Roman Catholic rite?  In other words, they agreed in advance to the eventual extinction of their Anglican liturgy.

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,736
Re: Disagreement on the October meeting of the Catholic-Orthodox Dialogue
« Reply #77 on: October 18, 2009, 01:34:51 AM »
Father,

But some EOC parishes did take a longer discernment process and joined the OCA Dioceses of the Midwest and the South but did not do so until 2002, 15 years after the other parishes joined the Antiochians and they seem to have none of the problems that group had.

Fr. Deacon Lance

Yes, and that is fine.   For each is it different.  But that is why I reject a wholesale view that it takes decades or even centuries for a people to become Orthodox and make some sort of uniform rule about it that does not fit with the Church's approach historically.   For example, one writer, although I cannot recall which, and it was probably some 10 or 15 years ago that I read it, argued that America could not possibly have its own Church because it takes a people centuries to "truly" become Orthodox.   That's funny, given that it took 50 days for the early Church to become Orthodox.   That means also that the second century Christians weren't really Orthodox yet, since it takes decades.  Also, the Church of Bulgaria was given for a time autocephaly only 80 years after its conversion to Christianity.   And then all of those "silly" people thinking that they were Orthodox after the Baptism of Rus when really they needed a few more centuries to "truly" become Orthodox.   For some it takes longer and some shorter, but our modern day presuppositions that are not founded on Patristics should be discarded.   Each should be dealt with in God's time, for some longer, for some shorter. 

I does take centuries.


It takes centuries to reduce Orthodoxy to a mere national brand, an ethnic tag.

Once, when a member at a parish of one of those hoary Orthodox backgrounds asked me about a parish that had converted from Protestantanism.

"Do you think that they can become Orthodox like us?"

"God, I hope not" I replied.
« Last Edit: October 18, 2009, 01:35:12 AM by ialmisry »
Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth

Offline Deacon Lance

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,046
  • Faith: Byzantine Catholic
  • Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Re: Disagreement on the October meeting of the Catholic-Orthodox Dialogue
« Reply #78 on: October 18, 2009, 08:35:04 AM »

In the US a few Episcopal parishes were accepted and allowed to use a corrected version of the Book of Common Prayer.  There are 4/5 parishes in Texas with own parishes and 6 or so other communities sharing a regular Roman parish.

Is there not a proviso required from these Anglican-Rite parishes that upon the death of their ex-Anglican pastor they will adopt the regular Roman Catholic rite?  In other words, they agreed in advance to the eventual extinction of their Anglican liturgy.

I don't know where you got that idea.  Nothing in the pastoral provision states this.  They will of course have to find priests willing to celebrate that Liturgy for them.  The ones in Texas that are actual parishes have quite a bit of support from their bishops so I imagine the bishops will ensure this.  I also don't think there is going to be a shortage of converting Episcopal priests anytime soon.

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
Re: Disagreement on the October meeting of the Catholic-Orthodox Dialogue
« Reply #79 on: October 18, 2009, 10:15:13 AM »
Is there not a proviso required from these Anglican-Rite parishes that upon the death of their ex-Anglican pastor they will adopt the regular Roman Catholic rite?  In other words, they agreed in advance to the eventual extinction of their Anglican liturgy.

I don't know where you got that idea.  Nothing in the pastoral provision states this. 

Apologies!  Where is my mind today?  What I wanted to say was that their married priests will not continue after the death of the convert priest who brings his parish into Catholicism?  But I could be wrong about that also - it needs checking.

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
Re: Disagreement on the October meeting of the Catholic-Orthodox Dialogue
« Reply #80 on: October 18, 2009, 10:23:27 AM »
Found it now.  This is what I had in mind.  I really should have checked before sending the first erroneous message.

3) Discipline: (a) To married Episcopalian priests who may be ordained Catholic priests, the following stipulations will apply: they may not become bishops; and they may not remarry in case of widowhood. (b) Future candidates for the priesthood must follow the discipline of celibacy. (c) Special care must be taken on the pastoral level to avoid any misunderstanding regarding the Church’s discipline of celibacy.

http://www.atonementonline.com/resource001.html

Document Outlining the Pastoral Provision
issued by the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith
on July 22, 1980


Offline Deacon Lance

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,046
  • Faith: Byzantine Catholic
  • Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Re: Disagreement on the October meeting of the Catholic-Orthodox Dialogue
« Reply #81 on: October 18, 2009, 07:29:34 PM »
Yes my understanding is married Episcopal priests will continue to be accepted but men born and raised in these parishes if they wish to pursue the priesthood will be expected to embrace celibacy like any other Latin priest.  These parishe are quite conservative and traditional and vocations from parishes like these have been plentiful as are converts from the ECUSA.
My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.

Offline mike

  • A sexual pervert with limited English reading comprehension
  • Protostrator
  • ***************
  • Posts: 24,872
  • Polish Laser Jesus shooting down schismatics
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Diocese of Białystok and Gdańsk
Re: Disagreement on the October meeting of the Catholic-Orthodox Dialogue
« Reply #82 on: October 19, 2009, 01:36:48 PM »
Quote
On 17 October 2009, a plenary session of the Joint International Commission for the Theological Dialogue between the Roman Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church began its work on Cyprus. Taking part in the session is a delegation of the Russian Orthodox Church headed by the Chairman of the Moscow Patriarchate Department for External Church Relations Archbishop Hilarion of Volokolamsk.

The participants will discuss the document on the role of the Pope of Rome in the first millennium prepared by the Joint Commission Coordinating Committee in October 2008. The Russian Orthodox Church presented its critical remarks to the Organizing Committee before the session.

On Sunday, October 18, the ordained Orthodox members of the Commission celebrated the Divine Liturgy in Nicosia. His Beatitude Archbishop Chrysostom of Cyprus officiated in concelebration with the representatives of the Patriarchates of Constantinople, Alexandria, Moscow, Serbia, Romania, and Georgia, the Churches of Greece, Poland, and of the Czech Lands and Slovakia. Laymen, who represented the Patriarchate of Jerusalem and the Albanian Orthodox Church, we praying at the service also attended by the Catholic participants in the session.

At the repast after the Divine Liturgy His Beatitude Archbishop Chrysostom and Archbishop Hilarion had a talk.

Later in the day the Commission members visited the Nicosia metochion of the famous Kykkos monastery where they were greeted by its abbot Metropolitan Nicephorus.

The Joint International Commission for the Theological dialogue between the Roman Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church will work till October 23.

source

Why there aren't any representants from the Church of Antioch?
« Last Edit: October 19, 2009, 01:37:41 PM by mike »
Hyperdox Herman, Eastern Orthodox Christian News - fb, Eastern Orthodox Christian News - tt

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Who can watch the watchmen?
"No one is paying attention to your post reports"
Why do posters that claim to have me blocked keep sending me pms and responding to my posts? That makes no sense.

Offline Papist

  • Patriarch of Pontification
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,771
Re: Disagreement on the October meeting of the Catholic-Orthodox Dialogue
« Reply #83 on: October 19, 2009, 01:39:03 PM »
I wonder who will walk out this time? The Catholics? The Russian Orthodox? A suprise walk out by another group? It saddens me to say this but I think that its unlikely that these meeting will bear much fuit... unless of course Our Lord miraculously intervenes.
« Last Edit: October 19, 2009, 01:39:55 PM by Papist »
"For, by its immensity, the divine substance surpasses every form that our intellect reaches. Thus we are unable to apprehend it by knowing what it is. Yet we are able to have some knowledge of it by knowing what it is not." - St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra gentiles, I, 14.

Offline Robb

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,537
Re: Disagreement on the October meeting of the Catholic-Orthodox Dialogue
« Reply #84 on: October 21, 2009, 02:07:08 AM »
I wonder who will walk out this time? The Catholics? The Russian Orthodox? A suprise walk out by another group? It saddens me to say this but I think that its unlikely that these meeting will bear much fuit... unless of course Our Lord miraculously intervenes.

On whose side exactly?
Men may dislike truth, men may find truth offensive and inconvenient, men may persecute the truth, subvert it, try by law to suppress it. But to maintain that men have the final power over truth is blasphemy, and the last delusion. Truth lives forever, men do not.
-- Gustave Flaubert

Offline Robb

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,537
Re: Disagreement on the October meeting of the Catholic-Orthodox Dialogue
« Reply #85 on: October 21, 2009, 02:16:42 AM »
Father,

But some EOC parishes did take a longer discernment process and joined the OCA Dioceses of the Midwest and the South but did not do so until 2002, 15 years after the other parishes joined the Antiochians and they seem to have none of the problems that group had.

Fr. Deacon Lance

Yes, and that is fine.   For each is it different.  But that is why I reject a wholesale view that it takes decades or even centuries for a people to become Orthodox and make some sort of uniform rule about it that does not fit with the Church's approach historically.   For example, one writer, although I cannot recall which, and it was probably some 10 or 15 years ago that I read it, argued that America could not possibly have its own Church because it takes a people centuries to "truly" become Orthodox.   That's funny, given that it took 50 days for the early Church to become Orthodox.   That means also that the second century Christians weren't really Orthodox yet, since it takes decades.  Also, the Church of Bulgaria was given for a time autocephaly only 80 years after its conversion to Christianity.   And then all of those "silly" people thinking that they were Orthodox after the Baptism of Rus when really they needed a few more centuries to "truly" become Orthodox.   For some it takes longer and some shorter, but our modern day presuppositions that are not founded on Patristics should be discarded.   Each should be dealt with in God's time, for some longer, for some shorter. 

I does take centuries.


It takes centuries to reduce Orthodoxy to a mere national brand, an ethnic tag.

Once, when a member at a parish of one of those hoary Orthodox backgrounds asked me about a parish that had converted from Protestantanism.

"Do you think that they can become Orthodox like us?"

"God, I hope not" I replied.

Please , lets not be so lighthearted in trashing those Orthodox who came into he Church by virtue of their ethnic backround and parental lineage.  Many of these cradle "ethnics" whom some converts seem so apt to dis have done a lot to build up Orthodoxy on this continent and made many sacrifices to preserve it so that others could have the grace to convert into the fold.  Sure, the ethnics may be accused by some of having a lax faith (as opposed to the super Bible thumping kind that those from a Protestant backround may bring with them).  This doesn't mean that the cradles ain't religious or do not care about their faith simply because they do not express it outwardly in the same manner as converts tend to.  As the old saying goes "familiarity breeds contempt".  Its only natural that, after generations of exposure to and acculturation to a religion, the descendants of the once zealous founders will become less devout, especially in their outward behavior.  This same process of lax faith which converts accuse ethnic parishes will probably end up happening to the descendants of even today's most devout Orthodox convert parishes and missions.  It's human nature and we shouldn't gloat over it.
Men may dislike truth, men may find truth offensive and inconvenient, men may persecute the truth, subvert it, try by law to suppress it. But to maintain that men have the final power over truth is blasphemy, and the last delusion. Truth lives forever, men do not.
-- Gustave Flaubert

Offline ag_vn

  • Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 409
Re: Disagreement on the October meeting of the Catholic-Orthodox Dialogue
« Reply #86 on: October 21, 2009, 09:56:51 AM »

Quote from: mike
Why there aren't any representants from the Church of Antioch?

Metropolitan Paul (Yazigi) of Aleppo and Archmandrite Isaac Barakat of the Balamand monastery are present.

Offline mike

  • A sexual pervert with limited English reading comprehension
  • Protostrator
  • ***************
  • Posts: 24,872
  • Polish Laser Jesus shooting down schismatics
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Diocese of Białystok and Gdańsk
Re: Disagreement on the October meeting of the Catholic-Orthodox Dialogue
« Reply #87 on: October 21, 2009, 10:02:50 AM »
Thank you
Hyperdox Herman, Eastern Orthodox Christian News - fb, Eastern Orthodox Christian News - tt

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Who can watch the watchmen?
"No one is paying attention to your post reports"
Why do posters that claim to have me blocked keep sending me pms and responding to my posts? That makes no sense.

Offline ag_vn

  • Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 409
Re: Disagreement on the October meeting of the Catholic-Orthodox Dialogue
« Reply #88 on: October 23, 2009, 08:19:08 AM »
The result of the meeting:

Quote
The eleventh meeting of the Joint International Commission for Theological Dialogue between the Orthodox Church and the Roman Catholic Church took place in Paphos, Cyprus, a city with a rich history, having received three Apostles, Paul, Barnabas and Mark. The meeting took place from 16-23 October 2009, generously and fraternally hosted by the Orthodox Church of Cyprus.

 Twenty Catholic members were present; several more were unable to attend. All the Orthodox Churches, with the exception of the Patriarchate of Bulgaria, were represented, namely the Ecumenical Patriarchate, the Patriarchate of Alexandria, the Patriarchate of Antioch, the Patriarchate of Jerusalem, the Patriarchate of Moscow, the Patriarchate of Serbia, the Patriarchate of Romania, the Patriarchate of Georgia, the Church of Cyprus, the Church of Greece, the Church of Poland, the Church of Albania and the Church of Czech Lands and Slovakia.

...

During this plenary meeting, the Commission carefully considered and amended the draft text of the Joint Coordinating Committee, and decided to complete its work on the text next year, by convening a further meeting of the Joint Commission. No final text has been decided upon, and any text that may be circulated is not valid.

It was decided that the 12th plenary meeting will be hosted by Cardinal Christoph Schönborn, in Vienna, Austria, from 20-27 September 2010.

...

the whole text

Offline mike

  • A sexual pervert with limited English reading comprehension
  • Protostrator
  • ***************
  • Posts: 24,872
  • Polish Laser Jesus shooting down schismatics
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Diocese of Białystok and Gdańsk
Re: Disagreement on the October meeting of the Catholic-Orthodox Dialogue
« Reply #89 on: October 23, 2009, 08:28:26 AM »
Thanks for that.
Hyperdox Herman, Eastern Orthodox Christian News - fb, Eastern Orthodox Christian News - tt

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Who can watch the watchmen?
"No one is paying attention to your post reports"
Why do posters that claim to have me blocked keep sending me pms and responding to my posts? That makes no sense.