OrthodoxChristianity.net
October 31, 2014, 02:10:24 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 »  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: John Paul II and the Assryian Church of the East  (Read 14233 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Amadeus
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 268


I'm a llama!


« Reply #45 on: May 13, 2004, 02:46:23 PM »

Ben:

Although the Assyrians accept only the first two Ecumenical Councils, recent ecumenical discussions among Churches of the Syriac Tradition held under the auspices of the Pro Oriente Foundation have concluded that, in substance, the faith of the Assyrian Church is consistent with the Christological teaching of the Council of Chalcedon (451).

Officially the ACE adheres to extreme Antiochian Christological terminology, according to which in Christ there are two natures and two qnoma (a Syriac term with no Greek equivalent that refers to an individual but never personalized concrete nature) in one person.

I think the ACE's synod of bishops has requested that their Church not be called "Nestorian," since this term has been used in the past to insult them.

See http://www.cired.org/east.html

Amado
Logged
Father Peter
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: British Orthodox Church within the Coptic Orthodox Patriarchate
Posts: 2,656



WWW
« Reply #46 on: May 13, 2004, 03:55:08 PM »

Hi Ben

The Assyrians do use the terminology of 'two hypostases'. This is the key point for me. It is not without explication. But it is the key phrase. The head of Ecumenical matters for the Assyrians, Mar Bawai Soro uses it extensively.

Its not a problem. But I need to know what is meant.

Did Pope JPII issue any material explaining how he understands the phrase 'two hypostases'?

Peter

Logged

Lord have mercy upon me a sinner
http://www.orthodoxmedway.org

My blog - http://anorthodoxpriest.blogspot.co.uk

The poster formerly known as peterfarrington
Ben
Unabashedly Pro-Life
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,260



« Reply #47 on: May 13, 2004, 11:40:39 PM »



Quote
Although the Assyrians accept only the first two Ecumenical Councils, recent ecumenical discussions among Churches of the Syriac Tradition held under the auspices of the Pro Oriente Foundation have concluded that, in substance, the faith of the Assyrian Church is consistent with the Christological teaching of the Council of Chalcedon (451).


If this is true (which I suspect it is, otherwise why would John Paul II sign such a declaration?), then the Assryians are not Nestorians, and we can move foward in the process of union between the two churches.

Quote
Officially the ACE adheres to extreme Antiochian Christological terminology, according to which in Christ there are two natures and two qnoma (a Syriac term with no Greek equivalent that refers to an individual but never personalized concrete nature) in one person.


This may be the problem, and I would love to better understand their Christological terminology.

Quote
I think the ACE's synod of bishops has requested that their Church not be called "Nestorian," since this term has been used in the past to insult them.


Well, of couse. "Nestorian" has a lot of baggage with it, and is commonly used to insult the Assryian Church and their faith.

Quote

Yes, this is a very imformative website.

In Christ,
Ben
Logged

"I prefer to be accused unjustly, for then I have nothing to reproach myself with, and joyfully offer this to the good Lord. Then I humble myself at the thought that I am indeed capable of doing the thing of which I have been accused. " - Saint
Ben
Unabashedly Pro-Life
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,260



« Reply #48 on: May 13, 2004, 11:52:57 PM »



Quote
Did Pope JPII issue any material explaining how he understands the phrase 'two hypostases'?

I do not know, perhaps someone else does. But I really do not think that the Pope signed that declaration without knowing what the Assryian Church teaches, and what they mean by "two hypostases". I really doubt that H.H. John Paul II and his H.H. Mar Dinkha IV are so ecumenicaly minded that they would dimiss their Christological differences for the sake of unity. The declaration states that presently the Churches have no Christological differences, and this is a wonderful progression towards the union between the two Churches.

Logged

"I prefer to be accused unjustly, for then I have nothing to reproach myself with, and joyfully offer this to the good Lord. Then I humble myself at the thought that I am indeed capable of doing the thing of which I have been accused. " - Saint
Mexican
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Church of Alexandria
Posts: 489


« Reply #49 on: May 14, 2004, 02:41:56 AM »

I hope there's a time when Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Asyrians and Catholics, will have at least a spiritual communion and common sacraments, as Apostolic Churches.... but there are some things that I find very demagogical in the common declaration:

Quote
“Finally, the words of Eucharistic Institution are indeed present in the Anaphora of Addai and Mari, not in a coherent narrative way and ad litteram, but rather in a dispersed euchological way, that is, integrated in successive prayers of thanksgiving, praise, and intercession.”

Is this believable? How is this, they're present invisibly but they're not present at all? Isn't it better to say that the "institution narrative" is not, after all, the condition si ne qua non of having a valid consecration? This sounds very demagogical.

Quote
When Chaldean faithful are participating in an Assyrian celebration of the Holy Eucharist, the Assyrian minister is warmly invited to insert the words of the Institution

 Cheesy hahaha, I wonder if someone will take this seriously when celebrating mass.

Leaving the Nestorian issue aside, which has been proved to be more a problem of terminology, the Assyrian Church has departed from the orthodox faith and has compromised with Protestantism. This is understandable, due to the isolation and persecution that the Assyrians have suffered.

They have signed agreements with the Anglicans and even permit Asyrians to attend the Episcopal services that are not valid at all. In Sweden they even allow them to attend Lutheran services. Some have accepted married bishops and divorce for the clergy.



Logged
Father Peter
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: British Orthodox Church within the Coptic Orthodox Patriarchate
Posts: 2,656



WWW
« Reply #50 on: May 14, 2004, 07:29:45 AM »

"the faith of the Assyrian Church is consistent with the Christological teaching of the Council of Chalcedon (451)."

This is why the OO broke off dialogue for a while with the RC's and this is why Chalcedon was rejected from the beginning.

I am not saying that Chalcedon is of necessity, but it is certainly liable of a Theodoran interpretation. We know that Theodoret said that his Christology had won the day at Chalcedon, and we know that Nestorius said that the Tome expressed his Christology.

I am interested in the passage about "qnoma" posted a bit further above. That is a very interesting and possibly encouraging sentence.

Peter
Logged

Lord have mercy upon me a sinner
http://www.orthodoxmedway.org

My blog - http://anorthodoxpriest.blogspot.co.uk

The poster formerly known as peterfarrington
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,962


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #51 on: May 14, 2004, 10:47:37 AM »

Mexican,

"Is this believable?" -I think so.

"How is this, they're present invisibly but they're not present at all?" -Read below.

"Isn't it better to say that the 'institution narrative' is not, after all, the condition si ne qua non of having a valid consecration?" -Not from the Latin Church's point of view. Considering that every extent Anaphora, East and West except those of Mar Addai and Mar Mari of the Assyrians/Chaldeans and that of Peter III of the Syriacs/Maronites, includes the Institution Narrative and the importance of the Institution Narrative in those traditions especially the Latin, even while recognizing the East believes the Consecration isn't complete until the Epiclesis the Latin Church needed this explanation.

Fr. Deacon Lance

"Finally, it must be observed that the eastern and western Eucharistic Anaphoras, while expressing the same mystery, have different theological, ritual and linguistic traditions. The words of the Eucharistic Institution are indeed present in the Anaphora of Addai and Mari, not in a coherent way and ad litteram, but rather in a dispersed euchological way, that is, integrated in prayers of thanksgiving, praise and intercession. All these elements constitute a “quasi-narrative” of the Eucharistic Institution. In the central part of the Anaphora, together with the Epiclesis, explicit references are made to the eucharistic Body and Blood of Jesus Christ
 
(“O my Lord, in thy manifold and ineffable mercies, make a good and gracious remembrance for all the upright and just fathers who were pleasing before thee, in the commemoration of the body and blood of thy Christ, which we offer to thee upon the pure and holy altar, as thou hast taught us”)

to the life-giving mystery of Jesus’ passion, death and resurrection, which is actually commemorated and celebrated

(“that all the inhabitants of the world may know thee ... and we also, O my Lord, thy unworthy, frail and miserable servants who are gathered and stand before thee, and have received by tradition the example which is from thee, rejoicing and glorifying and exalting and commemorating and celebrating this great and awesome mystery of the passion and death and resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ”),
 
to the eucharistic offering for the forgiveness of the sins, to the eschatological dimension of the eucharistic celebration and to the Lord’s command to 'do this in memory of me'
 
(“And let thy Holy Spirit come, O my Lord, and rest upon this offering of thy servants, and bless it and sanctify it that it my be to us, O my Lord, for the pardon of sins, and for the forgiveness of shortcomings, and for the great hope of the resurrection from the dead, and for new life in the kingdom of heaven with all who have been pleasing before thee”).

So the words of the Institution are not absent in the Anaphora of Addai and Mari, but explicitly mentioned in a dispersed way, from the beginning to the end, in the most important passages of the Anaphora. It is also clear that the passages cited above express the full conviction of commemorating the Lord’s paschal mystery, in the strong sense of making it present; that is, the intention to carry out in practice precisely what Christ established by his words and actions in instituting the Eucharist."

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/documents/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_20011025_chiesa-caldea-assira_en.html


Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Ben
Unabashedly Pro-Life
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,260



« Reply #52 on: May 14, 2004, 12:56:48 PM »




Quote
I am interested in the passage about "qnoma" posted a bit further above. That is a very interesting and possibly encouraging sentence.

I am also interested in this, I would love to learn more.
Logged

"I prefer to be accused unjustly, for then I have nothing to reproach myself with, and joyfully offer this to the good Lord. Then I humble myself at the thought that I am indeed capable of doing the thing of which I have been accused. " - Saint
Father Peter
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: British Orthodox Church within the Coptic Orthodox Patriarchate
Posts: 2,656



WWW
« Reply #53 on: May 14, 2004, 01:45:39 PM »

If I get anything interesting through contacts with Assyrians I'll keep you in the loop, Ben

Peter
Logged

Lord have mercy upon me a sinner
http://www.orthodoxmedway.org

My blog - http://anorthodoxpriest.blogspot.co.uk

The poster formerly known as peterfarrington
Antonious Nikolas
Orthodox Christian, Miaphysite, Anagnostis
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox
Posts: 2,208


Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker, Bishop of Myra


WWW
« Reply #54 on: May 14, 2004, 04:20:36 PM »

They have signed agreements with the Anglicans and even permit Asyrians to attend the Episcopal services that are not valid at all. In Sweden they even allow them to attend Lutheran services. Some have accepted married bishops and divorce for the clergy.

Very disturbing. :'(
Logged

"According to the Orthodox Faith, the teachings and traditions one upholds and believes in will necessarily influence and inform one's spiritual orientation and the way one worships..." - Harry Boosalis
Ben
Unabashedly Pro-Life
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,260



« Reply #55 on: May 15, 2004, 04:20:32 AM »

If I get anything interesting through contacts with Assyrians I'll keep you in the loop, Ben

Please do!  Smiley
Logged

"I prefer to be accused unjustly, for then I have nothing to reproach myself with, and joyfully offer this to the good Lord. Then I humble myself at the thought that I am indeed capable of doing the thing of which I have been accused. " - Saint
Ben
Unabashedly Pro-Life
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,260



« Reply #56 on: May 15, 2004, 04:22:46 AM »

Mexican....

What kind of agreements have the Assryians made with the Anglicans? If we're just talking Christological agreements, or stuff like that, then I don't see a problem.
Logged

"I prefer to be accused unjustly, for then I have nothing to reproach myself with, and joyfully offer this to the good Lord. Then I humble myself at the thought that I am indeed capable of doing the thing of which I have been accused. " - Saint
Arystarcus
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 836


« Reply #57 on: June 03, 2004, 11:26:09 PM »


*bump*

Quote
I also plan on investigating this more fully, but as of now, being a Catholic, I trust the Church.

I trust that the Pope wouldn't sign a comon Christological declaration with Nestorians. And I trust that the Vatican wouldn't allow Chaldean Catholics to recieve Nestorian Sacraments, and Nestorians to reive Catholic Sacraments, even if it was an emergency.

I actually plan on visiting an Assryian parish, and I have recently emailed an Assyrian bishop, I hope to learn more about their faith, but until then, I'll trust the Vatican.


Hey Ben,

Just wondering if you had visited an Assyrian Church yet, as well as to inquire if you had heard back from their bishop and what kind of fruits your contact with him bore.

Please post an update!

In Christ,
Aaron
Logged
Ben
Unabashedly Pro-Life
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,260



« Reply #58 on: June 07, 2004, 01:01:04 AM »

I did email an Assryian bishop but it didn't work. I got a delivery failure notification. As for visiting an Assryian church, I still gotta visit a Coptic, ROAC, and OCA parish in the near future, so I'll just have to see.
Logged

"I prefer to be accused unjustly, for then I have nothing to reproach myself with, and joyfully offer this to the good Lord. Then I humble myself at the thought that I am indeed capable of doing the thing of which I have been accused. " - Saint
Arystarcus
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 836


« Reply #59 on: June 07, 2004, 01:30:20 AM »

Quote
I did email an Assryian bishop but it didn't work. I got a delivery failure notification.

Don'tcha hate it when that happens? I am sure that you might be able to get in contact with another Assyrian bishop if you try, if not try getting in touch with an Assyrian priest - maybe he can help you out. If at first you don't succeed.....

Quote
I still gotta visit a Coptic, ROAC, and OCA parish in the near future, so I'll just have to see.

I really enjoyed my visit to a Coptic church, I would definately recommend that you go and experience worshipping with them first hand!  Cheesy

I'm surprised that you haven't already visited an OCA church yet! See if you can attend Vespers on a Saturday night, I am sure you would enjoy it!

I am not sure what language the liturgy will be in in a ROAC church, perhaps it varies by church? There aren't any ROAC churches anywhere near me, but I have been to both Vespers and the Divine Liturgy at a GOC (Chyrosotomos Synod) church and found them to be quite reverant. Both were in Greek, so I didn't understand a word of it, but I can tell you that their liturgy was longer than at any GOA parish I have been to. If you ever find yourself in the neighborhood of a church of the GOC (www.thegreekorthodoxchurch.com), I'd say you should visit there as well.

I also don't know how feasible it is because of your location, but perhaps there might be a Cyprianite GOC (this group is in fullcomunion with the ROCOR - so they're canonical) or a parish of the Jerusalem Patriarchate near you. You might want to look into that and give them a visit too.

In Christ,
Aaron
Logged
Ben
Unabashedly Pro-Life
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,260



« Reply #60 on: June 07, 2004, 01:44:55 AM »

ROAC - they use English. And there is no GOC or JP parishes in my area.
Logged

"I prefer to be accused unjustly, for then I have nothing to reproach myself with, and joyfully offer this to the good Lord. Then I humble myself at the thought that I am indeed capable of doing the thing of which I have been accused. " - Saint
Augustine
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 565

pray for me, please


WWW
« Reply #61 on: June 09, 2004, 12:18:41 AM »

Mexican,

Quote
Is this believable? How is this, they're present invisibly but they're not present at all? Isn't it better to say that the "institution narrative" is not, after all, the condition si ne qua non of having a valid consecration? This sounds very demagogical.

I don't think they can say that, since it goes against the scholastic definition of "valid form" for the eucharist which became enshrined in Roman Catholic dogmatics.  The "words of institution" are believed to be part of the essential form, in Catholicism.  Hence, the rather stretched reasoning.  I agree, it is silly.

Logged
Ben
Unabashedly Pro-Life
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,260



« Reply #62 on: June 09, 2004, 11:42:51 PM »

Mexican,I don't think they can say that, since it goes against the scholastic definition of "valid form" for the eucharist which became enshrined in Roman Catholic dogmatics.  The "words of institution" are believed to be part of the essential form, in Catholicism.  Hence, the rather stretched reasoning.  I agree, it is silly.



Honestly, I agree, it is sily.

From an email my Roman Catholic priest sent me on this topic, after I asked his opinion on this most concerning issue:

I was also able to read the explanation (apologetic?) published by the Pontifical Council For Promoting Christian Unity.
 
Their guidelines openly admit that the Council of Florence clearly and definitively states that the Holy Eucharist is confected solely by the Words of Institution, i.e. the words of Consecration, which are pronounced by the priest speaking in the person of Our Lord Jesus Christ.  This and this alone is the means of celebrating the Sacrifice of the Mass and bringing the Blessed Sacrament on the altar.  They also state that the Anaphora (Canon) of the Assyrians lacks such a ritual.  
 
There is no getting around it.  No attempt at circumventing, talking around or explaining away this inescapable truth can make the impossible possible.  Words do not change the reality.  Their "Mass" is hopelessly invalid and cannot be regarded as in some magical way making the Eucharist present because in a general way their Canon basically and in a round about way intends the same thing.  Matter and Form are indispensable for the Sacraments.  Without their uniting in a simultaneous way there can be no sacrament.  That is a truth no Catholic can deny.  If the Assyrian Canon does not contain the Words of Consecration said over the bread (and it does not), the necessary conclusion is that they have no Mass.  This is true no matter who pronounces to the contrary.  No further comment is needed.

 

 


Logged

"I prefer to be accused unjustly, for then I have nothing to reproach myself with, and joyfully offer this to the good Lord. Then I humble myself at the thought that I am indeed capable of doing the thing of which I have been accused. " - Saint
ambrosemzv
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 185


Pray unto God for us, Holy Ambrose of Optino!


« Reply #63 on: June 10, 2004, 06:41:23 AM »

Ben, you keep on insisting "the Assyrian Church is not Nestorian," apparently out of your desire to reassure yourself that the pope of Rome could not have made any sort of doctrinal error in this or any other matter.  But, you still haven't made it clear what you think the term, "Nestorian" means.  The Assyrians, according to their own hierarch, revere Nestorius, consider him a saint, and hold that his writings were, in no respect, heretical.  So, let's see:  They follow Nestorius and believe in his writings.  Sounds like "Nestorian" would be a pretty fair description.  The real issue, obviously, is:  Was Nestorius a heretic, or not?  The fathers of the Ecumenical Council of Ephesus thought so; the Church has taught so for thousands of years, but John Paul II says, "no."  Obviously, for the Orthodox, the latter fact doesn't matter anywhere near as much as it does for you, though it's worth our investigation.

A lot of the differences between the Orthodox Church and Roman Catholicism on this issue seems to have to do with how we regard the authority of Ecumenical Councils.  The Roman Church tends to be much more cavalier about the interpretation of Conciliar degrees and about their degree of authority, since, in Roman practice, the bishop of Rome has been granted the power to re-interpret, recognize, or refuse to recognize Councils as he sees fit.  As usual, it's all about the pope.

But, frankly, that's your problem, not ours.
« Last Edit: June 10, 2004, 06:49:49 AM by ambrosemzv » Logged

Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne comprend pas.  -Pascal
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,962


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #64 on: June 10, 2004, 09:54:33 AM »

"The real issue, obviously, is:  Was Nestorius a heretic, or not?  The fathers of the Ecumenical Council of Ephesus thought so; the Church has taught so for thousands of years, but John Paul II says, "no."

Lets rephrase:

The real issue, obviously, is:  Was Dioscorus/Severus a heretic, or not?  The fathers of the Ecumenical Council of Chalcedon thought so; the Church has taught so for thousands of years, but Patriarch (Name) says, "no.

So why the double standard for Assyrians?  The Assyrians believe Christ has two qnoma and one prospon.  The definitions differ but the substance is the same and I believe the same of the Orientals.  Why are the Orthodox willing to make concessions for the Orientals but not the Assyrians?  I believe because the Assyrians are closer to the Catholics than the Orthodox so they get the cold shoulder.

Fr. Deacon Lance

Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,962


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #65 on: June 10, 2004, 09:57:35 AM »

Ben

"From an email my Roman Catholic priest sent me on this topic, after I asked his opinion on this most concerning issue"

To bad his opinion means squat.  One can find a priest with opinions differing from the official teaching of the Church on any issue, yet they are all still wrong.  Get away from the Ultramontanes Ben.

Fr. Deacon Lance
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
ambrosemzv
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 185


Pray unto God for us, Holy Ambrose of Optino!


« Reply #66 on: June 10, 2004, 10:42:15 AM »

Fr. Deacon Lance, I am actually quite reserved about embracing the NCs as fully Orthodox, until and unless they are able to affirm the dogmatic decrees of Chalcedon, apart from those condemning specific individuals.  True, I think a way forward might include a lifting of "non-essential" anathemas against individuals whose heresy is debatable.  We know that even fully Ecumenical Councils are not always inerrant in the latter respect:  take Origen as a case in point (some of his beliefs, at least at points in his life, were clearly heretical, but most Orthodox and Catholic scholars agree he did not in fact appear to believe many of the things attributed to him by the Fifth EC).

When it comes to Nestorius, that seems more problematic.  From what I've read, there is little consensus even among Western scholars who have engaged in serious dialogue with the Church of the East that Nestorius was not actually heretical.

Perhaps many contemporary Nestorians have come to understand and use the language of Nestorius and Theodore of Mopsuestian in orthodox ways.  Perhaps that language was always susceptible of orthodox meaning, and was actually expressed by some Nestorians through the ages in orthodox ways.  Perhaps not.

In any case, further dialogue and study appear to be required, and the abrupt statement by any Orthodox patriarch would not change that, nor be met by many Orthodox being willing to say, "well, they must not be really Nestorian, because Patriarch So-and-So has declared them to be orthodox in their Christology."  Which was my point in the earlier posting.
Logged

Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne comprend pas.  -Pascal
Amadeus
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 268


I'm a llama!


« Reply #67 on: June 10, 2004, 10:46:03 AM »

Ben:

Between the Magisterium of the Catholic Church and the opinion(s) of a Catholic priest,  no Catholic worth his salt can overturn it nor supplant it.

A conscientious objection to a magisterial teaching is allowed only so far as it is reasonable. Beyond that, it becomes obduracy not worthy of charitable consideration.

Amado

P.S.

I presume that that "Roman Catholic priest" is SSPX?

Logged
Amadeus
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 268


I'm a llama!


« Reply #68 on: June 10, 2004, 10:55:30 AM »

Ambrosemzv:

Pope John Paul II's pronouncements re the Assyrians' Christology does not concern that of the Orthodox.

To the Catholic Church the Assyrians have acquitted themselves; thus, the common declaration on Christology.

Otherwise, the Chaldean Catholic Church is put in a bind now that she has established intercommunion with the Assyrian Church of the East.

Amado
Logged
ambrosemzv
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 185


Pray unto God for us, Holy Ambrose of Optino!


« Reply #69 on: June 10, 2004, 11:13:34 AM »

Amadeus, good points all.  But, I was addressing Ben's repeated assertion, on an Orthodox board, that the Assyrian Church of the East could not be Nestorian, because the Roman Pope had signed off on a joint (RC and C of the E) document on Christology.  Ben's entitled to his opinion, of course, but he seem to think that that sort of argument is going to be persuasive to the Orthodox, which I find curious.
Logged

Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne comprend pas.  -Pascal
Amadeus
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 268


I'm a llama!


« Reply #70 on: June 10, 2004, 11:43:55 AM »

Ambrosemzv:

Understood.

The issue is not whether the Assyrians are "Orthodox or not!"

Rather, are they Christians "good enough" to be considered catholic and apostolic?

The Catholic Church, through His Holiness, Pope John Paull II, thinks they are!

To us Catholics, Rome has spoken (and will speak again on this matter in the forseeable future! Wink)

Amado
Logged
Ben
Unabashedly Pro-Life
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,260



« Reply #71 on: June 10, 2004, 03:59:59 PM »

Ben, you keep on insisting "the Assyrian Church is not Nestorian," apparently out of your desire to reassure yourself that the pope of Rome could not have made any sort of doctrinal error in this or any other matter.

As I have stated again and again in this thread, the comon christological declaration, signed by the Pope and H.H. Mar Dinkha IV, contains no errors. It is 100% Catholic teaching. So, as I have said before, either the Assyrians are not Nestorians, or they are liars and entered into a false agreement.

As for what my priest, who is *not* SSPX, had to say about the Assyrian liturgy, it was 100% in line with the Council of Florence, which is considered to be infallible by the Catholic Church, and Catholic doctrine.

Documents, papal encyclicals, or papal opinions, can not change Catholic doctrine or the declarations of Ecumenical Councils. You can say my priest is not in line with the teachings or opinions of H.H. John Paul II, but you can not say he isn't in line with Catholic teaching.

I urge you all to read the declarations of the Council of Florence and Trent, and examine the offical Catholic doctrine on this issue, and you will see my priest made no error in his evaluation of this critical issue.
Logged

"I prefer to be accused unjustly, for then I have nothing to reproach myself with, and joyfully offer this to the good Lord. Then I humble myself at the thought that I am indeed capable of doing the thing of which I have been accused. " - Saint
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,962


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #72 on: June 10, 2004, 04:21:55 PM »

Ben,

Only the Magesterium of the Church can interpret its own pronouncements past and present.  I am familiar with Florence and Trent and they were not even aware of the Assyrian Anaphora so how could they make an infallible pronouncemet with out all the evidence?  They were under the impression that all Anphora for all time included the Words of Institution Narrative and made the best pronouncemnet they could.  The Pope is completely within his rights to review something with new evidence and make a pronouncement.  It is the so called "traditionalist" priests like your friend who pay lip service to loyalty and obedience to the Holy Father all the while rejecting his rulings that don't agree with their narrow Ultarmontane Latin superiorist views.  They are selective sedevacantists accepting and rejecting what they want just as liberal dissenters do and they are no better.  You would do well to avoid them before they drag you into their errors.

Fr. Deacon Lance
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Ben
Unabashedly Pro-Life
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,260



« Reply #73 on: June 10, 2004, 07:13:00 PM »

Quote
Only the Magesterium of the Church can interpret its own pronouncements past and present.


Yes, to a point, but the Magesterium can not reject or ignore Catholic teaching and doctrines given to us by the Ecumenical Councils.

Quote
I am familiar with Florence and Trent and they were not even aware of the Assyrian Anaphora so how could they make an infallible pronouncemet with out all the evidence?  


According to Catholic teaching these councils were prevented from all error by the Holy Ghost, period.

Quote
They were under the impression that all Anphora for all time included the Words of Institution Narrative and made the best pronouncemnet they could.  The Pope is completely within his rights to review something with new evidence and make a pronouncement.
 

Any pronouncement made by anyone should be ignored if it conflicts with the doctrines of the Church.

The Holy Father's opinions are *not* infallible, and it is obvious that they are not, esp when they contradict the teaching of the Church. The reason why the Catholic Church has so many traditionalist groups is because so many faithful Catholics watch daily as the Holy Father, their Bishops and priests destroy the Catholic faith by rejecting, ignoring, and changing the teachings of the Church. Doctrines and Dogmas can not be ignored or rejected, but they can be reinterpreted, but only to a point. There comes a time when you have reinterpreted a dogma so far that it is nothing near what it was originally.

Quote
It is the so called "traditionalist" priests like your friend who pay lip service to loyalty and obedience to the Holy Father all the while rejecting his rulings that don't agree with their narrow Ultarmontane Latin superiorist views.
 

I am sorry but these priests, like my priest, are only trying to preserve the Catholic faith. The faith held by all the Saints and Popes before the tagic post-Vat II reforms. If you disgaree with those who are trying to preserve the faith and provide sound Catholic teaching to their parishoneers, and if you feel their views are nothing more than "narror Ultramontane Latin superiorist views" then you must feel the same about some of the greatest Roman Catholic Saints! Those who defended and died for the faith that these traditionalist priests are trying to preserve.

It is truly sad that you are soo wrapped up in the post- Vat II teachings and falsehoods that you are blind to the past, blind to the fact that not even 100 years ago you sure wouldn't have been happy in the Catholic Church.

If you want to insult the faith of millions of Saints and the dogmas of the Catholic Church by saying they are nothing more than "narrow Ultramontane Latin superiorist views" then go ahead, may God be the judge.

Quote
They are selective sedevacantists accepting and rejecting what they want just as liberal dissenters do and they are no better.


Do you know what a sedevacantist is?

The vast majority of traditionalists are *not* sedevacantists. Sedevacantists are no better than liberal dissenters, they are schismatics and their sacraments are truly in doubt, who knows if they are valid or not. I surely do not take advice from Sedevacntist priests, never have, never will.

Please do not somehow think sedevacantist and traditionalist mean the same thing!

In Christ,
Ben

P.S. - Fr. Deacon Lance, we have gone way off topic, I would love to continue this discussion by private message or email if you wish Smiley
« Last Edit: June 10, 2004, 07:19:44 PM by Ben » Logged

"I prefer to be accused unjustly, for then I have nothing to reproach myself with, and joyfully offer this to the good Lord. Then I humble myself at the thought that I am indeed capable of doing the thing of which I have been accused. " - Saint
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Online Online

Posts: 17,964


The Pope Emeritus reading OCNet


WWW
« Reply #74 on: June 10, 2004, 07:34:26 PM »

Please keep the part of this discussion relating more specifically to the Roman Catholic Church separate from this thread.  You could start another thread, which I think could be interesting, or you could continue via PM.  Thanks!

Why are the Orthodox willing to make concessions for the Orientals but not the Assyrians?  I believe because the Assyrians are closer to the Catholics than the Orthodox so they get the cold shoulder.

I don't think one can say that the EO are "willing to make concessions" for the OO, but that is besides the point.  Why do you think that EO "suspicion" of the Assyrians is a result of the former's distaste for the Roman Catholic Church, in your opinion?  Why can't it be simply that the EO see certain problems with the Assyrians that they do not with the OO (and even this is not really the whole story)?  Is all EO policy made with Roman Catholicism in mind?
Logged

Still posting.

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


Mor Ephrem > Justin Kissel
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,962


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #75 on: June 10, 2004, 09:10:29 PM »

"Why do you think that EO "suspicion" of the Assyrians is a result of the former's distaste for the Roman Catholic Church, in your opinion?"

Because the situation is the same.  Both use terminology not used by the Chalcedonians, both honor men anathematized by the Chlacedonians, yet for the Non-Chalcedonians some Eastern Orthodox are willing to say the substance of the faith is the same to the point of allowing intercommunion. Also their ignoring of the Polish National Catholic Church, which by EO's own standards meets all the requirements they claim to require of Rome for Reunion namely rejection of Councils past the 7th, the Filioque, and obviously Papal Infallibilty and Supremacy.  The only common denominator between the Assyrian Church and the PNCC is both have close relations with Catholic Church and intercommunion with her.

Fr. Deacon Lance
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Rustaveli
Constant In Opal... Ultramarine
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Eastern Church
Posts: 126


Saint Shota Rustaveli


« Reply #76 on: June 10, 2004, 09:33:29 PM »

Wow! "narrow Ultarmontane Latin superiorist views" and "selective sedevacantists"!

... brilliant wordcrafting (and exceptional alliteration), but this is a tough room!

As I fear the wrath of the wielder of Anduril, I shall retreat into the Chalcedonian forests.

Peace, ya'll!

Tin+¦viel elvanui
Elleth alfirin edhelhael
O hon ring finnil fuinui
A renc gelebrin thiliol...
Logged
Ben
Unabashedly Pro-Life
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,260



« Reply #77 on: June 10, 2004, 09:54:15 PM »

"Why do you think that EO "suspicion" of the Assyrians is a result of the former's distaste for the Roman Catholic Church, in your opinion?"

Because the situation is the same.  Both use terminology not used by the Chalcedonians, both honor men anathematized by the Chlacedonians, yet for the Non-Chalcedonians some Eastern Orthodox are willing to say the substance of the faith is the same to the point of allowing intercommunion. Also their ignoring of the Polish National Catholic Church, which by EO's own standards meets all the requirements they claim to require of Rome for Reunion namely rejection of Councils past the 7th, the Filioque, and obviously Papal Infallibilty and Supremacy.  The only common denominator between the Assyrian Church and the PNCC is both have close relations with Catholic Church and intercommunion with her.

Fr. Deacon Lance

I do wonder why the EO don't view the Assryians in the same way they view the Oriental Orthodox. This really baffles me, I hope some can help me out!
Logged

"I prefer to be accused unjustly, for then I have nothing to reproach myself with, and joyfully offer this to the good Lord. Then I humble myself at the thought that I am indeed capable of doing the thing of which I have been accused. " - Saint
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #78 on: June 10, 2004, 09:54:16 PM »


Because the situation is the same.  Both use terminology not used by the Chalcedonians, both honor men anathematized by the Chlacedonians, yet for the Non-Chalcedonians some Eastern Orthodox are willing to say the substance of the faith is the same to the point of allowing intercommunion. Also their ignoring of the Polish National Catholic Church, which by EO's own standards meets all the requirements they claim to require of Rome for Reunion namely rejection of Councils past the 7th, the Filioque, and obviously Papal Infallibilty and Supremacy.  The only common denominator between the Assyrian Church and the PNCC is both have close relations with Catholic Church and intercommunion with her.

The key word (I bolded above) is SOME, Deacon Lance. I take it to mean more than 'none' and an undefined amount less than 'all'. I rather imagine that in both communions a greater "some" disagree with intercommunion.

As to the PNCC, you paint with a too broad brush or do not understand Orthodox standards as you call them.
It would seem by your definition above that the PNCC fails Orthodoxy in the main point of Eucharistic unity- despite all the other 'requirements' you state (I must take your word on them). You well know that intercommunion to us is tantamount to acceptance of all the other church holds - which is why I will never commune in the RCC and the PNCC, despite all the rest, is not Orthodox by virtue of that very intercommunion.

Demetri
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,962


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #79 on: June 10, 2004, 10:51:58 PM »

Demetri,

Some includes at least the Patirchate of Antioch which is a significant some.

As to the PNCC that is the point of my question.  EO's always say they are waiting with open arms for Rome to renounce her errors.  Here is one of her daughters who has and she is left out in the cold.  Why have the Orthodox not extended Eucharistic Communion to the PNCC when they have done so with the Oriental Orthodox ? Because the OO's are Eastern and the EOs have a subtle aversion to anything Latin?  

Fr. Deacon Lance

« Last Edit: June 10, 2004, 10:55:36 PM by Deacon Lance » Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Arystarcus
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 836


« Reply #80 on: June 10, 2004, 11:20:18 PM »

Quote
As to the PNCC that is the point of my question.  EO's always say they are waiting with open arms for Rome to renounce her errors.  Here is one of her daughters who has and she is left out in the cold.  Why have the Orthodox not extended Eucharistic Communion to the PNCC when they have done so with the Oriental Orthodox ? Because the OO's are Eastern and the EOs have a subtle aversion to anything Latin?

Hmmm... I'd never even thought of that before - good observation Deacon Lance.

Maybe this would be a good topic for a seperate thread?

I know I would be eager to learn more about this.

In Christ,
Aaron
Logged
Linus7
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,780



« Reply #81 on: June 10, 2004, 11:24:36 PM »

Quote
Deacon Lance: Why are the Orthodox willing to make concessions for the Orientals but not the Assyrians?

I don't think we are willing to make any concessions to either group, not if we are to be true to the Councils and Fathers.

One sometimes gets the wrong impression from comments made on this forum, but I don't see any concessions coming from the Orthodox Church.

Quote
Ben: I do wonder why the EO don't view the Assryians in the same way they view the Oriental Orthodox. This really baffles me, I hope some can help me out!

I think you mean to imply that we "accept" the Non-Chalcedonians as Orthodox and do not accept the Assyrians as Orthodox.

That is not the case.

We accept neither group as Orthodox.

Perhaps one could say in the NCs favor that they are one council closer to Orthodoxy than the Assyrians, but that's about it.




« Last Edit: June 10, 2004, 11:25:21 PM by Linus7 » Logged

The first condition of salvation is to keep the norm of the true faith and in no way to deviate from the established doctrine of the Fathers.
- Pope St. Hormisdas
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #82 on: June 10, 2004, 11:26:05 PM »

Demetri,

Some includes at least the Patirchate of Antioch which is a significant some.
Significant perhaps to you and your argument, but certainly not to me. Part of the protections from error in the Orthodox communion is our autocephalous structure- something you monocephalists still don't understand apparently.

Quote
As to the PNCC that is the point of my question.  EO's always say they are waiting with open arms for Rome to renounce her errors.  Here is one of her daughters who has and she is left out in the cold.  Why have the Orthodox not extended Eucharistic Communion to the PNCC when they have done so with the Oriental Orthodox ? Because the OO's are Eastern and the EOs have a subtle aversion to anything Latin?  
BY our definitions, not yours, the PNCC is still in error.
But I'll play your Polish game---when the Church of Rome becomes Orthodox I am sure all of the Vatican communion will be welcomed, including the PNCC.

Demetri
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
Arystarcus
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 836


« Reply #83 on: June 10, 2004, 11:33:00 PM »

Quote
BY our definitions, not yours, the PNCC is still in error.

Why is the PNCC considered to be in error?

Because it has not approached the Orthodox Church to be received?

What would it take from the PNCC not to be in error?

Sorry for all the questions, but like I told Deacon Lance, I'd never even thought about this situation before and I amvery intrigued.

In Christ,
Aaron
Logged
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #84 on: June 10, 2004, 11:48:51 PM »

Why is the PNCC considered to be in error?


Eucharistic Unity, Aaron.
If I commune at a non-Orthodox chalice I excommunicate myself by my virtual (actual) acceptance of all that that non-Orthodox church holds. No matter how many "requirements" Deacon Lance says the PNCC fulfills to be Orthodox, they nullify all of it via their intercommunion with a non-Orthodox church.

Demetri
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
Ben
Unabashedly Pro-Life
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,260



« Reply #85 on: June 10, 2004, 11:51:36 PM »

Why isn't the PNCC in union with the Orthodox Church? Has the PNCC approached the Orthodox Church to recieved? Is there any current dialouge between the PNCC and the Orthodox Church about the possibility of union?
Logged

"I prefer to be accused unjustly, for then I have nothing to reproach myself with, and joyfully offer this to the good Lord. Then I humble myself at the thought that I am indeed capable of doing the thing of which I have been accused. " - Saint
Arystarcus
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 836


« Reply #86 on: June 11, 2004, 12:00:11 AM »

Quote
Eucharistic Unity, Aaron.
If I commune at a non-Orthodox chalice I excommunicate myself by my virtual (actual) acceptance of all that that non-Orthodox church holds. No matter how many "requirements" Deacon Lance says the PNCC fulfills to be Orthodox, they nullify all of it via their intercommunion with a non-Orthodox church.

So Eucharistic unity is the only reason the PNCC is considered to be in error? Sorry if that question sounds simplistic, I am merely trying to get to the core of this.

I completely understand what you are saying by communing outside of the Orthodox Church, if I was Orthodox I would only commune at Orthodox Churches too - same goes for if I became a Catholic, etc.

Insofar as the inter-communion between the PNCC and the RC, I was under the impression that this was only to ccur under spcific circumstances - not an "all the time" thing. Perhaps I am mistaken?

In Christ,
Aaron
Logged
Arystarcus
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 836


« Reply #87 on: June 11, 2004, 12:03:13 AM »

Anybody else think this topic would be better suited to a seperate thread?

We've gone completely off topic and these recent posts have absolutely nothing to do with the Assryian Church and H.H. JPII.

If one of the mods happens to read this, would you be able to split this into a seperate topic?

Thank you.  Cheesy

In Christ,
Aaron
« Last Edit: June 11, 2004, 12:03:52 AM by Arystarcus » Logged
Ben
Unabashedly Pro-Life
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,260



« Reply #88 on: June 11, 2004, 12:06:10 AM »

for more info on the PNCC - http://www.pgf.cc/religion/faith_PNCC.asp
Logged

"I prefer to be accused unjustly, for then I have nothing to reproach myself with, and joyfully offer this to the good Lord. Then I humble myself at the thought that I am indeed capable of doing the thing of which I have been accused. " - Saint
Ben
Unabashedly Pro-Life
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,260



« Reply #89 on: June 11, 2004, 12:10:56 AM »

I think a new thread should be started...hmm...but in which forum?
Logged

"I prefer to be accused unjustly, for then I have nothing to reproach myself with, and joyfully offer this to the good Lord. Then I humble myself at the thought that I am indeed capable of doing the thing of which I have been accused. " - Saint
Tags: Church of the East Assyrian 
Pages: « 1 2 3 »  All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.141 seconds with 72 queries.