OrthodoxChristianity.net
October 30, 2014, 02:39:41 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  
Poll
Question: What would have to change for reunion to happen between the RCC and the EOC?
Nothing - 3 (3.1%)
Rome would have to guarantee the EOC would be self-governing. - 4 (4.2%)
Rome would have to give up the doctrines of papal infallibility and the Filioque. - 6 (6.3%)
Rome would have to give up the above doctrines and make other changes. - 37 (38.5%)
Rome would to have an extensive overhaul. - 38 (39.6%)
Reunion should never take place. - 8 (8.3%)
Total Voters: 96

Pages: 1 2 »  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Poll About Reunion with Rome  (Read 8130 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
St. Christopher
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 101


« on: May 29, 2007, 06:04:18 PM »

I put the poll here because I wanted only Orthodox participants.  If you want to discuss your answers and the reasons for them, please do that below.  If my wording doesn't match what you think. please explain the difference.
Logged
Entscheidungsproblem
Formerly Friul & Nebelpfade
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Machine God
Posts: 4,495



WWW
« Reply #1 on: May 29, 2007, 07:07:42 PM »

Coming from the RCC to the EOC, I think the RCC would need an extensive overhaul for reunion to take place.  Is it possible?  Well, the post-Vatican II RCC altered so drastically from the RCC before it, it is entirely possible one day for another overhaul, hopefully in the right direction.
Logged

As a result of a thousand million years of evolution, the universe is becoming conscious of itself, able to understand something of its past history and its possible future.
-- Sir Julian Sorell Huxley FRS
scamandrius
Crusher of Secrets; House Lannister
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: I'm Greek and proud of it, damn it!
Posts: 6,190



« Reply #2 on: May 29, 2007, 07:22:34 PM »

Coming from the RCC to the EOC, I think the RCC would need an extensive overhaul for reunion to take place.  Is it possible?  Well, the post-Vatican II RCC altered so drastically from the RCC before it, it is entirely possible one day for another overhaul, hopefully in the right direction.

Vatican II was the start of "Protestantizing" the RCC.  With the massive influx of secularism, radical atheism, Islam and Evangelical Protestantism into many formerly Catholic strongholds and thus into the ranks of the clergy, I think the RCC will only create more obstacles than remove them which would again stifle any hope of reunion. 
Logged

I seek the truth by which no man was ever harmed--Marcus Aurelius

Those who do not read  history are doomed to get their facts from Hollywood--Anonymous

What earthly joy remains untouched by grief?--St. John Damascene
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #3 on: May 29, 2007, 08:17:34 PM »

I chose give up Papal Infallibility and the Filioque, but I believe the filioque has already been taken care of for all intents and purposes. Papal Infallibility (along with the manner in which Rome conducts herself) are all that really stand in the way. Ultimately it stands in the way on both sides, we cannot justify communion with someone who rejects our ecclesiology and Rome cannot really enter communion with those who reject her self-appointed status without loosing face.
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
falafel333
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 337


« Reply #4 on: May 29, 2007, 10:12:58 PM »

Vatican II was the start of "Protestantizing" the RCC.  With the massive influx of secularism, radical atheism, Islam and Evangelical Protestantism into many formerly Catholic strongholds and thus into the ranks of the clergy, I think the RCC will only create more obstacles than remove them which would again stifle any hope of reunion. 

I really don't understand how you've come to this conclusion from Vatican II. I think Vatican II was a great step in the right direction.
Logged
lubeltri
Latin Catholic layman
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Boston
Posts: 3,795



« Reply #5 on: May 29, 2007, 10:41:16 PM »

I really don't understand how you've come to this conclusion from Vatican II. I think Vatican II was a great step in the right direction.

Indeed. Vatican II was not the problem, the problem was with modernists' interpretation of the council. Like any council, it is to be interpreted in the light of tradition. The modernists tried to use it to break with tradition. This tug-of-war over interpretation of the council, combined with the huge sociocultural tsunami happening in the developed world, put much of the Catholic Church into crisis. Of course, such crises are nothing new. I like to refer to the second half of the 20th century as the onset of the Great Western Iconoclasm. I pray that this one will not last as long as the iconoclastic crisis in the East so many centuries ago. Of course, the Catholic Church's mission marches on, and it continues to make great strides in the Global South while in the developed world it makes a slow recovery.

As for the Second Vatican Council, I think one of its greatest fruits has been its opening up the Catholic Church to our Orthodox brethren so long tragically separated from us.
Logged
St. Christopher
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 101


« Reply #6 on: May 29, 2007, 11:07:35 PM »

I chose the fourth option.  Many of the "other changes" that would be necessary would the RCC accepting the EOC's doctrine and practices.  Many Orthodox would insist on continuing our currect practices like Byzantine rite liturgies and having married priests.  (I know the RCC does allow priests to marry under special circumstances, but it's not what they usually do.)  Also, we have a diversity of belief on topics that the RCC has strictly defined, i.e. purgatory and the Immaculate Conception.
Logged
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,487


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #7 on: May 29, 2007, 11:12:10 PM »

I chose the fourth option.  Many of the "other changes" that would be necessary would the RCC accepting the EOC's doctrine and practices.  Many Orthodox would insist on continuing our currect practices like Byzantine rite liturgies and having married priests.  (I know the RCC does allow priests to marry under special circumstances, but it's not what they usually do.)  Also, we have a diversity of belief on topics that the RCC has strictly defined, i.e. purgatory and the Immaculate Conception.

The Roman Catholic Church already has satellite Churches like the Byzantine Catholic Church in America (www.byzcath.org) that use the Byzantine Rite. We would want to avoid becoming like that (i.e., subjugated) in any reunion scenario.
Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching. Also, I served as an Orthodox priest from 2008-2013, before resigning.
St. Christopher
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 101


« Reply #8 on: May 29, 2007, 11:20:19 PM »

The Roman Catholic Church already has satellite Churches like the Byzantine Catholic Church in America (www.byzcath.org) that use the Byzantine Rite. We would want to avoid becoming like that (i.e., subjugated) in any reunion scenario.
I wondered if the RCC might accept the Byzantine rite as an acceptable rite.  I wouldn't want to be a junior partner if we reunited with Rome.
Logged
lubeltri
Latin Catholic layman
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Boston
Posts: 3,795



« Reply #9 on: May 29, 2007, 11:35:37 PM »

I think a big part of the reason why the Eastern rites are often seen as "junior partners" (though they are officially equal in dignity) is because the Eastern ritual churches, though they count millions of followers, are tiny compared to the 1 billion+ Western Catholics. Add 200 million Orthodox to the Catholic Church and I think the extra weight would help balance the scales a bit more.

I am reminded of how dominated by the East the early Church was. The first ecumenical councils were usually dominated by Eastern bishops. That's where most of the Christians were.

Theory remains pure, but practice is so often influenced by current circumstances.
« Last Edit: May 29, 2007, 11:36:17 PM by lubeltri » Logged
Entscheidungsproblem
Formerly Friul & Nebelpfade
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Machine God
Posts: 4,495



WWW
« Reply #10 on: May 30, 2007, 12:01:57 AM »

The differing views on Original Sin will lead to some interesting debates no doubt.
Logged

As a result of a thousand million years of evolution, the universe is becoming conscious of itself, able to understand something of its past history and its possible future.
-- Sir Julian Sorell Huxley FRS
BrotherAidan
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,568

OC.net


« Reply #11 on: May 30, 2007, 12:13:14 AM »

I would like to see the conditions occur for shared communion, not only with Roman Catholics, but also non-Calcedonian Orthodox. My opinion is that there are three Apostolic Churches - the three just mentioned.
Some form of reciprocal communion should be strived for without institutional union at this point.

Some recognition of the full equality and ecumenicity of EO and OO bishops and their historical sovereignty over their rites world-wide and within their geographic jurisdictions (including the Americas); while affirming the universality of the pope as first among equals and only universal pontiff of the Roman rite churches of the west might be a way of backing out of previous papal claims. Would it be enough? I don't know? (and there would be sticky areas of tension still to be worked out in the east, such as Ukranian churches).

We just had this debate a few months ago. I think I now have more modest hopes regarding what such unity might possibly look like and lean away from institutional unity, which is a change from what I argued for in that thread.

Logged
JSOrthodoxy
Orthodox Antiochian
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 54


« Reply #12 on: May 30, 2007, 11:17:23 AM »

I indicated that giving up papal infallibility, the filioque, and some other changes would be required. Here is a short list of what would have to change at the minimum:

1) Give up Papal infallibility and universal jurisdicion.  The Pope would have to be understood as having a primacy of honor only, perhaps with the right to hear appeals from the particular Churches.
2) The filioque would have to be removed from the Western use of the Nicene Creed and the filioque would have to be explained as the Holy Spirit, "proceeding from the Father through the Son," or as St. John Damascene says in 'the Orthodox faith', "from the Father and sent by the Son."
3) There would have to be significant measures to restore the dignity of the Roman rite of the Liturgy and there would have to be a willingness of the Roman Catholic Bishops to enforce discipline in their own flock.
4) Other ideas and practices such as Indulgences would have to scrapped
5) it would have to be acknowledge that Nicea II (787) was the last Ecumenical Council.

I don't see any of this happening, so while I pray and hope for reunion, I'm rather pessimistic.  Now the suggestion of having intercommunion is interesting.  One potential problem though would be the differences in the discipline between the Roman Catholic and Orthodox Churches with regard to communion.  Are Roman Catholic Christians going to be required to fast from midnight, abstain from marital relations on Saturday night, and approach the Orthodox priest at the parish they are visiting to request to be admitted to communion?  Or are they going to assume that because some document was signed that established some kind of intercommunion, that they have a "right" to communion.  Also, will some start demanding the option of having communion in the hand or having female altar severs or eucharistic ministers?  I remember, when I was a Melkite, an incident where a young Roman Catholic lady went up for communion and was rather indignant when our Priest would not put the sacred bread in her hand but insisted that she open her mouth.  My concern is that in terms of the general spiritual cultures of the two Churches, they are just too far different in practice today to have any kind of meaningful reunion.  So, perhaps I should have voted for a complete overhaul of the Roman Church.  Reunion can't just be about formal theological decrees and agreements.  They has to be a uniting of spiritual cultures and contemporary Catholicism and Orthodox, on the whole, are radically different spiritual cultures.

Joe
« Last Edit: May 30, 2007, 11:19:22 AM by JSOrthodoxy » Logged
Entscheidungsproblem
Formerly Friul & Nebelpfade
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Machine God
Posts: 4,495



WWW
« Reply #13 on: May 30, 2007, 11:42:05 AM »

Issues with Saints would have to be addressed too.  Some believe all post-schism Roman Catholic Saints would have to be abandoned, some believe they would have to pick and choose which would be accepted, while others believe they call all be seen as Saints by both Roman Catholicism and Orthodoxy.
Logged

As a result of a thousand million years of evolution, the universe is becoming conscious of itself, able to understand something of its past history and its possible future.
-- Sir Julian Sorell Huxley FRS
BrotherAidan
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,568

OC.net


« Reply #14 on: May 30, 2007, 07:41:11 PM »

Joe
you raise excellent points about inter-communion. I would envision the "rules" to be to first, become aware of the practices and customs of the church you are communing at, then, two, follow their practice and three assert nothing of your own practice.

All that, of course, assumes the proper prior conditions were in place for any of that to occur
Logged
Simayan
Site Supporter
High Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Ecumenical Patriarchate - GOA
Posts: 816



« Reply #15 on: May 30, 2007, 10:10:45 PM »

Choosing saints would be an easy step, I think. Any RC saint who knew of Orthodoxy and scolded it as heretical would lose sainthood, whereas those who lived in the rural farms and had never even heard of it would be kept.
Logged

"He will wipe every tear from their eyes, and there will be no more death, nor mourning nor crying nor suffering, for the old order of things has passed away."
Entscheidungsproblem
Formerly Friul & Nebelpfade
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Machine God
Posts: 4,495



WWW
« Reply #16 on: May 30, 2007, 10:40:38 PM »

Choosing saints would be an easy step, I think. Any RC saint who knew of Orthodoxy and scolded it as heretical would lose sainthood, whereas those who lived in the rural farms and had never even heard of it would be kept.

What about those who knew of Orthodoxy, but stayed Roman Catholic?  You will have saints like Francis of Assisi or Pio of Pietrelcina who few Roman Catholics, especially Italians, would be willing to give up.
Logged

As a result of a thousand million years of evolution, the universe is becoming conscious of itself, able to understand something of its past history and its possible future.
-- Sir Julian Sorell Huxley FRS
StGeorge
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Posts: 708


St. George


« Reply #17 on: May 31, 2007, 12:42:16 PM »

Quote
Originally Posted by BrotherAidan:

Some recognition of the full equality and ecumenicity of EO and OO bishops and their historical sovereignty over their rites world-wide and within their geographic jurisdictions (including the Americas); while affirming the universality of the pope as first among equals and only universal pontiff of the Roman rite churches of the west might be a way of backing out of previous papal claims. Would it be enough? I don't know? (and there would be sticky areas of tension still to be worked out in the east, such as Ukranian churches).


A certain priority of the Bishop of Rome is legitimate.  The Bishop of Rome needs to be formally re-recognized by Latin Catholics as Patriarch of the West. 

Quote
Originally Posted by Friul:

Issues with Saints would have to be addressed too.  Some believe all post-schism Roman Catholic Saints would have to be abandoned, some believe they would have to pick and choose which would be accepted, while others believe they call all be seen as Saints by both Roman Catholicism and Orthodoxy.

Another, though still problematic option, make the veneration of certain saints a local rather than universal matter.  In other words, if there be any universal feast days on the liturgical calendar, remove them but allow private celebration of the feast day.  The RCC several decades ago did this with celebrated saints such as St. Philomena.  They perhaps could do this again. 

Rome allows Eastern Catholic Christians to venerate Eastern saints such as St. Gregory Palamas, even though his hesychasm is not popular in the West and indeed has been attacked by some Latin Catholic writers.   
Logged
rakovsky
Protokentarchos
*********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Posts: 4,570



WWW
« Reply #18 on: June 11, 2010, 06:53:12 AM »

Rome would have to give up the doctrines of papal infallibility and the Filioque.     - 2 (4.8%)
Rome would have to give up the above doctrines and make other changes.


Currently if Eastern Catholics, who really only have autonomy, disagree with the Pope about a doctrine or practice, then the Pope can order them to obey him.

Rome would at the least have to give up the doctrines of papal infallibility and the Filioque, as well as the doctrine that the Pope is the supreme Patriarch OVER ALL the church where he has direct administrative control over the other Patriarchs.

If there is a disagreement about a practice or lesser doctrine, autocephaly gives Orthodox churches the ability to disagree and yet stay in communion and organizational disagreement with eachother.

I see Rome's claim that the Pope can be infallible and has administrative control over the rest of the Patriachs is the biggest obstacle to church unity. In fact, I would strongly advise against combining the churches in a situation where the Orthodox would be "under the pope" - any way except first among equals. Otherwise the Orthodox would end up no different then the Eastern Catholics- autonomous subjects to a single earthly "infallible" replacement for Christ on earth.
Logged
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,290


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #19 on: June 11, 2010, 12:12:30 PM »

Rome would have to give up the doctrines of papal infallibility and the Filioque.     - 2 (4.8%)
Rome would have to give up the above doctrines and make other changes.


Currently if Eastern Catholics, who really only have autonomy, disagree with the Pope about a doctrine or practice, then the Pope can order them to obey him.

Rome would at the least have to give up the doctrines of papal infallibility and the Filioque, as well as the doctrine that the Pope is the supreme Patriarch OVER ALL the church where he has direct administrative control over the other Patriarchs.

If there is a disagreement about a practice or lesser doctrine, autocephaly gives Orthodox churches the ability to disagree and yet stay in communion and organizational disagreement with eachother.

I see Rome's claim that the Pope can be infallible and has administrative control over the rest of the Patriachs is the biggest obstacle to church unity. In fact, I would strongly advise against combining the churches in a situation where the Orthodox would be "under the pope" - any way except first among equals. Otherwise the Orthodox would end up no different then the Eastern Catholics- autonomous subjects to a single earthly "infallible" replacement for Christ on earth.
You know very well that the Pope is not Christ's "replacement on earth". Why would you even post such a thing?
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
David Lanier
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Diocese of the South - OCA
Posts: 49



WWW
« Reply #20 on: June 12, 2010, 12:25:37 AM »

Here's a loaded question: What concessions would us Orthodox have to make?
Logged
ICXCNIKA
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 661



« Reply #21 on: June 12, 2010, 01:11:51 AM »

I think if the RCC joined the OC (i don't believe any other form of  union would be accepted by the EO) it would not go back to its previous status of 1st among equals. I would think that in its initial stages it would have to be some type of exarchate of the the EP or another of the Autocephalous Churches. If it remains Orthodox for 250 years it can become autonomous, 500 years autocephalous, 750 years it can be after Jerusalem in the dyptiks of the ancient Patriarchates, after 1,000 years then I think it would be possible for it to return to being the 1st among equals. Just my 2 cents. I pulled the amounts of time out of thin air but I would of course accept what ever the OC determines.
Logged
rakovsky
Protokentarchos
*********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Posts: 4,570



WWW
« Reply #22 on: June 12, 2010, 01:12:42 AM »

Quote
You know very well that the Pope is not Christ's "replacement on earth". Why would you even post such a thing?

Great! The more Catholics who think he is not Christ's overarching administrative "vicar"(replacement) on earth the better!

I think leaders have a natural tendency to hold to power. But if enough Catholics feel different, like they do about the Inquisition nowadays, things can change I believe.

St Thomas Moore believed that the Pope was not infallible and it would be very honorable for the Catholic Church to return or come to this position too.
« Last Edit: June 12, 2010, 01:14:58 AM by rakovsky » Logged
Sloga
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Serbian Orthodox Church
Posts: 830



« Reply #23 on: June 12, 2010, 03:53:21 AM »

Quote
You know very well that the Pope is not Christ's "replacement on earth". Why would you even post such a thing?

Great! The more Catholics who think he is not Christ's overarching administrative "vicar"(replacement) on earth the better!


I'd love to smirk at this but Papist is right, without rather explaining himself well  Smiley Vicar does not mean replacement... Vicarius Christi as the Pope has his title means Representative of Christ. Now, its a foggy translation, in everyday Latin class discussed in English im sure youd get away with saying replacement, but not necessarily true.

All in all, I still think the title is a bit off. All good christians are representatives of Christ imo. Not including people that cover up child molestation cases however Wink
Logged

Христе Боже, Распети и Свети!

"In the history of the human race there have been three principal falls: that of Adam, that of Judas, and that of the pope." Saint Justin Popovic
rakovsky
Protokentarchos
*********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Posts: 4,570



WWW
« Reply #24 on: June 12, 2010, 04:30:45 AM »

They don't consider that the Pope is Jesus' unequally supreme earthly administrative replacement while Jesus has gone up to heaven? Great!

You are right that we are all representatives of Christ. You can even say that the priest is a representative during the liturgy I think. But the Orthodox Church rejects that the Pope alone represents Christ in an administrative capacity in such a way that no one else does, including the other spiritual inheritors of the apostles' chairs. You could say that the Pope represents Peter or has replaced Peter, but our Church teaches that you can't say the Pope is representing or replacing Jesus in such a way that no one else is.

OR AM I WRONG?

Hal
« Last Edit: June 12, 2010, 04:31:20 AM by rakovsky » Logged
vamrat
Vamratoraptor
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Serbian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: New Gracanica
Posts: 7,852



« Reply #25 on: June 12, 2010, 11:18:50 AM »

I put significant overhaul is needed because changing the Filioque and Papal Supremacy would have been good enough in 1200, but a lot of things have changed since then.  Marriage of Priests is a big thing, as current events are showing.
Logged

Das ist des Jägers Ehrenschild, daß er beschützt und hegt sein Wild, weidmännisch jagt, wie sich’s gehört, den Schöpfer im Geschöpfe ehrt.
wynd
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 501


Transfiguration


« Reply #26 on: June 12, 2010, 02:27:22 PM »

I put significant overhaul is needed because changing the Filioque and Papal Supremacy would have been good enough in 1200, but a lot of things have changed since then.

My main concern is the state of the liturgy in the modern RCC. There's no way Orthodoxy could have any reunion with such a mess.
Logged
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #27 on: June 12, 2010, 06:40:16 PM »

My concerns would be primarily doctrinal, however I have many more doctrinal concerns other than the authority of the papacy and the filioque, so I didn't vote for the one that contains only those two, and rather voted for the second to last option.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,290


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #28 on: June 14, 2010, 04:38:05 PM »

Here's a loaded question: What concessions would us Orthodox have to make?

Not attack Latins on matters that are not truely doctrinal, that is, don't create problems where none exist.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
WetCatechumen
Roman Catholic
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic Christianity
Jurisdiction: Latin Rite - Archdiocese of Santa Fe; Ruthenian Byzantine Catholic Eparchy of Phoenix
Posts: 297



« Reply #29 on: June 15, 2010, 02:12:35 AM »

I indicated that giving up papal infallibility, the filioque, and some other changes would be required. Here is a short list of what would have to change at the minimum:

1) Give up Papal infallibility and universal jurisdicion.  The Pope would have to be understood as having a primacy of honor only, perhaps with the right to hear appeals from the particular Churches.
2) The filioque would have to be removed from the Western use of the Nicene Creed and the filioque would have to be explained as the Holy Spirit, "proceeding from the Father through the Son," or as St. John Damascene says in 'the Orthodox faith', "from the Father and sent by the Son."
3) There would have to be significant measures to restore the dignity of the Roman rite of the Liturgy and there would have to be a willingness of the Roman Catholic Bishops to enforce discipline in their own flock.
4) Other ideas and practices such as Indulgences would have to scrapped
5) it would have to be acknowledge that Nicea II (787) was the last Ecumenical Council.

I don't see any of this happening, so while I pray and hope for reunion, I'm rather pessimistic.  Now the suggestion of having intercommunion is interesting.  One potential problem though would be the differences in the discipline between the Roman Catholic and Orthodox Churches with regard to communion.  Are Roman Catholic Christians going to be required to fast from midnight, abstain from marital relations on Saturday night, and approach the Orthodox priest at the parish they are visiting to request to be admitted to communion?  Or are they going to assume that because some document was signed that established some kind of intercommunion, that they have a "right" to communion.  Also, will some start demanding the option of having communion in the hand or having female altar severs or eucharistic ministers?  I remember, when I was a Melkite, an incident where a young Roman Catholic lady went up for communion and was rather indignant when our Priest would not put the sacred bread in her hand but insisted that she open her mouth.  My concern is that in terms of the general spiritual cultures of the two Churches, they are just too far different in practice today to have any kind of meaningful reunion.  So, perhaps I should have voted for a complete overhaul of the Roman Church.  Reunion can't just be about formal theological decrees and agreements.  They has to be a uniting of spiritual cultures and contemporary Catholicism and Orthodox, on the whole, are radically different spiritual cultures.

Joe
I would like to point out that His Holiness Pope Paul VI referred to all post-schism councils as "general synods of the West". This would indicate that the West does not hold them to be Ecumenical in the same sense that the first seven were.
Logged

"And because they have nothing better to do, they take cushion and chairs to Rome. And while the Pope is saying liturgy, they go, 'Oh, oh, oh, filioque!' And the Pope say, 'Filioque? That-uh sound nice! I think I divide-uh the Church over it!'" - Comrade Real Presence
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,721


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #30 on: June 15, 2010, 02:17:36 AM »

Here's a loaded question: What concessions would us Orthodox have to make?
Just an informal moderatorial suggestion:  You may want to start a separate thread on the Orthodox-Catholic board for this question, since the answers you'll most likely receive fall outside the scope of the Orthodox Faith Issues board.
Logged
rakovsky
Protokentarchos
*********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Posts: 4,570



WWW
« Reply #31 on: June 15, 2010, 04:07:44 AM »

Here's a loaded question: What concessions would us Orthodox have to make?

Not attack Latins on matters that are not truely doctrinal, that is, don't create problems where none exist.

I am sympathetic to not breaking communion on nondoctrinal matters. However, good-faith criticism has to be allowed - Eastern Catholics most strongly attack Latins on nondoctrinal matters because under their agreements they only have to agree on matters of doctrine, I believe.
Logged
WetCatechumen
Roman Catholic
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic Christianity
Jurisdiction: Latin Rite - Archdiocese of Santa Fe; Ruthenian Byzantine Catholic Eparchy of Phoenix
Posts: 297



« Reply #32 on: June 15, 2010, 04:59:13 AM »

Here's a loaded question: What concessions would us Orthodox have to make?

Not attack Latins on matters that are not truely doctrinal, that is, don't create problems where none exist.

I am sympathetic to not breaking communion on nondoctrinal matters. However, good-faith criticism has to be allowed - Eastern Catholics most strongly attack Latins on nondoctrinal matters because under their agreements they only have to agree on matters of doctrine, I believe.
I am curious; would you consider prozymes vs. azymes a doctrinal matter? It was one of the issues at the forefront when the infamous excommunications took place.
Logged

"And because they have nothing better to do, they take cushion and chairs to Rome. And while the Pope is saying liturgy, they go, 'Oh, oh, oh, filioque!' And the Pope say, 'Filioque? That-uh sound nice! I think I divide-uh the Church over it!'" - Comrade Real Presence
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #33 on: June 15, 2010, 05:42:22 AM »

am curious; would you consider prozymes vs. azymes a doctrinal matter? It was one of the issues at the forefront when the infamous excommunications took place.

Interesting question, WetCatechumen.  I would say Yes but the reasons go way way back and I am not sure how applicable they are today.   They centre on the first encounter by the Orthodox with azymes in the context of what the Orthodox saw as the error of monophysitism in the Armenian Church.  Even today the very few Western Rite parishes (in the Russian and Antiochian Churches) are forbidden to use unleavened bread but must bake leavened wafers.

If you look at the bottom of these messages  you will see "TAGS."   Click 'leavened bread' and it will take you to some earlier threads on this question.
Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #34 on: June 15, 2010, 05:47:09 AM »

It is my deeply held belief that the institution of the papacy is a major aberration in the ecclesiology of the Catholic Church, something which Christ never called into existence. 

Before there can be unity between us this institution must be destroyed.  It has no place in the Church.

I believe that the words of Saint Justin (Popovich) the great modern Serbian
Teacher, are more than a propos:

"...the Orthodox Church, in its nature and its dogmatically unchanging
constitution is episcopal and centered in the bishops. For the bishop and
the faithful gathered around him are the expression and
manifestation of the Church as the Body of Christ, especially in the Holy
Liturgy; the Church is Apostolic and Catholic only by virtue of its bishops,
insofar as they are the heads of true ecclesiastical
units, the dioceses.


"At the same time, the other, historically later and variable forms of
church organization of the Orthodox Church: the metropolias, archdioceses,
patriarchates, pentarchies, autocephalies, autonomies, etc., however many
there may be or shall be, cannot have and do not have a determining and
decisive significance in the conciliar system of the Orthodox Church.
Furthermore, they may constitute an obstacle in the correct functioning of
the conciliary principle if they obstruct and reject the episcopal character
and structure of the Church and of the Churches.


"Here, undoubtedly, is to be found the primary difference between Orthodox
and Papal ecclesiology."

-oOo-

"No heresy has ever raised up so radically and so completely against the God-Man Christ
and His Church as has the Papacy, with its dogma of the infallible Pope-man. There is no doubt:
this dogma is the heresy of heresies."

Archimandrite Justin Popovic, "Man and God-Man", Athens, 1987
Logged
Carl Kraeff (Second Chance)
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,890



« Reply #35 on: June 15, 2010, 10:18:01 AM »

It is my deeply held belief that the institution of the papacy is a major aberration in the ecclesiology of the Catholic Church, something which Christ never called into existence. 

Before there can be unity between us this institution must be destroyed.  It has no place in the Church.

I believe that the words of Saint Justin (Popovich) the great modern Serbian
Teacher, are more than a propos:

"...the Orthodox Church, in its nature and its dogmatically unchanging
constitution is episcopal and centered in the bishops. For the bishop and
the faithful gathered around him are the expression and
manifestation of the Church as the Body of Christ, especially in the Holy
Liturgy; the Church is Apostolic and Catholic only by virtue of its bishops,
insofar as they are the heads of true ecclesiastical
units, the dioceses.


"At the same time, the other, historically later and variable forms of
church organization of the Orthodox Church: the metropolias, archdioceses,
patriarchates, pentarchies, autocephalies, autonomies, etc., however many
there may be or shall be, cannot have and do not have a determining and
decisive significance in the conciliar system of the Orthodox Church.
Furthermore, they may constitute an obstacle in the correct functioning of
the conciliary principle if they obstruct and reject the episcopal character
and structure of the Church and of the Churches.


"Here, undoubtedly, is to be found the primary difference between Orthodox
and Papal ecclesiology."

-oOo-

"No heresy has ever raised up so radically and so completely against the God-Man Christ
and His Church as has the Papacy, with its dogma of the infallible Pope-man. There is no doubt:
this dogma is the heresy of heresies."

Archimandrite Justin Popovic, "Man and God-Man", Athens, 1987

When GIC and Father Ambrose, among others, agree that Papacy itself is the greatest obstacle to unity, how can one not agree?  Cheesy

PS: In case anyone thinks that I am being sarcastic, let me say that I agree with Father Ambrose and others 100%. Yet, Papacy arose as a unifying and existential tool to save the Western Church from crumbling into the dust. Today, the Church of Constantinople is also faced with an existential challenge and the current Patriarch seems to be flirting with quasi-papal ideas regarding the nature of the worldwide Orthodoxy. We need to be on guard.
Logged

Michal: "SC, love you in this thread."
Azul
Moderated
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Român Ortodox
Jurisdiction: Eastern Orthodox
Posts: 988



« Reply #36 on: June 15, 2010, 10:57:07 AM »

There can be no union without conversion to Orthodoxy... Rome is a mess..
Logged

Every formula of every religion has in this age of reason, to submit to the acid test of reason and universal assent.
Mahatma Gandhi
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #37 on: June 15, 2010, 11:06:08 AM »


When GIC and Father Ambrose, among others, agree that Papacy itself is the greatest obstacle to unity, how can one not agree?  Cheesy


The late great Fr Schmemann said:  "The first step in the dialogue is for the Pope to declare himself fallible.  Then a dialogue can commence in reality."
Logged
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #38 on: June 15, 2010, 02:12:05 PM »

I would like to see the conditions occur for shared communion, not only with Roman Catholics, but also non-Calcedonian Orthodox. My opinion is that there are three Apostolic Churches - the three just mentioned.

If you set doctrinal issues aside like that, there are at least 4 basic Apostolic faith traditions: the Roman (the "Catholic Church"), the Byzantine (the "Orthodox Church"), the Oriental (the "Oriental Orthodox Church"), and the East Assyrian (the "Assyrian Church of the East"). The "Old Catholic Church" (primarily within the Union of Utrecht) and the Anglican Communion would both be additional possibilities, however.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
Azul
Moderated
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Român Ortodox
Jurisdiction: Eastern Orthodox
Posts: 988



« Reply #39 on: June 16, 2010, 01:59:23 PM »


When GIC and Father Ambrose, among others, agree that Papacy itself is the greatest obstacle to unity, how can one not agree?  Cheesy


The late great Fr Schmemann said:  "The first step in the dialogue is for the Pope to declare himself fallible.  Then a dialogue can commence in reality."

He is correct.
Logged

Every formula of every religion has in this age of reason, to submit to the acid test of reason and universal assent.
Mahatma Gandhi
stashko
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: ИСТОЧНИ ПРАВОСЛАВНИ СРБИН
Jurisdiction: Non Ecumenist Free Serbian Orthodox Church
Posts: 4,998


Wonderworking Sitka Icon


« Reply #40 on: June 16, 2010, 08:18:55 PM »

This site say's otherwise about some of the popes... Grin

http://babylonmysteryreligion.com/Quotes/pope%20claims%20to%20be%20God.htm



Popes claiming to be God on Earth:

 

"The Pope is not simply the representative of Jesus Christ. On the contrary, he is Jesus Christ Himself, under the veil of the flesh, and who by means of a being common to humanity continues His ministry amongst men ... Does the Pope speak? It is Jesus Christ Who is speaking. Does he teach? It is Jesus Christ Who teaches. Does he confer grace or pronounce an anathema? It is Jesus Christ Himself Who is pronouncing the anathema and conferring the grace. Hence consequently, when one speaks of the Pope, it is not necessary to examine, but to obey: there must be no limiting the bounds of the command, in order to suit the purpose of the individual whose obedience is demanded: there must be no cavilling at the declared will of the Pope, and so invest it with quite another than that which he has put upon it: no preconceived opinions must be brought to bear upon it: no rights must be set up against the rights of the Holy Father  to teach and command; his decisions are not to be criticized, or his ordinances disputed. Therefore by Divine ordination, all, no matter how august the person may be — whether he wear a crown or be invested with the purple, or be clothed in the sacred vestments: all must be subject to Him Who has had all things put under Him." -Evangelical Christendom, January 1, 1895,  pg. 15, published in London by J. S. Phillips.

 

"It seems that Pope John Paul II now presides over the universal Church from his place upon Christ's cross." "Auckland Bishop Says Pope Presides From the Cross" AUCKLAND, New Zealand, SEPT. 20, 2004, Zenit.org

 

"In founders and foundresses [of the consecrated orders of nuns and priests, etc.] we see a constant and lively sense of the Church, which they manifest by their full participation in all aspects of the Church's life, and in their ready obedience to the bishops and especially to the Roman Pontiff. Against this background of love towards Holy Church, 'the pillar and bulwark of the truth' (1 Tim 3:15), we readily understand the devotion of Saint Francis of Assisi for 'THE LORD POPE', the daughterly outspokenness of Saint Catherine of Siena towards the one whom she called 'SWEET CHRIST ON EARTH', the apostolic obedience and the sentire cum Ecclesia of Saint Ignatius Loyola, and the joyful profession of faith made by Saint Teresa of Avila: 'I am a daughter of the Church'. We can also understand the deep desire of Saint Theresa of the Child Jesus: 'In the heart of the Church, my mother, I will be love'. These testimonies are representative of the full ecclesial communion which the Saints, founders and foundresses, have shared in diverse and often difficult times and circumstances. They are examples which consecrated persons need constantly to recall if they are to resist the particularly strong centrifugal and disruptive forces at work today. A distinctive aspect of ecclesial communion is allegiance of mind and heart to the magisterium of the bishops, an allegiance which must be lived honestly and clearly testified to before the People of God by all consecrated persons, especially those involved in theological research, teaching, publishing, catechesis and the use of the means of social communication. Because consecrated persons have a special place in the church, their attitude in this regard is of immense importance for the whole people of God" (Pope John Paul II, "Apostolic Exhortation on the Consecrated Life and Its Mission in the Church and in the World," to the bishops and clergy, religious orders and congregations, societies of apostolic life, secular institutes, and all the faithful, given in Rome, at Saint Peter's, March 25, 1996) (Emphasis added)

 

"It seems that Pope John Paul II now presides over the universal Church from his place upon Christ's cross," said Bishop Dunn, who traveled with seven other prelates to Rome. Taken from an article entitled, "Auckland Bishop Says Pope Presides From the Cross" AUCKLAND, New Zealand, SEPT. 20, 2004 -Zenit.org (Article # ZE04092001)

(Also note the term "Universal Church" is now being used!)

"The Pope is of so great dignity, and so exalted that he is not a mere man, but as it were God. and the vicar of God." -Ferraris Ecclesiastical dictionary

 

"All names which in the Scriptures are applied to Christ, by virtue of which it is established that He is over the church, all the same names are applied to the Pope." - On the Authority of the Councils, book 2, chapter 17

  

 "The Pope and God are the same, so he has all power in Heaven and earth." Pope Pius V, quoted in Barclay, Chapter XXVII, p. 218, "Cities Petrus Bertanous".

 

 "...the Pope is as it were God on earth, sole sovereign of the faithful of Christ, chief of kings, having plenitude of power." Lucius Ferraris, in "Prompta Bibliotheca Canonica, Juridica, Moralis, Theologica, Ascetica, Polemica, Rubristica, Historica", Volume V, article on "Papa, Article II", titled "Concerning the extent of Papal dignity, authority, or dominion and infallibility", #1, 5, 13-15, 18, published in Petit-Montrouge (Paris) by J. P. Migne, 1858 edition.

 

  "The Pope takes the place of Jesus Christ on earth...by divine right the Pope has supreme and full power in faith, in morals over each and every pastor and his flock. He is the true vicar, the head of the entire church, the father and teacher of all Christians. He is the infallible ruler, the founder of dogmas, the author of and the judge of councils; the universal ruler of truth, the arbiter of the world, the supreme judge of heaven and earth, the judge of all, being judged by no one, God himself on earth." Quoted in the New York Catechism.

 

-These words appeared in the Roman Canon Law: "To believe that our Lord God the Pope has not the power to decree as he is decreed, is to be deemed heretical.-I?i the Gloss "Extravagantes" o.f Pope John XXII Cum inter, Tit. XIV, Cap. IV. Ad Callem Sexti Decretalium, Paris, 1685.

 

-Father A. Pereira says: "It is quite certain that Popes have never approved or rejected this title 'Lord God the Pope,' for the passage in the gloss referred to appears in the edition of the Canon Law published in Rome in 1580 by Gregory XIII."

 

-Writers on the Canon Law say, "The Pope and God are the same, so he has all power in heaven and earth."- Barclay Cap. XXVII, p. 218. Cities Petrus Bertrandus, Pius V. - Cardinal Cusa supports his statement.

 

.-Pope Nicholas I declared that "the appellation of God had been confirmed by Constantine on the Pope, who, being God, cannot be judged by man." - Labb IX Dist.: 96 Can. 7, Satis evidentur, Decret Gratian Primer Para.

 

"The pope is of so great dignity and so exalted that he is not a mere man (...) he is as it were God on earth, sole sovereign of the faithful of Christ, chief of kings, having plenitude of power." -Lucius Ferraris, «Prompta Bibliotheca», 1763, Volume VI, 'Papa II', pp.25-29

 

  "The supreme teacher in the Church is the Roman Pontiff. Union of minds, therefore, requires (...) complete submission and obedience of will to the Church and to the Roman Pontiff, as to God Himself." -Leo VIII, «On the Chief Duties of Christians as Citizens», Encyclical letter, 1890

 

"God separates those whom the Roman Pontiff, who exercises the functions, not of mere man, but of the true God (...) dissolves, not by human but rather by divine authority." -Decretals of Gregory IX», Book 1, Chapter 7.3

 

"Hence the Pope is crowned with a triple crown, as king of heaven and of earth and of the lower regions (infernorum)." -Lucius Ferraris, «Prompta Bibliotheca», 1763, Volume VI, 'Papa II', p.26)

 

"Innocent III has written: "Indeed, it is not top much to say that in view of the sublimity of their offices the priests are so many gods." -The dignity of the priesthood by Liguori p, 36

 

"The Pope is not only the representative of Jesus Christ, he is Jesus Christ himself, hidden under the veil of flesh." Catholic National July 1895.

 

"We hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty" ...Pope Leo XIII Encyclical Letter of June 20, 1894,

 

"For thou art the shepherd, thou art the physician, thou art the director, thou art the husbandman, finally thou art another God on earth." Labbe and Cossart's "History of the Councils." Vol. XIV, col. 109

 

The title "Lord God the Pope" is found within a gloss of Extravagantes of Pope John XXII, title 14, chapter 4,

 

In an Antwerp edition of the Extravagantes, the words, "Dominum Deum Nostrum Papam" (Our Lord God the Pope) can be found in column 153. In a Paris edition, they are found in column 140.

 

Roman Catholic Canon Law stipulates through Pope Innocent III that the Roman pontiff is "the vicegerent upon earth, not a mere man, but of a very God;" and in a gloss on the passage it is explained that this is because he is the vicegerent of Christ, who is "very God and very man." Decretales Domini Gregorii translatione Episcoporum, (on the transference of Bishops), title 7, chapter 3; Corpus Juris Canonice (2nd Leipzig ed., 1881), col. 99; (Paris, 1612), tom. 2, Devretales, col. 205

 

"The pope is the supreme judge of the law of the land... He is the vicegerent (replacement) of Christ, who is not only a Priest forever, but also King of kings and Lord of lords." - La Civilia Cattolica, March 18, 1871, quoted in Leonard Woosely Bacaon, An inside view of the Vatican Council (American Tract Society ed.), p.229, n.

 

The last line of the 1302 ad Bull Unam Sanctam... Issued by POPE BONIFACE VIII states; we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff. -UNAM SANCTAM (Promulgated November 18, 1302) (For a complete look at this quote, see this... http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/b8-unam.html or this... http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Bon08/B8unam.htm )

 

"Christ entrusted His office to the chief pontiff;... but all power in heaven and in earth has been given to Christ;... therefore the chief pontiff, who is His vicar, will have this power." Corpus Juris chap. 1 column 29, translated from a gloss on the words Porro Subesse Romano Pontiff

 

 "The pope is the supreme judge of the law of the land . . . He is the vicegerent of Christ, and is not only a priest forever, but also King of kings and Lord of lords"--La Civilta Cattolica, March 18, 1871.

 

 "All the faithful must believe that the Holy Apostolic See and the Roman Pontiff [the Pope] possesses the primacy over the whole world, and the Roman Pontiff is the successor of blessed Peter, Prince of the Apostles, and is true vicar of Christ, and heed of the whole church, and father and teacher of all Christians; and that full power was given to him in blessed Peter to rule, feed, and govern the universal Church by Jesus Christ our Lord."--First Dogmatic Constitution on the Church of Christ, "Eternal Pastor," published in the fourth session of the Vatican Council, 1870, chap. 3, in Philip Schaff, Creeds of Christendom. vol. 2, p. 262.

 

“The Pope’s authority is unlimited, incalculable; it can strike, as Innocent III says, wherever sin is; it can punish every one; it allows no appeal and is itself Sovereign Caprice; for the Pope carries, according to the expression of Boniface VIII, all rights in the Shrine of his breast. As he has now become infallible, he can by the use of the little word, “orbi,” (which means that he turns himself round to the whole Church) make every rule, every doctrine, every demand, into a certain and incontestable article of Faith.  No right can stand against him, no personal or corporate liberty; or as the [Roman Catholic] Canonists put it—“The tribunal of God and of the pope is one and the same.” -Ignaz von Dollinger, “A Letter Addressed to the Archbishop of Munich”  1871; as quoted in MacDougall, The Acton Newman Relations (Fordham University Press) pp. 119,120.

 

"The Saviour Himself is the door of the sheepfold: 'I am the door of the sheep.' Into this fold of Jesus Christ, no man may enter unless he be led by the Sovereign Pontiff; and only if they be united to him can men be saved, for the Roman Pontiff is the Vicar of Christ and His personal representative on earth." (Pope John XXIII in his homily to the Bishops and faithful assisting at his coronation on November 4, 1958).

 

"This is our last lesson to you: receive it, engrave it in your minds, all of you: by God's commandment salvation is to be found nowhere but in the Church; the strong and effective instrument of salvation is none other than the Roman Pontificate." (Pope Leo XIII, Allocution for the 25th anniversary of his election, February 20, 1903; Papal Teachings: The Church, Benedictine Monks of Solesmes, St. Paul Editions, Boston, 1962, par. 653).

 

"Furthermore, in this one Church of Christ no man can be or remain who does not accept, recognize and obey the authority and supremacy of Peter and his legitimate successors." (Pope Pius XI, Encyclical, Mortalium animos, January 6, 1928, The Papal Encyclicals, Claudia Carlen, I.H.M., McGrath Publishing Co., 1981, pp. 317, 318).

 

"We define that the Holy Apostolic See (the Vatican) and the Roman Pontiff hold the primacy over the whole world."-A Decree of the Council of Trent, quoted in Philippe Labbe and Gabriel Cossart, "The Most Holy Councils," col. 1167.

 

"Of what sublime dignity is the office of the Christian priest who is thus privileged to act as the ambassador and the vicegerent of Christ on earth! He continues the essential ministry of Christ; he teaches the faithful with the authority of Christ, he pardons the penitent sinner with the power of Christ, he offers up again the same sacrifice of adoration and atonement which Christ offered on Calvary. No wonder that the name which spiritual writers are especially found of applying to the priest is that of 'alter Christus.' For the priest is and should be another Christ" (Faith of Millions, John O'Brien, Ph.D., LL.D., 268-269, "nihil obstat" by Rev. T. E. Dillon-Censor Librorum and "imprimatur" by John Francis Noll, D.D. -Bishop of Fort Wayne).

 

"But as for you and your companions, you certainly sin, if, having heard the decrees of the Apostolic See, and of the universal Church, and the same is confirmed by Holy Writ, you refuse to follow them; for, though your fathers were holy, do you think that their small number, in a corner of the remotest island, is to be preferred before the universal Church of Christ throughout the world? And if that Columba of yours (and, I may say, ours also, if he was Christ's servant), was a holy man and powerful in miracles, yet could he be preferred before the most blessed prince of the Apostles to whom Our Lord said 'Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it, and to thee I will give the keys of the kingdom of heaven'?" When Wilfrid had spoken thus, the king said, "Is it true Colman, that these words were spoken to Peter by Our Lord?" He answered, "It is true, O king!" Then says he, "Can you show any such power given to your Columba?" Colman answered, "None." Then added the king, "Do you both agree that these words were principally directed to Peter, and that the keys of heaven were given to him by Our Lord?" They both answered. "We do." Then the king concluded, "And I also say unto you, that he is the door-keeper, whom I will not contradict, but will, as far as I know and am able, in all things obey his decrees, lest, when I come to the gates of the kingdom of heaven, there should be none to open them, he being my adversary who is proved to have the keys." (St. Bede, Ecclesiastical History of the English Nation, quoted in Readings from Church History, Volume I, edited by Fr. Colman Barry, O.S.B., The Newman Press, Westminster, MD, 1966, p. 273.)

 

HOME  |  BACK
 
« Last Edit: June 16, 2010, 08:20:41 PM by stashko » Logged

ГОСПОДЕ ГОСПОДЕ ,ПОГЛЕДАЈ СА НЕБА ,ДОЂИ И ПОСЕТИ ТВОЈ ВИНОГРАД ТВОЈА ДЕСНИЦА ПОСАДИЛА АМИН АМИН.
David Carroll
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 110


Holy Ephraim, pray for us!


« Reply #41 on: June 16, 2010, 08:28:43 PM »

What's funny is that the RC Church thinks that Vatican II made the Church more palatable to those they were trying to reach out to (e.g. the Orthodox Churches of the East), but, if anything, it made it less palatable.

I would have less of a problem if we were trying to reunite with the Pre-Vatican-II RC Church.

Vatican II didn't just throw out the baby with the bathwater.  It KEPT the bathwater and threw out the baby....and threw out its twin brother with it to boot.
Logged

Pray that God would deliver me from hatred and pride.
rakovsky
Protokentarchos
*********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Posts: 4,570



WWW
« Reply #42 on: June 16, 2010, 08:46:50 PM »

What's funny is that the RC Church thinks that Vatican II made the Church more palatable to those they were trying to reach out to (e.g. the Orthodox Churches of the East), but, if anything, it made it less palatable.

I would have less of a problem if we were trying to reunite with the Pre-Vatican-II RC Church.

Vatican II didn't just throw out the baby with the bathwater.  It KEPT the bathwater and threw out the baby....and threw out its twin brother with it to boot.

I prefer pre-pre-pre-pre-Vatican II church or post-Vatican II church because the first was closest to us and in the second they are now reaching out to us, examining their old ways, making dialogue an exception for us.

maybe from a stratgic standpoint you want to say that it is better before vatican ii because there was less danger of us getting swallowed, but who knows. We should be able to hold our own either way.
Logged
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,482


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #43 on: June 16, 2010, 08:49:09 PM »

stashko,

While many Popes have certainly said and written some troubling things regarding the nature of the Papacy (things which are heterodox let me be clear), I don't think that it's wise for you to be lifting examples of such from that website.  I guarantee you that the author(s) of that site would be saying much the same things about the Orthodox Way that they do about the Roman Catholic Church on those webpages.

Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
stashko
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: ИСТОЧНИ ПРАВОСЛАВНИ СРБИН
Jurisdiction: Non Ecumenist Free Serbian Orthodox Church
Posts: 4,998


Wonderworking Sitka Icon


« Reply #44 on: June 16, 2010, 09:07:06 PM »

If the popes are guilty of saying these troubling things,why do we orthodox have to pretend it didn't happen or try to ignore it ...Isn't it better to bring these things up to the light of day... Grin Huh Huh

Especally when part of Holy Orthodox Is seeking Reunion with rome..Can't Have this hidden in their closet, after reunion the may want to bring this back and put it into practice or it could  be ,that the present pope still believes this about himself  ..... Grin
« Last Edit: June 16, 2010, 09:24:04 PM by stashko » Logged

ГОСПОДЕ ГОСПОДЕ ,ПОГЛЕДАЈ СА НЕБА ,ДОЂИ И ПОСЕТИ ТВОЈ ВИНОГРАД ТВОЈА ДЕСНИЦА ПОСАДИЛА АМИН АМИН.
Tags: Pope unity leavened bread 
Pages: 1 2 »  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 0.176 seconds with 73 queries.