OrthodoxChristianity.net
July 30, 2014, 11:13:33 AM *
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 4 5 6 7 »  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Patriarch Bartholomew is ready to accept the Pope's primacy  (Read 28835 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Veniamin
Fire for Effect!
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA Diocese of the South
Posts: 3,372


St. Barbara, patroness of the Field Artillery


« Reply #45 on: November 28, 2007, 05:48:54 PM »

I'm defending the theological position of the Ecumenical Patriarchate concerning ecumenism.  A quick search of recent documents from the ecumenical movement would show that to be true. 

And we know that the EP's position is the Orthodox one as a per se rule.   Roll Eyes
Logged

Artillery adds dignity to what would otherwise be a vulgar brawl. ~Frederick the Great
Νεκτάριος
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,437



« Reply #46 on: November 28, 2007, 05:55:37 PM »

And we know that the EP's position is the Orthodox one as a per se rule.   Roll Eyes

If you believe that the Patriarchate's position is not Orthodox, then it would only make sense to sever communion.  Complaining about and saying one's bishops aren't Orthodox makes no sense to me. 

I have tremendous respect for groups like the GOC as they are consistent in their position.  Their faithful believe ecumenism is an heresy and hence have joined themselves to like minded bishops.  I don't think the policy of all my bishops in my jurisdiction and those with whom it is in communion are un-Orthodox, but I'm Orthodox since I complain about them on an internet forum has much historical justification. 
Logged
JoeS
(aka StMarkEofE)
Site Supporter
OC.net guru
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,122


Global Warming Enthusiast.


« Reply #47 on: November 28, 2007, 05:56:45 PM »

Patriarch Bartholomew is ready to accept the Pope's primacy

Is the Patriarch doing this as an individual or is he assuming all of Orthodoxy?

 Huh
Logged
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #48 on: November 28, 2007, 05:59:44 PM »

Patriarch Bartholomew is ready to accept the Pope's primacy

Is the Patriarch doing this as an individual or is he assuming all of Orthodoxy?

 Huh

No, JoeS. He's not by either standard. His thinking hasn't changed one iota from what it always has been.
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
TinaG
I am not a pessimist - I'm just grimly realistic!
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 870


If only my family were this normal !


WWW
« Reply #49 on: November 28, 2007, 06:25:25 PM »

I ask everyone's forgiveness for my post if it sounded harsh or judgemental and for setting us against each other and causing strife.  

If I can clarify, I am opposed to reunification with the 21st century RC church, and more specifically the mainstream American catholic church.  I have no desire to dilute Orthodoxy with Novos Ordo guitar masses, liturgical dancers, eucharistic ministers, communion buffet lines and social justice peace rallies.  I do greatly respect Pope Benedict and what seem like genuine efforts to reign in the effects of Vatican II, and for honest efforts to reunify the OC and RC church, but only with the doctrinal changes that Orthodox must insist on.  Are we ready to make concessions on the Filioque, the nature of salvation or the forms and practices of Liturgy?

The RC church is a huge, monolithic organization and has the momentum of a giant oil tanker at full speed.  I picture Pope Benedict as a tiny little tug.  He might want to turn the course of the tanker but is ineffective in so far as he's only able to make very small changes.  In all honesty, does anyone think he can do away with entrenched Catholic dogmas?  He may be Pope but he's got to tread a fine line too.  He's also an older man - there is no guarantee the next Pope will be as traditionally minded or have the same good intentions.   I guess it must be my former protestant nature showing, but I think the Catholic Church, no matter the good intentions of one Pope, at some level has a certain view of itself and its role in history.  Reunification will overwhelm the Orthodox just by sheer numbers of RC believers and the multiplicity of RC worship styles, beliefs and practices.

I also have enough close devout Catholic friends who have shown me that the faithful will never accept "first among equals" or give up the belief that Roman Catholic = One Pope, One Church.

Again, I apologize for being blunt and tactless.  These are only my little opinions.
Logged

On the spiritual path somewhere between the Simpsons and St. Theophan the Recluse, but I still can't see the Springfield city limits sign yet.
lubeltri
Latin Catholic layman
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

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



« Reply #50 on: November 28, 2007, 07:02:38 PM »

I ask everyone's forgiveness for my post if it sounded harsh or judgemental and for setting us against each other and causing strife.  

If I can clarify, I am opposed to reunification with the 21st century RC church, and more specifically the mainstream American catholic church.  I have no desire to dilute Orthodoxy with Novos Ordo guitar masses, liturgical dancers, eucharistic ministers, communion buffet lines and social justice peace rallies.  I do greatly respect Pope Benedict and what seem like genuine efforts to reign in the effects of Vatican II, and for honest efforts to reunify the OC and RC church, but only with the doctrinal changes that Orthodox must insist on.  Are we ready to make concessions on the Filioque, the nature of salvation or the forms and practices of Liturgy?

The RC church is a huge, monolithic organization and has the momentum of a giant oil tanker at full speed.  I picture Pope Benedict as a tiny little tug.  He might want to turn the course of the tanker but is ineffective in so far as he's only able to make very small changes.  In all honesty, does anyone think he can do away with entrenched Catholic dogmas?  He may be Pope but he's got to tread a fine line too.  He's also an older man - there is no guarantee the next Pope will be as traditionally minded or have the same good intentions.   I guess it must be my former protestant nature showing, but I think the Catholic Church, no matter the good intentions of one Pope,

Wow, I never thought I'd see an EO lament that the Pope in Rome does not have enough power. Roll Eyes

The Pope's Marshall Plan for the Catholic Church (Fr. John Zuhlsdorf's expression) is proceeding apace. He will not live to see this project completed, but it will continue nevertheless.

To be honest, would we have wanted to stick with the Eastern Churches for much of the first millennium? Arianism, Monophysitism, Iconoclasm . . . . But we must remember that the gates of Hell shall not prevail.

I would compare the "Spirit of Vatican II" (which had its beginnings well before the Council---Pope St. Pius X drove the Modernists underground a century ago) to the Iconoclastic crisis in the East. Is it more or less severe a crisis than that? Hard to say. I will say, though, that the Catholic Church turned the corner probably between 15-25 years ago, and the momentum of restoration is slowly building.

Of course, we're talking the West here. I think things have been phenomenal overall in Africa and Asia. A great new evangelization.

Pope Benedict knows exactly what he's doing. We may have a pruning, but we will bloom all the brighter in time. The younger generation of clergy, religious and laity are the future, and they are increasingly traditional.
Logged
wynd
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 501


Transfiguration


« Reply #51 on: November 28, 2007, 08:41:41 PM »

We know several things. That you are not heretics, are true churches, have true sacraments, and are "sister churches" with us.

Doesn't the denial of such things as papal infallibility/supremacy and the Immaculate Conception make one a heretic according to Catholic thinking? In my experience, it certainly does if one is Protestant. What about the Orthodox?
Logged
Νεκτάριος
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,437



« Reply #52 on: November 28, 2007, 09:43:03 PM »

Doesn't the denial of such things as papal infallibility/supremacy and the Immaculate Conception make one a heretic according to Catholic thinking? In my experience, it certainly does if one is Protestant. What about the Orthodox?

The Catholic Church takes a fairly nuanced stance.  It considers the various Eastern Churches not in communion with Rome to have the same Marian doctrine that is expressed in a different manner.  Also only those who leave the Catholic Church are actually considered to be personally guilty of schism.  No matter how you spin it, this is a far more positive view than is reciprocated by Orthodoxy.  So I am a bit baffled at why Orthodox people are upset at the RCC's position, or for that matter why they even care. 

If I can clarify, I am opposed to reunification with the 21st century RC church, and more specifically the mainstream American catholic church.  I have no desire to dilute Orthodoxy with Novos Ordo guitar masses, liturgical dancers, eucharistic ministers, communion buffet lines and social justice peace rallies.

These aren't universal in Catholicism.  I don't think you'd ever see anything like that in Poland.  While the social justice message is still very intense in Western Europe, none of my sister's (who spent some time living in Germany) nor my experience in Western Europe saw anything else like what you describe.  I think most of these American liturgical aberrations are the influence of Evangelical Mega Churches.  And in all honesty, not even American Orthodox Churches have been immune to such influences.         

Quote
Are we ready to make concessions on the Filioque, the nature of salvation or the forms and practices of Liturgy?

As for the forms and practices of liturgy, Western rite parishes have already made those concessions. 
 
Quote
The RC church is a huge, monolithic organization and has the momentum of a giant oil tanker at full speed.

The RC is monolithic?   Cheesy

Officialdom aside, Orthodoxy has been much more monolithic IME than Catholicism. 

And I would actually agree with you to a point.  Roman Catholicism is in a bit of crisis at the moment, but I'm not convinced it is any more widespread or serious than the problems facing the Orthodox Church presently. 

Quote
I guess it must be my former protestant nature showing

Jack Chick with incense.   Roll Eyes  Why not simply say that you fear the numerical superiority of Catholicism rather than comparing it with sinister characters and impugning the motives of many the highest levels of the Catholic Church? 
Logged
Joab Anias
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Rome
Posts: 145


« Reply #53 on: November 28, 2007, 09:48:57 PM »

Doesn't the denial of such things as papal infallibility/supremacy and the Immaculate Conception make one a heretic according to Catholic thinking? In my experience, it certainly does if one is Protestant. What about the Orthodox?

I think the big difference was how public the dissent of the reformers was in teaching against doctrines. Though it may be true if we fail to ascend to the teachings of the Church we may anathemize ourselves with apostacy, those in power have always thought they could put the fear of God into someone by exercising that authority rather than letting the Holy Spirit do it. What a big mess they made with their passions. In the words of Father Groeshel, our Pope at the time of the reformation was a meat head. As a result we see generations of believers trying to grow in faith without the guidance of the Church interpretation of Sacred Scripture. It equates to putting a disobedient child on the street and letting them learn everything the hard way. Luther may have become just as full of himself before it was over but we musn't forget he had some valid points about the corruption of the men in the Church. Love heals and sin divides. Shouldn't all Christian divisions be an embarassment to all Christians?

Peace.
Logged
lubeltri
Latin Catholic layman
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

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



« Reply #54 on: November 28, 2007, 09:56:28 PM »

In the words of Father Groeschel, our Pope at the time of the reformation was a meat head.

Ha! Cheesy Benedict Groeschel is the man! I saw him speak last June---he's got a lot of New York moxie.
Logged
Joab Anias
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Rome
Posts: 145


« Reply #55 on: November 28, 2007, 09:59:28 PM »

Ha! Cheesy Benedict Groeschel is the man! I saw him speak last June---he's got a lot of New York moxie.

I think I saw him speak the summer of 1999. I'd go do it again in a heartbeat if I knew he was going to be somewhere close enough.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #56 on: November 28, 2007, 10:49:14 PM »

I also would accept the Pope of Rome as the first among equals, if he does away with the heresies the Roman Church has fallen into.
John Paul II made great strides in reforming the Roman Liturgy, he restored the Little and Great entrances, and added an epiclecus during the Roman Anaphora.
I also feel they need to restore Leavened Bread.

Obadiah?  Is that you? Smiley
« Last Edit: November 28, 2007, 10:49:45 PM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #57 on: November 28, 2007, 10:52:27 PM »

He still is, whatever the "West" means anymore, the Latin Church being in every corner of the globe. The Vatican only dropped it from the annual yearbook because they say it is no longer "useful" as a title. Not sure if it was a good idea, but it's just a title, and it didn't make it into the yearbook until 1863 anyway. The reality---that the Bishop of Rome is patriarch of the Latin Church---still exists.

Yes, the previous one was making claims on the Romanians.

The explicit epicleses were added to the three new Eucharistic Prayers by Pope Paul VI's Apostolic Constitution Missale Romanum in 1969, establishing the Novus Ordo. Not that an explicit one is needed, of course. The original Roman Canon, or Eucharistic Prayer 1, has an implied one.



We prefer an explicit one.  Maybe I should say require: it is one of the few changes between the pre Vatican II Western Liturgies and the WRO.

Only minor changes in the 2002 revision of the Missale Romanum.

A small thing is not a small thing, if it leads to something great. St. John of Damascus.

The "minor" changes, if Obadiah is correct, are in the right direction.  A major objection of the hard core opponents of reunion (and those not so die hard  Wink) is the absence of the epiclesis.
« Last Edit: November 28, 2007, 10:58:01 PM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #58 on: November 28, 2007, 11:13:00 PM »

Well they've been calmly sitting down for 70 years at the WCC and the Faith and Order to chat along with several EO-OO conferences and nothing has happened yet.

I have to disagree.

I don't know where you're at or where you have been, but in the Middle East there has been much on the informal level, i.e. amongst the masses of Faithful.

A EO primate from there told me the real hold up is that "no one wants to die."  There is a fear that the Antiocheans will swallow up the Syriac, and an even bigger danger of the Copts swallowing everyone in Egypt. Just by numbers, the relations in Syria are excellent, as too in Egypt.

The EO Popes of Alexandria are working out a solution: they have a vicarate for their Arab EO, with their own bishop on the synod.  Something could be worked out in Syria (where it is more of an issue: both Syriac and Arab are native to the area.  Arabs and Greeks in Egypt are new comers, the Copts are the original Egyptians).

The resistence of a lot of EO is because their Churches don't have any practical contact with any OO, but that's changing.  The Armenians, as always are everywhere, but the Copts are all over Europe and now the US, and in those places I've met (even at the EO Cathedral in Finland) Copts who attend EO Churches as their Churches, and the Copts are so accepted by the Churches in question.

The formalities still have to be worked out (Chalcedon with have to be accepted and Dioscoros rehabilitated, even canonized on the EO side, etc).  We should take our time and do it right, so it is lasting.  But let's get going!
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #59 on: November 28, 2007, 11:21:17 PM »

I'm defending the theological position of the Ecumenical Patriarchate concerning ecumenism.  A quick search of recent documents from the ecumenical movement would show that to be true. 

I don't know on this forum, but on the ECF there was massive support for the Patriarch of Moscos et alia on this issue (and the Ravenna, conference), although only Fr. Ambrose I believe is under Alexei (and then just recently).
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #60 on: November 28, 2007, 11:49:02 PM »

The Catholic Church takes a fairly nuanced stance.  It considers the various Eastern Churches not in communion with Rome to have the same Marian doctrine that is expressed in a different manner.  Also only those who leave the Catholic Church are actually considered to be personally guilty of schism.  No matter how you spin it, this is a far more positive view than is reciprocated by Orthodoxy.  So I am a bit baffled at why Orthodox people are upset at the RCC's position, or for that matter why they even care. 

We don't.  I haven't seen a post boo hooing Rome's position, just stating it, or its logical conclusions.

Quote
These aren't universal in Catholicism.  I don't think you'd ever see anything like that in Poland.  While the social justice message is still very intense in Western Europe, none of my sister's (who spent some time living in Germany) nor my experience in Western Europe saw anything else like what you describe.  I think most of these American liturgical aberrations are the influence of Evangelical Mega Churches.  And in all honesty, not even American Orthodox Churches have been immune to such influences.
 

We don't have liberal theology or any such thing.  Rome's branches in the Americas is now its core: amost half its adherents are there.  The Protestants (Evangelicals, Pentacostals, etc.) are making serious inroads, though.  But Rome is compensating with Africa, where there is also the Evanelical/Pentacostal problem. jSo American problems are not localized problems.

The Orthodox don't have the problems with liturgical experiments.      

Quote
As for the forms and practices of liturgy, Western rite parishes have already made those concessions.
 

No concessions were made in the Western Rite.  What was Orthodox stayed, what wasn't, went.
 
Quote
The RC is monolithic?   Cheesy

Officialdom aside, Orthodoxy has been much more monolithic IME than Catholicism. 


They keep telling me they are confused, and don't know who speaks authoritatively for the Orthodox.

Quote
And I would actually agree with you to a point.  Roman Catholicism is in a bit of crisis at the moment, but I'm not convinced it is any more widespread or serious than the problems facing the Orthodox Church presently. 


The Orthodox problems are the usual ones: persecusion, state interference, nominalism....So dealt with them before.  The crisis in Rome is a new problem.

Quote
Jack Chick with incense.   Roll Eyes  Why not simply say that you fear the numerical superiority of Catholicism rather than comparing it with sinister characters and impugning the motives of many the highest levels of the Catholic Church? 


well, the selling point (safety in numbers) might be the problem (outnumbered).
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #61 on: November 29, 2007, 12:04:30 AM »


Given the way this thread is evolving, I'm moving it out of "Christian News" and into "Orthodox-Catholic Discussion".
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Joab Anias
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Rome
Posts: 145


« Reply #62 on: November 29, 2007, 12:19:14 AM »

Beg to differ,. Somehow being considered a 'defective church' by il popa leads me to think TinaG's absolutely correct.

Sorry to be a word stikler but please if your going criticize what the Pope said please get it right.

He never said "defective" which would mean something totally different than what he actually said.
Logged
Νεκτάριος
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,437



« Reply #63 on: November 29, 2007, 01:00:53 AM »

We don't have liberal theology or any such thing.  Rome's branches in the Americas is now its core: amost half its adherents are there.  The Protestants (Evangelicals, Pentacostals, etc.) are making serious inroads, though.  But Rome is compensating with Africa, where there is also the Evanelical/Pentacostal problem. jSo American problems are not localized problems.

There most certainly is liberal theology in many Orthodox theological circles.  Never heard of St. Sergius in Paris?   

Quote
The Orthodox don't have the problems with liturgical experiments.

Time will tell.  Hang around certain Orthodox jurisdictions long enough and you'll start seeing some curious things. 
 
Quote
The Orthodox problems are the usual ones: persecusion, state interference, nominalism....So dealt with them before.  The crisis in Rome is a new problem.

Not this tired rant.  Persecution - yes I would agree that the Orthodox Church is complicit in the persecution of religious minorities in Eastern Europe.  State interference - yes I'd agree that the Orthodox Church has backed nationalist politicians and willingly made itself into a political organ. 
Logged
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,440


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #64 on: November 29, 2007, 01:04:39 AM »

We don't.  I haven't seen a post boo hooing Rome's position, just stating it, or its logical conclusions.

I have run into Orthodox in person and on the internet that were offended by Benedict's statement that we are not the fullness of a Church. Like, "how dare he say that about us?!" But I say, good for him. He's honest about his position.


Quote
We don't have liberal theology or any such thing.  Rome's branches in the Americas is now its core: amost half its adherents are there.  The Protestants (Evangelicals, Pentacostals, etc.) are making serious inroads, though.  But Rome is compensating with Africa, where there is also the Evanelical/Pentacostal problem. jSo American problems are not localized problems.

I disagree entirely on that point, especially from the Paris school, and some of the things I see coming out of the various theological dialogs between Orthodox and heterodox.


Quote
The Orthodox don't have the problems with liturgical experiments.

If you say on the same scale, fine, I'll agree. But look at New Skete (I have taken the time to actually visit there unlike most of its critics, and I was repulsed by many aspects of it). St Vladimir's has made some adjustments that are idiosyncratic.  And many parishes have chopped up the liturgy in various ways. So I don't agree we are free from this.     
 
Logged

Met. Demetrius's Enthronement

Disclaimer: Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching.

I served as an Orthodox priest from June 2008 to April 2013, before resigning for personal reasons
Pravoslavbob
Section Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 3,180


St. Sisoes the Great


« Reply #65 on: November 29, 2007, 01:51:54 AM »

I disagree entirely on that point, especially from the Paris school, and some of the things I see coming out of the various theological dialogs between Orthodox and heterodox.

Anastasios,

I would certainly agree that recently there have been some things happening that have made me nervous and given me pause to think.  Perhaps you would like to edify us with a few examples you know of, or point us towards them.

 I've made this point before: I don't think you can tar everyone in the "Paris school" with the same brush.  An Evdokimov or a Behr-Siegel  are not the same creatures as a Lossky or a Schmemann or a Meyendorff.

My nervousness aside, the kind of liberalism that one sees displayed in Orthodox circles usually pails in comparison to that seen outside.  Still, I do agree that although New Skete has made some interesting strides in liturgical scholarship that some weird things have happened there.  As an aside,I notice that Fr. Laurence Mancuso died a few months ago.  I gather he had not been living at New Skete for some time.  Would you happen to know why?

I still think it's funny that some people refer to a "modernist" trend in Orthodoxy, when really, there is nothing in Orthodoxy that closely resembles a modernist trend in the Roman Catholic sense of the word.

J.B.
« Last Edit: November 29, 2007, 01:55:04 AM by Pravoslavbob » Logged

Religion is a disease, and Orthodoxy is its cure.
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,440


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #66 on: November 29, 2007, 02:04:00 AM »

Anastasios,

I would certainly agree that recently there have been some things happening that have made me nervous and given me pause to think.  Perhaps you would like to edify us with a few examples you know of, or point us towards them.

 I've made this point before: I don't think you can tar everyone in the "Paris school" with the same brush.  An Evdokimov or a Behr-Siegel  are not the same creatures as a Lossky or a Schmemann or a Meyendorff.

My nervousness aside, the kind of liberalism that one sees displayed in Orthodox circles usually pails in comparison to that seen outside.  Still, I do agree that although New Skete has made some interesting strides in liturgical scholarship that some weird things have happened there.  As an aside,I notice that Fr. Laurence Mancuso died a few months ago.  I gather he had not been living at New Skete for some time.  Would you happen to know why?

I still think it's funny that some people refer to a "modernist" trend in Orthodoxy, when really, there is nothing in Orthodoxy that closely resembles a modernist trend in the Roman Catholic sense of the word.

J.B.

My point is not to rehash old arguments or to tar someone broadly; I was merely making some general comments that there are liberal trends going on in Orthodoxy. I also think it is to be expected in any normal religion that there will be such trends and disputes.

I don't know if what I know about Fr Laurence is public knowledge so suffice it to say he was asked to resign by the community some years back.

I agree that in scope Orthodoxy is still much less liberal than outside, but when we sign documents with people outside that have such views I wonder where we are headed (well that is a rhetorical as I obviously made a jurisdictional choice based on this).
Logged

Met. Demetrius's Enthronement

Disclaimer: Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching.

I served as an Orthodox priest from June 2008 to April 2013, before resigning for personal reasons
lubeltri
Latin Catholic layman
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

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



« Reply #67 on: November 29, 2007, 02:08:28 AM »

A small thing is not a small thing, if it leads to something great. St. John of Damascus.

The "minor" changes, if Obadiah is correct, are in the right direction.  A major objection of the hard core opponents of reunion (and those not so die hard  Wink) is the absence of the epiclesis.

The additional Eucharistic Prayers with the explicit epicleses were added in 1970, not in John Paul II's 2002 revision. Like I said, minor changes (though they were for the better---the Novus Ordo has slowly been getting better over the last 35 years).
Logged
lubeltri
Latin Catholic layman
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

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



« Reply #68 on: November 29, 2007, 02:13:21 AM »

We don't have liberal theology or any such thing. 

I would suggest you be more wary. It's a cancer and can infect quietly and insidiously. EO is not immune. I think the birth control thing is a sad example of its effects.
Logged
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #69 on: November 29, 2007, 02:24:58 AM »

I would suggest you be more wary. It's a cancer and can infect quietly and insidiously. EO is not immune. I think the birth control thing is a sad example of its effects.

Thank you, I keep trying to tell people that the left is your friend and that we really are making changes for the better...at least someone gets it. Wink
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
msmirnov
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Bulgarian Orthodox Church
Posts: 151


« Reply #70 on: November 29, 2007, 05:08:08 AM »

I was just explaining why I called it Pater Noster. It wasn't a conscious decision. I've also called it by the other two names.

OK. Excuse me please. I was too harsh.
Logged
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #71 on: November 29, 2007, 06:43:58 AM »

Sorry to be a word stikler but please if your going criticize what the Pope said please get it right.

He never said "defective" which would mean something totally different than what he actually said.

For the word stickler:
"we believe they suffer from defects"
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #72 on: November 29, 2007, 08:18:02 AM »

Nobody has thought of asking the corollorary question:  Is Pope Benedict ready to accept Patriarch Bartholomew's submission to his authority?

The Patriarch brings some major problems with his submission to Rome... he is used to having autocephalic authority whereas all the present Catholic Patriarchs are permitted merely autonomous authority.  He proclaims a teaching on marriage and divorce and on contraception and even abortion (the last to his everlasting shame) which the Pope will not be able to tolerate.

So the question is - while the Patriarch may be ready to accept the Pope, is the Pope ready to accept the Patriarch?
Logged
lubeltri
Latin Catholic layman
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

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



« Reply #73 on: November 29, 2007, 10:01:30 AM »

You're right, those erroneous (in RC eyes) views would have to change, or at least he'd have to be hush-hush about them (like the liberal bishops) if he still adhered to them.

What I don't understand most is his softness on abortion---the other two views are generally acceptable among EO. More of his countrymen in Greece are aborted than born. He needs to speak up about that rather than kiss Paul Sarbanes' shoes.
« Last Edit: November 29, 2007, 10:05:19 AM by lubeltri » Logged
dantxny
OC.net Mineshaft gap
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Russian
Posts: 769



« Reply #74 on: November 29, 2007, 10:09:07 AM »

He still is, whatever the "West" means anymore, the Latin Church being in every corner of the globe. The Vatican only dropped it from the annual yearbook because they say it is no longer "useful" as a title. Not sure if it was a good idea, but it's just a title, and it didn't make it into the yearbook until 1863 anyway. The reality---that the Bishop of Rome is patriarch of the Latin Church---still exists.

Well, although, we may not often agree, that is a good point and well-put way to state it.
Logged

"If you give the average Frenchman a choice between a reforming president who would plug the country's huge deficit and a good cheese, he would probably opt for the cheese." - Stephen Clarke
I think the French may be on to something here.
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #75 on: November 29, 2007, 10:56:22 AM »

You're right, those erroneous (in RC eyes) views would have to change, or at least he'd have to be hush-hush about them (like the liberal bishops) if he still adhered to them.

What I don't understand most is his softness on abortion---the other two views are generally acceptable among EO. More of his countrymen in Greece are aborted than born. He needs to speak up about that rather than kiss Paul Sarbanes' shoes.

Quite to the contrary, any agreement of communion would have to be born out of mutual respect; we would have to tolerate your positions that we find distasteful, and likewise you would have to tolerate these positions of ours that you find distasteful. If not born out of mutual respect and tolerance, any communion would quickly die.
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
JoeS
(aka StMarkEofE)
Site Supporter
OC.net guru
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,122


Global Warming Enthusiast.


« Reply #76 on: November 29, 2007, 11:12:35 AM »

Quite to the contrary, any agreement of communion would have to be born out of mutual respect; we would have to tolerate your positions that we find distasteful, and likewise you would have to tolerate these positions of ours that you find distasteful. If not born out of mutual respect and tolerance, any communion would quickly die.

AND this would be considered a union?Huh??  What about union of faith and belief?

The One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church is not a country club where two or more can have doctrinal beliefs opposite each other.  How does mutual respect and tolerance deal with rock hard dogmas which are contrary to true belief? 

I just cant get it through my head how one can have dogmatic opposite beliefs and still be considered in union.   This may be tolerated but this is not Unity.

Logged
TinaG
I am not a pessimist - I'm just grimly realistic!
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 870


If only my family were this normal !


WWW
« Reply #77 on: November 29, 2007, 11:27:33 AM »

AND this would be considered a union?Huh??  What about union of faith and belief?

The One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church is not a country club where two or more can have doctrinal beliefs opposite each other.  How does mutual respect and tolerance deal with rock hard dogmas which are contrary to true belief? 

I just cant get it through my head how one can have dogmatic opposite beliefs and still be considered in union.   This may be tolerated but this is not Unity.


Well said and my point exactly.   What makes Orthodoxy so cohesive and uniform is its commitment across the board to liturgical unity.  The theology of the Church is an expression of its Liturgy.  Change Liturgy and you open yourselves up to any number of innovations and experiments.  That is not to say there are no variations or anomalies, but on the whole, we are much more united.  That is the one strength of the pre Vatican II Catholic Church and the universal (among western RC not Byz Cath) use of the Tridentine Mass.

If (and that's a big if) unity ever happens, all I hope is that Orthodox leaders are not going to wink-wink-nod-nod at RC  dogmas and take the attitude that we're all one big happy family with a multitude of diverse religious expressions or some PC hooey like that.  Doesn't some religious group use the slogan "Unity within diversity"?
Logged

On the spiritual path somewhere between the Simpsons and St. Theophan the Recluse, but I still can't see the Springfield city limits sign yet.
Joab Anias
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Rome
Posts: 145


« Reply #78 on: November 29, 2007, 11:32:20 AM »

For the word stickler:
"we believe they suffer from defects"

I believe that was speaking of non-apostolic Churches

"gravely deficient situation"

There are two important Church documents about this issue, and each of these has a few important points.

The one that I think you are talking about is called "Dominus Iesus: On the Unicity and Salvific Universality of Jesus Christ and the Church." It was written by Ratzinger and promulgated in 2000. In it, he wrote,

Quote
"22. With the coming of the Saviour Jesus Christ, God has willed that the Church founded by him be the instrument for the salvation of all humanity (cf. Acts 17:30-31).90 This truth of faith does not lessen the sincere respect which the Church has for the religions of the world, but at the same time, it rules out, in a radical way, that mentality of indifferentism “characterized by a religious relativism which leads to the belief that ‘one religion is as good as another'”.91 If it is true that the followers of other religions can receive divine grace, it is also certain that objectively speaking they are in a gravely deficient situation in comparison with those who, in the Church, have the fullness of the means of salvation.92"

There's a few footnotes in there. Footnote #92 refers to "Mystici Corporis Christi: Encyclical of Pope Pius XII on the Mystical Body of Christ." It was promulgated in 1943.

Ratzinger is drawing upon the teaching of Pius XII. Although all this is in reference to salvation outside of the Church which is does not include the Orthodox who are a sister apostolic Church.

In July of this year there was a 4 page document which clarified by saying:

Quote
Eastern Orthodox churches, though lacking communion with Rome, nonetheless deserve the term "Church" because their priests follow in the succession of bishops and priests that started in the early church, the document explains.

Protestant denominations, however, "because of the absence of the sacramental priesthood, have not preserved the genuine and integral substance of the Eucharistic Mystery," and are therefore to be termed mere "Christian Communities."

DOMINUS IESUS
Clarification on the Doctrine of the Church
Orthodox Say Unity Must Be Priority

Peace.
Logged
Joab Anias
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Rome
Posts: 145


« Reply #79 on: November 29, 2007, 11:40:05 AM »

I just cant get it through my head how one can have dogmatic opposite beliefs and still be considered in union.   This may be tolerated but this is not Unity.

Through putting in the groundwork to study the doctrines and finding the similarities and understanding the differences. Once that is done one should confidently find that they speak the same faith in 90% of the percieved desparities. The disunity will fall away.

Peace.
Logged
JoeS
(aka StMarkEofE)
Site Supporter
OC.net guru
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,122


Global Warming Enthusiast.


« Reply #80 on: November 29, 2007, 11:52:41 AM »

Through putting in the groundwork to study the doctrines and finding the similarities and understanding the differences. Once that is done one should confidently find that they speak the same faith in 90% of the percieved desparities. The disunity will fall away.

Peace.

Why are we stopping at 90%?  Me thinks that this 10% is THE major stumbling block to union. This 10% contains the many doctrinal differences that separate us.  This 10% is what has been the reason for our schism.

Union, Unity has to be all or nothing.  The Eastern Catholics had to agree to this prior to them coming under the Roman Pope.  Yes, they got to keep their traditions and the like but they had to agree to start believing in the Filioque, Purgatory, Infallibility, Supremacy, etc. issues just the same.





Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #81 on: November 29, 2007, 11:58:07 AM »

Well said and my point exactly.   What makes Orthodoxy so cohesive and uniform is its commitment across the board to liturgical unity. 
Wait a minute. How is it liturgical unity if you allow the western liturgy in the western rite Orthodox Churches?
I don't see why you cannot have intercommunion between two Churches with different liturgies.
Logged
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #82 on: November 29, 2007, 11:58:35 AM »

Hey, I'd like to see examples 90/10, myself.
There about 30 Latins innovations not found in Orthodoxy; so 27/3. Which three?
Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Patriarch of Jerusalem
Posts: 390


Kona-Kai


« Reply #83 on: November 29, 2007, 12:00:29 PM »

Through putting in the groundwork to study the doctrines and finding the similarities and understanding the differences. Once that is done one should confidently find that they speak the same faith in 90% of the percieved desparities. The disunity will fall away.

Peace.

Of course your statement presupposes that Orthodoxy has not already studied Catholic beliefs and found them either lacking in or outright contrary to the deposit of faith once received.  The groundwork already exists; the 'disparities' are real; the disunity will fall away once Catholicism decides it can no longer dwell outside the Church, renounces its errant beliefs, and returns to the faith it once embraced.
« Last Edit: November 29, 2007, 12:02:07 PM by Heracleides » Logged

"And having found Heracleides there again, we instructed him to proclaim the Gospel of God..."  ~Acts of Barnabas
Pravoslavbob
Section Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 3,180


St. Sisoes the Great


« Reply #84 on: November 29, 2007, 12:56:17 PM »

The RC church is a huge, monolithic organization and has the momentum of a giant oil tanker at full speed.  I picture Pope Benedict as a tiny little tug.  He might want to turn the course of the tanker but is ineffective in so far as he's only able to make very small changes.  In all honesty, does anyone think he can do away with entrenched Catholic dogmas? and practices.

IMHO, this is bang on the mark.  I once heard an Eastern Catholic priest tell a story about an audience some Catholics had with the Pope (Paul VI if memory serves).  During the audience, one of the faithful asked the Pope: "Holy Father, how many people work in the Vatican?"  The Pope  considered the question thoughtfully for a few moments, and then responded:  "Oh, I would say about half."  In other words, fifty percent of the people working in the Vatican were trying to implement the policies and practices of the Roman see, while the other half were either tying them up in bureaucratic knots, ignoring them, or actively opposing them.

The continuing negative experience of the Eastern Catholics with the Roman Church should put the Orthodox on the alert.  Here is but one example: the field of canon law.  They have been struggling for decades to have eastern concepts recognized in their canon law, but continue to have to make decisions based on Roman concepts, as I see it seemingly because Roman canon lawyers simply can't be bothered to go online and order a few books on Orthodox views of canon law and ecclesiology!  Anyone who doesn't believe me is welcome to root around for themselves and find some info.  Perhaps you could start with the work of the well-respected Eastern Catholic canon lawyer Fr Jobe Abbass (sp?)

It seems that well-intentioned Catholics  sometimes seem to have great difficulty grasping eastern concepts.  But when they work at it, they can come up with remarkably charitible and gracious ways of relating to the Orthodox.  One should remember that a considerable amount of positive change that emanated from Vatican II(and all but the most rigid Orthodox, IMHO, would have to acknowledge that at leastsome  positive things came from Vatican II) was inspired by the Melkite Church.  A document like the one signed at Balamand, however, is a mixed creature.  Clearly, there are elements in Balamand that are totally incompatible with Orthodox ecclesiology, but on the other hand, some of its declarations show remarkable sensitivity and deference to Orthodox values and concepts regarding the nature of the Church.

Orthodox nervousness regarding the Catholic Church cannot all be dismissed simply as Orthodox paranoia, though there is an unfortunate element of that present.  There are prominent Catholics out there, who, IMHO, are rightly viewed by the Orthodox as having a kind of benevolent yet arrogant superiority complex regarding the Eastern Church based on genuine ignorance about the differences between the West and Orthodoxy.  "The Orthodox are exactly the same as us, except that they are completely disorganised and don't have the benefit of communion with the Roman see, poor souls.Oh yes, and they have such a beautiful and rich liturigical tradition."
« Last Edit: November 29, 2007, 01:01:24 PM by Pravoslavbob » Logged

Religion is a disease, and Orthodoxy is its cure.
TinaG
I am not a pessimist - I'm just grimly realistic!
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 870


If only my family were this normal !


WWW
« Reply #85 on: November 29, 2007, 12:56:48 PM »

Wait a minute. How is it liturgical unity if you allow the western liturgy in the western rite Orthodox Churches?
I don't see why you cannot have intercommunion between two Churches with different liturgies.


Whoops, I forgot our WR brothers.  Well than I have myself in a pickle if I say WR is the exception to the norm.  I'm gonna be ducking and dodging rocks, stones and flaming cow pies now for sure.  I'll qualify my statements (and probably dig the hole deeper) by saying I still think there is more dissimilarity between the Liturby of the RCC vs. the EO (and WRO) Liturgies.  The theology behind the liturgies is certainly different (the sacrifice/atoning mass vs. the EO view - sorry can't find the correct words).  I still think liturgically and theologically we have more in common with OO than RCC.  
Logged

On the spiritual path somewhere between the Simpsons and St. Theophan the Recluse, but I still can't see the Springfield city limits sign yet.
Pravoslavbob
Section Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 3,180


St. Sisoes the Great


« Reply #86 on: November 29, 2007, 01:06:52 PM »

In other words, outside the Church period. We aren't even a church, and I am unbaptized in most EO eyes. Our Eucharist is play-acting.

Hmm, any Orientale Lumen, Unitatis Redintegratio or Ut Unum Sint from the EO side?

Stirring the pot I see. You know full well (or you should by now) that there is not a single  accepted monolithic view of the nature of the Catholic Church in Orthodox circles.
Logged

Religion is a disease, and Orthodoxy is its cure.
JoeS
(aka StMarkEofE)
Site Supporter
OC.net guru
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,122


Global Warming Enthusiast.


« Reply #87 on: November 29, 2007, 01:12:57 PM »

Whoops, I forgot our WR brothers.  Well than I have myself in a pickle if I say WR is the exception to the norm.  I'm gonna be ducking and dodging rocks, stones and flaming cow pies now for sure.  I'll qualify my statements (and probably dig the hole deeper) by saying I still think there is more dissimilarity between the Liturby of the RCC vs. the EO (and WRO) Liturgies.  The theology behind the liturgies is certainly different (the sacrifice/atoning mass vs. the EO view - sorry can't find the correct words).  I still think liturgically and theologically we have more in common with OO than RCC.  

Im not quite convinced that the inception of the WRO was a good idea or not. I also believe that this is uniquely an American phenomenon.  I know why it was created but I feel there should have been more effort in steering these converts towards the more traditional Liturgy in the Orthodoxy church.  Anyway, the numbers of WRO are still small and I do believe IMHO that in time the WRO will be absorbed into the Eastern Orthodox church where this "intermediate" step would not be necessary.
Logged
Pravoslavbob
Section Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 3,180


St. Sisoes the Great


« Reply #88 on: November 29, 2007, 01:16:45 PM »

My point is not to rehash old arguments or to tar someone broadly; I was merely making some general comments that there are liberal trends going on in Orthodoxy. I also think it is to be expected in any normal religion that there will be such trends and disputes.

I don't know if what I know about Fr Laurence is public knowledge so suffice it to say he was asked to resign by the community some years back.

I agree that in scope Orthodoxy is still much less liberal than outside, but when we sign documents with people outside that have such views I wonder where we are headed (well that is a rhetorical as I obviously made a jurisdictional choice based on this).

Okay, thanks.   Smiley  I would be geniunely interested, BTW, to see you or someone else start another thread about dealings with other ecclesial bodies that might be considered suspect.   
Logged

Religion is a disease, and Orthodoxy is its cure.
TinaG
I am not a pessimist - I'm just grimly realistic!
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 870


If only my family were this normal !


WWW
« Reply #89 on: November 29, 2007, 01:18:15 PM »

Im not quite convinced that the inception of the WRO was a good idea or not.  I...do believe IMHO that in time the WRO will be absorbed into the Eastern Orthodox church where this "intermediate" step would not be necessary.

Ohhhh, lookout, there's gonna be a flaming cow pie headed your way too. laugh
Logged

On the spiritual path somewhere between the Simpsons and St. Theophan the Recluse, but I still can't see the Springfield city limits sign yet.
Tags: celibacy ecclesiology ecumenism latinization Eastern Catholic dead horse cheval mort satan's synagoge  Primacy 
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 »  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 0.161 seconds with 72 queries.