January 29, 2015, 08:38:37 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1   Go Down
Author Topic: Orthodox statements about the Great Schism  (Read 1004 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
perpetual neophyte
Site Supporter
Sr. Member
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 171

« on: December 03, 2007, 06:15:29 PM »

In order to forgive and forget, the Eastern Orthodox must first repent of their lies against the Catholic Church
OK, it's just about lies.

In another place, I read this comment:
As a life long Catholic, I do have a question regarding the great schism. At one of the ecumenical councils, the second one, I believe, the Nicaean Creed was pretty much set in stone and it was determined that no changes could be made without approval of the council. When the western church added the filiique clause without approval, did this not violate the council? I've never heard or read what I considered an adequate explanation for this.
Which elicited this response:
I understand that the things were not done to the satisfaction of everybody, till a time came, they protested.

Now the attitude should be of forebearance and forgiveness. Let by gones be by gones, and a new effort for unifying the Protestants and Catholics should be made.

This individual seems to be equating Orthodox and Protestants. In an ostensibly charitable manner he prescribes forbearence!

To which I replied...
Yes, the Latin Cardinals protested the Greek deletion of the filioque from the Creed. Since the Greeks did not respond in a way that was satisfactory to these two Cardinals (one a future Pope) they took the Roman church out of the Orthodox communion of diaphysite churches.

The Latin Patriarchate and the four Greek Patriarchates were separated in 1054AD by an act of protest of the Latins.

It is now time to forgive and forget, and move forward for the sake of Christ.

And another Roman Catholic responded as follows...
In order to forgive and forget, the Eastern Orthodox must first repent of their lies against the Catholic Church, wouldn't you agree.

I'll assume you have never read the actual excommunication decree, which specifically praises the Greek people for their holiness, but pronounced anathema by name ONLY the Patriarch and two others of his fellow hierarchs.

I'll assume you did not know that the Patriarch Michael deliberately falsified the anathema profferred by the Latin delegation, a falsification which he had no shame about spreading to his flock, a falsification later discovered and rebuked by the Emperor.

I'll assume you are working off of this falsified document in your claim that the Latins accused the Greeks of removing filioque from the Creed. In fact, the excommunication only mentions - as far as filioque is concerned - that the participation of the Son in the Procession had been denied.

You'll get no sympathy except from anti-Catholics, for your statements.

Now I have to ask, have I perpetrated a lie in my statement above? Is this individual correct that I am working off of bad information? 

If so...why? Did the Patriarch falsify the contents of the Bull?

If not...why not? Who knows what the Bull did state, and what evidence is available?

I dislike being called a liar, or the perpetrator of lies.


I know you were going for dramatic flair, but people need to know what your question is referring to based on the thread title (which is why I changed the title). - Cleveland, GM
« Last Edit: December 03, 2007, 06:21:45 PM by cleveland » Logged

"Tradition is the living faith of the dead; traditionalism is the dead faith of the living"
Jaroslav Pelikan
(aka StMarkEofE)
Site Supporter
OC.net guru
Offline Offline

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

Global Warming Enthusiast.

« Reply #1 on: December 03, 2007, 07:12:25 PM »

My question would be: Does this Bull of Excomunication still exist, and if so what are it's contents?  What proof does this Roman have that Patriarch Michael modified the bull of excommunication?  Do we have information that this wasnt tampered with? 

Let this Roman come up with the proof and if he cant then he is just blowing smoke to get your gall up.

Offline Offline

Posts: 2,749

« Reply #2 on: December 03, 2007, 10:28:03 PM »


I don't get troubled by these type of statements or people, the info is out there to read and contemplate...

Yesterday is gone, today is the present and the Lord only knows what tomorrow will bring...



An old timer is a man who's had a lot of interesting experiences -- some of them true.

Grant me the senility to forget the people I never liked anyway, the good fortune to run into the ones I do, and the eyesight to tell the difference.
Tags: schism 
Pages: 1   Go Up
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 0.047 seconds with 30 queries.