OrthodoxChristianity.net
December 18, 2014, 09:42:27 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 »   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Papist's Criticism of Byzantine Rite Catholicism  (Read 51643 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
frjohnmorris
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 1,177


« Reply #180 on: December 18, 2013, 10:08:16 PM »

The difference is that we are Orthodox Catholics. The word "Catholic" was first used in the East by St. Ignatius of Antioch. If you are under Rome, you are not Orthodox. This issue is one of the greatest sources of tension between Eastern Orthodox and the Catholic Church. It is dishonest for a group under Rome to call themselves "Orthodox in Communion with Rome," because you cannot be Orthodox and be in Communion with Rome until Rome abandons all teachings like Purgatory, the Augustinian conception of original sin, and most of all papal supremacy, claims to universal jurisdiction and infallibility. Even if you use the Byzantine Liturgy if your Bishop in in Communion with Rome according to Orthodox theology that means that you share a Common Faith with Rome including the Roman teachings that contradict the teaching of the ancient undivided Church.
How about this, you let the Orthodox Church decide who is really Orthodox?
Fr. John W. Morris
Father that is circular logic. Obviously Orthodox believe they are Catholic, and Catholics believe they are Orthodox.  I could say: "If you are not under Rome, you are not Catholic."  You would not accept that, nor should you.  So no, I will not let the Orthodox Church decide who is really Orthodox, aymore than you will let the Catholic Church decide who is really Catholic.  And besides, the whole "Orthodox in Communion with Rome" title usage is largely limited to a very few on the internet and even fewer in real life.  I would be more concerned about vagantes parading as the "Orthodox Catholic Church of North America" and such. 

This issue is one of the most serious sources of tension between Eastern Orthodoxy and Rome. All that I am asking for is respect for our Church and our sensibilities on this subject. Eastern Catholics are not Orthodox because they or their spiritual ancestors left the Orthodox Church to submit to Rome. Just be honest about it. If you are under Rome, you are not Orthodox.

Fr. John W. Morris
Logged
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,404


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #181 on: December 18, 2013, 10:09:24 PM »

The difference is that we are Orthodox Catholics. The word "Catholic" was first used in the East by St. Ignatius of Antioch. If you are under Rome, you are not Orthodox. This issue is one of the greatest sources of tension between Eastern Orthodox and the Catholic Church. It is dishonest for a group under Rome to call themselves "Orthodox in Communion with Rome," because you cannot be Orthodox and be in Communion with Rome until Rome abandons all teachings like Purgatory, the Augustinian conception of original sin, and most of all papal supremacy, claims to universal jurisdiction and infallibility. Even if you use the Byzantine Liturgy if your Bishop in in Communion with Rome according to Orthodox theology that means that you share a Common Faith with Rome including the Roman teachings that contradict the teaching of the ancient undivided Church.
How about this, you let the Orthodox Church decide who is really Orthodox?
Fr. John W. Morris
Father that is circular logic. Obviously Orthodox believe they are Catholic, and Catholics believe they are Orthodox.  I could say: "If you are not under Rome, you are not Catholic."  You would not accept that, nor should you.  So no, I will not let the Orthodox Church decide who is really Orthodox, aymore than you will let the Catholic Church decide who is really Catholic.  And besides, the whole "Orthodox in Communion with Rome" title usage is largely limited to a very few on the internet and even fewer in real life.  I would be more concerned about vagantes parading as the "Orthodox Catholic Church of North America" and such. 

This issue is one of the most serious sources of tension between Eastern Orthodoxy and Rome. All that I am asking for is respect for our Church and our sensibilities on this subject. Eastern Catholics are not Orthodox because they or their spiritual ancestors left the Orthodox Church to submit to Rome. Just be honest about it. If you are under Rome, you are not Orthodox.

Fr. John W. Morris
But we believe that in order to be orthodox in the true sense of the word, one would need to be in communion with Rome. We are being true to our faith (note: I'm not one to use the "Orthodox in Communion with Rome" title).
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 3,049


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #182 on: December 18, 2013, 10:18:46 PM »

The difference is that we are Orthodox Catholics. The word "Catholic" was first used in the East by St. Ignatius of Antioch. If you are under Rome, you are not Orthodox. This issue is one of the greatest sources of tension between Eastern Orthodox and the Catholic Church. It is dishonest for a group under Rome to call themselves "Orthodox in Communion with Rome," because you cannot be Orthodox and be in Communion with Rome until Rome abandons all teachings like Purgatory, the Augustinian conception of original sin, and most of all papal supremacy, claims to universal jurisdiction and infallibility. Even if you use the Byzantine Liturgy if your Bishop in in Communion with Rome according to Orthodox theology that means that you share a Common Faith with Rome including the Roman teachings that contradict the teaching of the ancient undivided Church.
How about this, you let the Orthodox Church decide who is really Orthodox?
Fr. John W. Morris
Father that is circular logic. Obviously Orthodox believe they are Catholic, and Catholics believe they are Orthodox.  I could say: "If you are not under Rome, you are not Catholic."  You would not accept that, nor should you.  So no, I will not let the Orthodox Church decide who is really Orthodox, aymore than you will let the Catholic Church decide who is really Catholic.  And besides, the whole "Orthodox in Communion with Rome" title usage is largely limited to a very few on the internet and even fewer in real life.  I would be more concerned about vagantes parading as the "Orthodox Catholic Church of North America" and such. 

This issue is one of the most serious sources of tension between Eastern Orthodoxy and Rome. All that I am asking for is respect for our Church and our sensibilities on this subject. Eastern Catholics are not Orthodox because they or their spiritual ancestors left the Orthodox Church to submit to Rome. Just be honest about it. If you are under Rome, you are not Orthodox.

Fr. John W. Morris
I am being honest.  I believe if you are under Rome, you are Orthodox.  What you are asking is something that you yourself will not do, let someone else define your terms.   
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
frjohnmorris
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 1,177


« Reply #183 on: December 18, 2013, 10:44:32 PM »

The difference is that we are Orthodox Catholics. The word "Catholic" was first used in the East by St. Ignatius of Antioch. If you are under Rome, you are not Orthodox. This issue is one of the greatest sources of tension between Eastern Orthodox and the Catholic Church. It is dishonest for a group under Rome to call themselves "Orthodox in Communion with Rome," because you cannot be Orthodox and be in Communion with Rome until Rome abandons all teachings like Purgatory, the Augustinian conception of original sin, and most of all papal supremacy, claims to universal jurisdiction and infallibility. Even if you use the Byzantine Liturgy if your Bishop in in Communion with Rome according to Orthodox theology that means that you share a Common Faith with Rome including the Roman teachings that contradict the teaching of the ancient undivided Church.
How about this, you let the Orthodox Church decide who is really Orthodox?
Fr. John W. Morris
Father that is circular logic. Obviously Orthodox believe they are Catholic, and Catholics believe they are Orthodox.  I could say: "If you are not under Rome, you are not Catholic."  You would not accept that, nor should you.  So no, I will not let the Orthodox Church decide who is really Orthodox, aymore than you will let the Catholic Church decide who is really Catholic.  And besides, the whole "Orthodox in Communion with Rome" title usage is largely limited to a very few on the internet and even fewer in real life.  I would be more concerned about vagantes parading as the "Orthodox Catholic Church of North America" and such. 

This issue is one of the most serious sources of tension between Eastern Orthodoxy and Rome. All that I am asking for is respect for our Church and our sensibilities on this subject. Eastern Catholics are not Orthodox because they or their spiritual ancestors left the Orthodox Church to submit to Rome. Just be honest about it. If you are under Rome, you are not Orthodox.

Fr. John W. Morris
But we believe that in order to be orthodox in the true sense of the word, one would need to be in communion with Rome. We are being true to our faith (note: I'm not one to use the "Orthodox in Communion with Rome" title).

And I am being true to my faith as an Orthodox Christian when I believe that one cannot be in Communion with Rome and call themselves Orthodox because I do not believe that Rome is Orthodox.

Fr. John W. Morris
Logged
podkarpatska
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,944


Pokrov


WWW
« Reply #184 on: December 18, 2013, 11:33:11 PM »

Reality, and accepted, common English usage, is clear. The Catholic Church is understood to refer to those under Rome. The Orthodox Church refers to the Eastern Orthodox churches of apostolic Christianity under the remaining  four Eastern Patriarchs of the pre-schism Pentarchy, the Eastern Orthodox churches subsequently recognized as autochephalous or autonomous and the non-Chalcedonian "Oriental" Orthodox churches. ( I hope I got everyone...)

Yes, we each believe ourselves to be catholic, apostolic and orthodox, but arguing about the terminology is pointless. And I agree with Deacon Lance, the average Eastern Catholic does NOT self identify as "Orthodox in union with Rome." That is offensive even to those of us kindly disposed to Eastern Catholics for it is historically wrong and inaccurate in its very understanding of ecclesiology. And if my memory is correct, even the Slavonic and English Trebnik/Liturgikon of the Slavic Greek Catholics reflects this by removing the term "pravoslavnyj" as in not saying: "Remember in Your Kingdom all Orthodox Christians" but rather saying "Christians of the true Faith". (Although this is not uniform I've noticed it in European liturgies.)
« Last Edit: December 18, 2013, 11:34:25 PM by podkarpatska » Logged
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 3,049


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #185 on: December 18, 2013, 11:52:17 PM »

And if my memory is correct, even the Slavonic and English Trebnik/Liturgikon of the Slavic Greek Catholics reflects this by removing the term "pravoslavnyj" as in not saying: "Remember in Your Kingdom all Orthodox Christians" but rather saying "Christians of the true Faith". (Although this is not uniform I've noticed it in European liturgies.)
Actually, the Metropolia of Pittsburgh is the only one left with "true faith", the Ukrainians have returned to "Orthodox". 
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
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: 38,135



« Reply #186 on: December 19, 2013, 12:09:23 AM »

The difference is that we are Orthodox Catholics. The word "Catholic" was first used in the East by St. Ignatius of Antioch. If you are under Rome, you are not Orthodox. This issue is one of the greatest sources of tension between Eastern Orthodox and the Catholic Church. It is dishonest for a group under Rome to call themselves "Orthodox in Communion with Rome," because you cannot be Orthodox and be in Communion with Rome until Rome abandons all teachings like Purgatory, the Augustinian conception of original sin, and most of all papal supremacy, claims to universal jurisdiction and infallibility. Even if you use the Byzantine Liturgy if your Bishop in in Communion with Rome according to Orthodox theology that means that you share a Common Faith with Rome including the Roman teachings that contradict the teaching of the ancient undivided Church.
How about this, you let the Orthodox Church decide who is really Orthodox?
Fr. John W. Morris
Father that is circular logic. Obviously Orthodox believe they are Catholic, and Catholics believe they are Orthodox.  I could say: "If you are not under Rome, you are not Catholic."  You would not accept that, nor should you.
 
Your Pastor Aeternus, Deacon, does say that, and says we should accept it.

Sticking with the original and Orthodox definition of Catholic, of course, we don't.

That, of course, doesn't stop the Vatican from calling the schisms in Orthodox Churches as a "return to Catholic communion/unity," when it fact the date in question specifies the date the schism left it.

So no, I will not let the Orthodox Church decide who is really Orthodox

Not your call, Deacon.
aymore than you will let the Catholic Church decide who is really Catholic.
 
Of course the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church decides who is Catholic.
And besides, the whole "Orthodox in Communion with Rome" title usage is largely limited to a very few on the internet and even fewer in real life.  I would be more concerned about vagantes parading as the "Orthodox Catholic Church of North America" and such. 
Don't know about that, but I will concede you have a point.
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
Moderated
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: 38,135



« Reply #187 on: December 19, 2013, 12:09:55 AM »

But, to be fair, the Orthodox don't claim the name "Roman" or "Rome".

Oh wait ...

 Wink

Actually we do. In Arabic what we call Greek Orthodox is literally Roman (Rhum) Orthodox because the we were the Church of the Roman Empire which lasted until 1453 when the Turks conquered Constntinople.  Following their Islamic religion, the Turks organized various people according to their religion. Eastern Orthodox were called the Rhum Millet or Roman Nation under the Turks and because of that we are called Rhum Orthodox in the Arabic speaking world.

Fr. John W. Morris

Alright. (Anyhow, the "Oh wait ...  Wink" was a reference to ialmisry, as he just graciously illustrated. Smiley)

Anytime. Wink
« Last Edit: December 19, 2013, 12:10:17 AM 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
mike
Warned
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,522


« Reply #188 on: December 19, 2013, 03:12:19 AM »

3 pages of ping-pong. Can you get over it already?
Logged
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,174



« Reply #189 on: December 19, 2013, 06:17:00 AM »

That, of course, doesn't stop the Vatican from calling the schisms in Orthodox Churches as a "return to Catholic communion/unity," when it fact the date in question specifies the date the schism left it.

It presumably goes without saying that being Catholic is not some kind of magic pill that makes every Catholic think exactly the same as every other Catholic.

Just yesterday I was reading about the outrage among some so-called traditionalist Catholics at the rejection of "ecumenism of return". But does their outrage mean that we do not really reject "ecumenism of return"? Hardly!
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
frjohnmorris
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 1,177


« Reply #190 on: December 19, 2013, 11:42:34 AM »

That, of course, doesn't stop the Vatican from calling the schisms in Orthodox Churches as a "return to Catholic communion/unity," when it fact the date in question specifies the date the schism left it.

It presumably goes without saying that being Catholic is not some kind of magic pill that makes every Catholic think exactly the same as every other Catholic.

Just yesterday I was reading about the outrage among some so-called traditionalist Catholics at the rejection of "ecumenism of return". But does their outrage mean that we do not really reject "ecumenism of return"? Hardly!

I am reading a very interesting book about the origins and early development of the Eastern Catholic Churches in Eastern Europe. It is not a polemic, but is a serious scholarly study by a professional historian. Barbara Skinner, The Western Front of the Eastern Church: Uniate and Orthodox Conflict in Eighteenth-century Poland, Ukraine, Belarus, and Russia I think that an objective reading would confirm my point that Eastern Catholics are not Orthodox but were heavily Latinized and had to accept Roman Catholic doctrine including the "filioque" as a result of their union with Rome. . I should point out that I know that Eastern Catholics do not like being called Uniates, but that is what all scholarly histories of the movement call them to distinguish them from Orthodox. It comes from the origins of the Eastern Catholic Churches in the Union of Brest of 1596 and was never meant to be an insult.

Fr. John W. Morris
« Last Edit: December 19, 2013, 11:44:29 AM by frjohnmorris » Logged
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,494


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #191 on: December 19, 2013, 11:57:56 AM »

That, of course, doesn't stop the Vatican from calling the schisms in Orthodox Churches as a "return to Catholic communion/unity," when it fact the date in question specifies the date the schism left it.

It presumably goes without saying that being Catholic is not some kind of magic pill that makes every Catholic think exactly the same as every other Catholic.

Just yesterday I was reading about the outrage among some so-called traditionalist Catholics at the rejection of "ecumenism of return". But does their outrage mean that we do not really reject "ecumenism of return"? Hardly!

I am reading a very interesting book about the origins and early development of the Eastern Catholic Churches in Eastern Europe. It is not a polemic, but is a serious scholarly study by a professional historian. Barbara Skinner, The Western Front of the Eastern Church: Uniate and Orthodox Conflict in Eighteenth-century Poland, Ukraine, Belarus, and Russia I think that an objective reading would confirm my point that Eastern Catholics are not Orthodox but were heavily Latinized and had to accept Roman Catholic doctrine including the "filioque" as a result of their union with Rome. . I should point out that I know that Eastern Catholics do not like being called Uniates, but that is what all scholarly histories of the movement call them to distinguish them from Orthodox. It comes from the origins of the Eastern Catholic Churches in the Union of Brest of 1596 and was never meant to be an insult.

Fr. John W. Morris

And yet it demonstrably came to be used as an insult in the last century, especially in the United States as a result of the creation of what became the OCA and ACROD.  Many words that now find usage as pejoratives did not begin life as such but are now considered an insult by those they address (for instance, "squaw" for an Amerind woman).  Outside of some academic discussions, it is often best and most charitable to refrain from calling someone a name they've asked you not use.
« Last Edit: December 19, 2013, 11:58:39 AM by Schultz » Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
frjohnmorris
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 1,177


« Reply #192 on: December 19, 2013, 12:08:59 PM »

That, of course, doesn't stop the Vatican from calling the schisms in Orthodox Churches as a "return to Catholic communion/unity," when it fact the date in question specifies the date the schism left it.

It presumably goes without saying that being Catholic is not some kind of magic pill that makes every Catholic think exactly the same as every other Catholic.

Just yesterday I was reading about the outrage among some so-called traditionalist Catholics at the rejection of "ecumenism of return". But does their outrage mean that we do not really reject "ecumenism of return"? Hardly!

I am reading a very interesting book about the origins and early development of the Eastern Catholic Churches in Eastern Europe. It is not a polemic, but is a serious scholarly study by a professional historian. Barbara Skinner, The Western Front of the Eastern Church: Uniate and Orthodox Conflict in Eighteenth-century Poland, Ukraine, Belarus, and Russia I think that an objective reading would confirm my point that Eastern Catholics are not Orthodox but were heavily Latinized and had to accept Roman Catholic doctrine including the "filioque" as a result of their union with Rome. . I should point out that I know that Eastern Catholics do not like being called Uniates, but that is what all scholarly histories of the movement call them to distinguish them from Orthodox. It comes from the origins of the Eastern Catholic Churches in the Union of Brest of 1596 and was never meant to be an insult.

Fr. John W. Morris

And yet it demonstrably came to be used as an insult in the last century, especially in the United States as a result of the creation of what became the OCA and ACROD.  Many words that now find usage as pejoratives did not begin life as such but are now considered an insult by those they address (for instance, "squaw" for an Amerind woman).  Outside of some academic discussions, it is often best and most charitable to refrain from calling someone a name they've asked you not use.


I have honored that request and have never referred to Eastern Catholics as Uniates on this site, but that is the title of a scholarly work on this subject.I cannot change the name of the book. I am not OCA or ACROD and know nothing on the personal level on their relations with Eastern Catholics. I have also had no exposure to the Eastern Catholics, so I know nothing about Eastern Catholics  except what I have read in history books all of which refer to Byzantine Rite Eastern Catholics as Uniates.
It offends me and many Orthodox when an Eastern Catholic calls their Church, "Orthodox in Communion with Rome," but they do not seem to extend to me and other like me in the Orthodox Church the same courtesy that I extend to them by not calling them Uniates.

Fr. John W. Morris

« Last Edit: December 19, 2013, 12:13:19 PM by frjohnmorris » Logged
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,494


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #193 on: December 19, 2013, 12:45:37 PM »

That, of course, doesn't stop the Vatican from calling the schisms in Orthodox Churches as a "return to Catholic communion/unity," when it fact the date in question specifies the date the schism left it.

It presumably goes without saying that being Catholic is not some kind of magic pill that makes every Catholic think exactly the same as every other Catholic.

Just yesterday I was reading about the outrage among some so-called traditionalist Catholics at the rejection of "ecumenism of return". But does their outrage mean that we do not really reject "ecumenism of return"? Hardly!

I am reading a very interesting book about the origins and early development of the Eastern Catholic Churches in Eastern Europe. It is not a polemic, but is a serious scholarly study by a professional historian. Barbara Skinner, The Western Front of the Eastern Church: Uniate and Orthodox Conflict in Eighteenth-century Poland, Ukraine, Belarus, and Russia I think that an objective reading would confirm my point that Eastern Catholics are not Orthodox but were heavily Latinized and had to accept Roman Catholic doctrine including the "filioque" as a result of their union with Rome. . I should point out that I know that Eastern Catholics do not like being called Uniates, but that is what all scholarly histories of the movement call them to distinguish them from Orthodox. It comes from the origins of the Eastern Catholic Churches in the Union of Brest of 1596 and was never meant to be an insult.

Fr. John W. Morris

And yet it demonstrably came to be used as an insult in the last century, especially in the United States as a result of the creation of what became the OCA and ACROD.  Many words that now find usage as pejoratives did not begin life as such but are now considered an insult by those they address (for instance, "squaw" for an Amerind woman).  Outside of some academic discussions, it is often best and most charitable to refrain from calling someone a name they've asked you not use.


I have honored that request and have never referred to Eastern Catholics as Uniates on this site, but that is the title of a scholarly work on this subject.I cannot change the name of the book. I am not OCA or ACROD and know nothing on the personal level on their relations with Eastern Catholics. I have also had no exposure to the Eastern Catholics, so I know nothing about Eastern Catholics  except what I have read in history books all of which refer to Byzantine Rite Eastern Catholics as Uniates.
It offends me and many Orthodox when an Eastern Catholic calls their Church, "Orthodox in Communion with Rome," but they do not seem to extend to me and other like me in the Orthodox Church the same courtesy that I extend to them by not calling them Uniates.

Fr. John W. Morris

You do more than many, Father, by extending the courtesy of calling others what they wish to be called, and I thank you for it even if I am no longer an Eastern Catholic.  I have a number of uncles who are Ruthenian Catholic and I learned early on that one shouldn't call another a "U-word" although it was perfectly fine to use it in more academically inclined discussions.

As for what some ECs call themselves, that is on them, not you, of course, and it does you credit that you extend them a courtesy they do not return. Smiley
Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,404


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #194 on: December 19, 2013, 01:39:53 PM »

That, of course, doesn't stop the Vatican from calling the schisms in Orthodox Churches as a "return to Catholic communion/unity," when it fact the date in question specifies the date the schism left it.

It presumably goes without saying that being Catholic is not some kind of magic pill that makes every Catholic think exactly the same as every other Catholic.

Just yesterday I was reading about the outrage among some so-called traditionalist Catholics at the rejection of "ecumenism of return". But does their outrage mean that we do not really reject "ecumenism of return"? Hardly!

I am reading a very interesting book about the origins and early development of the Eastern Catholic Churches in Eastern Europe. It is not a polemic, but is a serious scholarly study by a professional historian. Barbara Skinner, The Western Front of the Eastern Church: Uniate and Orthodox Conflict in Eighteenth-century Poland, Ukraine, Belarus, and Russia I think that an objective reading would confirm my point that Eastern Catholics are not Orthodox but were heavily Latinized and had to accept Roman Catholic doctrine including the "filioque" as a result of their union with Rome. . I should point out that I know that Eastern Catholics do not like being called Uniates, but that is what all scholarly histories of the movement call them to distinguish them from Orthodox. It comes from the origins of the Eastern Catholic Churches in the Union of Brest of 1596 and was never meant to be an insult.

Fr. John W. Morris

And yet it demonstrably came to be used as an insult in the last century, especially in the United States as a result of the creation of what became the OCA and ACROD.  Many words that now find usage as pejoratives did not begin life as such but are now considered an insult by those they address (for instance, "squaw" for an Amerind woman).  Outside of some academic discussions, it is often best and most charitable to refrain from calling someone a name they've asked you not use.


I have honored that request and have never referred to Eastern Catholics as Uniates on this site, but that is the title of a scholarly work on this subject.I cannot change the name of the book. I am not OCA or ACROD and know nothing on the personal level on their relations with Eastern Catholics. I have also had no exposure to the Eastern Catholics, so I know nothing about Eastern Catholics  except what I have read in history books all of which refer to Byzantine Rite Eastern Catholics as Uniates.
It offends me and many Orthodox when an Eastern Catholic calls their Church, "Orthodox in Communion with Rome," but they do not seem to extend to me and other like me in the Orthodox Church the same courtesy that I extend to them by not calling them Uniates.

Fr. John W. Morris


Father, I would never call you anything other than what you call yourself and that is Orthodox.
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
frjohnmorris
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 1,177


« Reply #195 on: December 19, 2013, 04:26:19 PM »

That, of course, doesn't stop the Vatican from calling the schisms in Orthodox Churches as a "return to Catholic communion/unity," when it fact the date in question specifies the date the schism left it.

It presumably goes without saying that being Catholic is not some kind of magic pill that makes every Catholic think exactly the same as every other Catholic.

Just yesterday I was reading about the outrage among some so-called traditionalist Catholics at the rejection of "ecumenism of return". But does their outrage mean that we do not really reject "ecumenism of return"? Hardly!

I am reading a very interesting book about the origins and early development of the Eastern Catholic Churches in Eastern Europe. It is not a polemic, but is a serious scholarly study by a professional historian. Barbara Skinner, The Western Front of the Eastern Church: Uniate and Orthodox Conflict in Eighteenth-century Poland, Ukraine, Belarus, and Russia I think that an objective reading would confirm my point that Eastern Catholics are not Orthodox but were heavily Latinized and had to accept Roman Catholic doctrine including the "filioque" as a result of their union with Rome. . I should point out that I know that Eastern Catholics do not like being called Uniates, but that is what all scholarly histories of the movement call them to distinguish them from Orthodox. It comes from the origins of the Eastern Catholic Churches in the Union of Brest of 1596 and was never meant to be an insult.

Fr. John W. Morris

And yet it demonstrably came to be used as an insult in the last century, especially in the United States as a result of the creation of what became the OCA and ACROD.  Many words that now find usage as pejoratives did not begin life as such but are now considered an insult by those they address (for instance, "squaw" for an Amerind woman).  Outside of some academic discussions, it is often best and most charitable to refrain from calling someone a name they've asked you not use.


I have honored that request and have never referred to Eastern Catholics as Uniates on this site, but that is the title of a scholarly work on this subject.I cannot change the name of the book. I am not OCA or ACROD and know nothing on the personal level on their relations with Eastern Catholics. I have also had no exposure to the Eastern Catholics, so I know nothing about Eastern Catholics  except what I have read in history books all of which refer to Byzantine Rite Eastern Catholics as Uniates.
It offends me and many Orthodox when an Eastern Catholic calls their Church, "Orthodox in Communion with Rome," but they do not seem to extend to me and other like me in the Orthodox Church the same courtesy that I extend to them by not calling them Uniates.

Fr. John W. Morris

You do more than many, Father, by extending the courtesy of calling others what they wish to be called, and I thank you for it even if I am no longer an Eastern Catholic.  I have a number of uncles who are Ruthenian Catholic and I learned early on that one shouldn't call another a "U-word" although it was perfectly fine to use it in more academically inclined discussions.

As for what some ECs call themselves, that is on them, not you, of course, and it does you credit that you extend them a courtesy they do not return. Smiley

It is on me when it confuses they confuse the Faithful by offering them Communion and telling them that they are Orthodox when they are not. They first began to gain a following in the Middle East by offering Byzantine worship with much easier fasting traditions than are observed by the Orthodox Church. At that time, 1724, the Turks governed their subject peoples through their religion. A person could escape a fine or worse, from an Orthodox Bishop by joining the Eastern Catholics.

Fr. John W. Morris
Logged
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 3,049


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #196 on: December 19, 2013, 05:20:19 PM »

It offends me and many Orthodox when an Eastern Catholic calls their Church, "Orthodox in Communion with Rome," but they do not seem to extend to me and other like me in the Orthodox Church the same courtesy that I extend to them by not calling them Uniates.

Fr. John W. Morris

We extend the same courtesy by not using terms for you that you would find perjorative like "Schismatic".  We do not take offense that you use the term Catholic, you should take no offense if we use the term Orthodox.  In truth, however, in real life you will not see signs outside our churches that read "St. Michael's Orthodox Church in Communion with Rome".  They read St. Michael's Byzantine Catholic Church, or Greek Catholic Church, or Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church. If you walk into the church and ask people what they are the will respond: Byzantine Catholic, Melkite Catholic, Ukrainian Catholic.  The "Orthodox in Communion wit Rome" is an internet phenoma.  In my own Metropolia, due to the our split with ACROD, the tem Orthodox became a dirty word we excised from the English translation of our liturgy that we still have not replaced.
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #197 on: December 19, 2013, 05:27:12 PM »

But we, in large part, DO find "Orthodox in communion with Rome" to be as insulting as the U-term is to you - so much so that that I think it should be proscribed here as much as the "U-word" is. The saw cuts BOTH ways. That you care not to use this term is fine with me.
Logged

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

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 3,049


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #198 on: December 19, 2013, 05:33:49 PM »

I am not OCA or ACROD and know nothing on the personal level on their relations with Eastern Catholics. I have also had no exposure to the Eastern Catholics, so I know nothing about Eastern Catholics  except what I have read in history books all of which refer to Byzantine Rite Eastern Catholics as Uniates.

It is on me when it confuses they confuse the Faithful by offering them Communion and telling them that they are Orthodox when they are not. They first began to gain a following in the Middle East by offering Byzantine worship with much easier fasting traditions than are observed by the Orthodox Church. At that time, 1724, the Turks governed their subject peoples through their religion. A person could escape a fine or worse, from an Orthodox Bishop by joining the Eastern Catholics.

Fr. John W. Morris

You claim to know nothing about us and then go on to accuse us.  Let me guess you are a convert from Protestantism?  The split in Antioch of 1724 had everything to do with Greek domination of the native Arabs and nothing to do with fasts or fines.  You need to get yourself better books.

And Melkites communing Antiochians and Antiochians communing Melkites is common in the Middle East.
Logged

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

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 3,049


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #199 on: December 19, 2013, 05:36:57 PM »

But we, in large part, DO find "Orthodox in communion with Rome" to be as insulting as the U-term is to you - so much so that that I think it should be proscribed here as much as the "U-word" is. The saw cuts BOTH ways. That you care not to use this term is fine with me.

It is one thing to be insulted by what somebody calls you.  It is another to be insulted by what somebody else calls themselves. 
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,174



« Reply #200 on: December 19, 2013, 07:41:47 PM »

It offends me and many Orthodox when an Eastern Catholic calls their Church, "Orthodox in Communion with Rome," but they do not seem to extend to me and other like me in the Orthodox Church the same courtesy that I extend to them by not calling them Uniates.

Fr. John W. Morris

I don't think it's that simple. Many of us ECs (and some LCs of course) do have a very positive view of the Orthodox; but we nevertheless have to cope with the negative view held by many (most?) of our coreligionists.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
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: 38,135



« Reply #201 on: December 19, 2013, 08:34:28 PM »

I am not OCA or ACROD and know nothing on the personal level on their relations with Eastern Catholics. I have also had no exposure to the Eastern Catholics, so I know nothing about Eastern Catholics  except what I have read in history books all of which refer to Byzantine Rite Eastern Catholics as Uniates.

It is on me when it confuses they confuse the Faithful by offering them Communion and telling them that they are Orthodox when they are not. They first began to gain a following in the Middle East by offering Byzantine worship with much easier fasting traditions than are observed by the Orthodox Church. At that time, 1724, the Turks governed their subject peoples through their religion. A person could escape a fine or worse, from an Orthodox Bishop by joining the Eastern Catholics.

Fr. John W. Morris

You claim to know nothing about us and then go on to accuse us.  Let me guess you are a convert from Protestantism?  The split in Antioch of 1724 had everything to do with Greek domination of the native Arabs and nothing to do with fasts or fines.  You need to get yourself better books.

And Melkites communing Antiochians and Antiochians communing Melkites is common in the Middle East.
But Melkites.  No Ukrainian, Ruthenians, Greeks or Latins in submission to the Vatican.

Greek domination of the native Arabs came in reaction after 1724.
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
Moderated
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: 38,135



« Reply #202 on: December 19, 2013, 08:37:08 PM »

It offends me and many Orthodox when an Eastern Catholic calls their Church, "Orthodox in Communion with Rome," but they do not seem to extend to me and other like me in the Orthodox Church the same courtesy that I extend to them by not calling them Uniates.

Fr. John W. Morris

We extend the same courtesy by not using terms for you that you would find perjorative like "Schismatic".  We do not take offense that you use the term Catholic, you should take no offense if we use the term Orthodox.  In truth, however, in real life you will not see signs outside our churches that read "St. Michael's Orthodox Church in Communion with Rome".  They read St. Michael's Byzantine Catholic Church, or Greek Catholic Church, or Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church. If you walk into the church and ask people what they are the will respond: Byzantine Catholic, Melkite Catholic, Ukrainian Catholic.  The "Orthodox in Communion wit Rome" is an internet phenoma.  In my own Metropolia, due to the our split with ACROD, the tem Orthodox became a dirty word we excised from the English translation of our liturgy that we still have not replaced.
If heretics call us schismatics, what's the harm.  The "curses of heretics are blessings and the blessings of heretics are curses" and all that.

You can have Byzantine.
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
mike
Warned
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,522


« Reply #203 on: December 19, 2013, 08:39:32 PM »

This topic is awesome now that Papist has gone Greek.

You should be banned for reopening this.
Logged
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,174



« Reply #204 on: December 19, 2013, 08:48:24 PM »

If heretics call us schismatics, what's the harm.  The "curses of heretics are blessings and the blessings of heretics are curses" and all that.

I think I need to explain to you how ecumenism works ...

But that aside, if you're okay with us calling you "schismatics", then shouldn't you also be okay with us calling ourselves "Orthodox"?
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
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: 38,135



« Reply #205 on: December 19, 2013, 10:50:16 PM »

If heretics call us schismatics, what's the harm.  The "curses of heretics are blessings and the blessings of heretics are curses" and all that.

I think I need to explain to you how ecumenism works ...

But that aside, if you're okay with us calling you "schismatics", then shouldn't you also be okay with us calling ourselves "Orthodox"?
No, we have exclusive use of names proper to us.
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
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #206 on: December 19, 2013, 11:38:55 PM »

But we, in large part, DO find "Orthodox in communion with Rome" to be as insulting as the U-term is to you - so much so that that I think it should be proscribed here as much as the "U-word" is. The saw cuts BOTH ways. That you care not to use this term is fine with me.

It is one thing to be insulted by what somebody calls you.  It is another to be insulted by what somebody else calls themselves. 

Only in your world.
Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 1,177


« Reply #207 on: December 20, 2013, 01:39:56 AM »

If heretics call us schismatics, what's the harm.  The "curses of heretics are blessings and the blessings of heretics are curses" and all that.

I think I need to explain to you how ecumenism works ...

But that aside, if you're okay with us calling you "schismatics", then shouldn't you also be okay with us calling ourselves "Orthodox"?

Let me explain to you how ecumenism really works. The first principle of ecumenism is respect for the feelings of the group with which you are in dialogue. If you respect them, you strive not to offend them by the terms that you use. When in discussions with Eastern Catholics, I avoid the term "Uniate" because they have decided that it is offensive. You know that it offends us when someone calls himself Orthodox who is not in our Church. Melkites are not in the Orthodox Church. They are a Rite of the Catholic Church under the Pope. Therefore according to the real principles of ecumenism, you should respect our feelings and not call yourself Orthodox because that is the name of our Church and has a certain meaning to us. In Arabic, Melkites are called Catholic, not Orthodox.

Fr. John W. Morris
« Last Edit: December 20, 2013, 01:41:39 AM by frjohnmorris » Logged
JR
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: No idea
Jurisdiction: Athens
Posts: 381



« Reply #208 on: December 20, 2013, 04:51:49 AM »

If heretics call us schismatics, what's the harm.  The "curses of heretics are blessings and the blessings of heretics are curses" and all that.

I think I need to explain to you how ecumenism works ...

But that aside, if you're okay with us calling you "schismatics", then shouldn't you also be okay with us calling ourselves "Orthodox"?

Let me explain to you how ecumenism really works. The first principle of ecumenism is respect for the feelings of the group with which you are in dialogue. If you respect them, you strive not to offend them by the terms that you use. When in discussions with Eastern Catholics, I avoid the term "Uniate" because they have decided that it is offensive. You know that it offends us when someone calls himself Orthodox who is not in our Church. Melkites are not in the Orthodox Church. They are a Rite of the Catholic Church under the Pope. Therefore according to the real principles of ecumenism, you should respect our feelings and not call yourself Orthodox because that is the name of our Church and has a certain meaning to us. In Arabic, Melkites are called Catholic, not Orthodox.

Fr. John W. Morris

Actually the Melkites are a church of the Byzantine rite in Communion with the Pope, they are not a rite, but a church  Wink
Logged

"If you judge people, you have no time to love them".

Mother Teresa
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,174



« Reply #209 on: December 20, 2013, 08:50:53 AM »

Actually the Melkites are a church of the Byzantine rite in Communion with the Pope, they are not a rite, but a church  Wink

Well said. Smiley
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,174



« Reply #210 on: December 20, 2013, 08:53:32 AM »

But we, in large part, DO find "Orthodox in communion with Rome" to be as insulting as the U-term is to you - so much so that that I think it should be proscribed here as much as the "U-word" is. The saw cuts BOTH ways. That you care not to use this term is fine with me.

It is one thing to be insulted by what somebody calls you.  It is another to be insulted by what somebody else calls themselves. 

Only in your world.

Well, taking your "saw cuts both ways" (you have to be careful with that) a step further, shouldn't the following be against forum rules too, as infringing on our right to the words "Rome" and "Roman"?

I am

Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #211 on: December 20, 2013, 08:57:56 AM »

But we, in large part, DO find "Orthodox in communion with Rome" to be as insulting as the U-term is to you - so much so that that I think it should be proscribed here as much as the "U-word" is. The saw cuts BOTH ways. That you care not to use this term is fine with me.

It is one thing to be insulted by what somebody calls you.  It is another to be insulted by what somebody else calls themselves. 

Only in your world.

Well, taking your "saw cuts both ways" (you have to be careful with that) a step further, shouldn't the following be against forum rules too, as infringing on our right to the words "Rome" and "Roman"?

I am


Being a descendent of New Rome, capital of the empire longer than old Rome, myself, no.
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,174



« Reply #212 on: December 20, 2013, 10:20:58 AM »

Being a descendent of New Rome, capital of the empire longer than old Rome, myself, no.

Alright, but you're severely weakening your claim that we shouldn't call ourselves "Orthodox".
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
podkarpatska
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,944


Pokrov


WWW
« Reply #213 on: December 20, 2013, 10:50:40 AM »

If heretics call us schismatics, what's the harm.  The "curses of heretics are blessings and the blessings of heretics are curses" and all that.

I think I need to explain to you how ecumenism works ...

But that aside, if you're okay with us calling you "schismatics", then shouldn't you also be okay with us calling ourselves "Orthodox"?

Let me explain to you how ecumenism really works. The first principle of ecumenism is respect for the feelings of the group with which you are in dialogue. If you respect them, you strive not to offend them by the terms that you use. When in discussions with Eastern Catholics, I avoid the term "Uniate" because they have decided that it is offensive. You know that it offends us when someone calls himself Orthodox who is not in our Church. Melkites are not in the Orthodox Church. They are a Rite of the Catholic Church under the Pope. Therefore according to the real principles of ecumenism, you should respect our feelings and not call yourself Orthodox because that is the name of our Church and has a certain meaning to us. In Arabic, Melkites are called Catholic, not Orthodox.

Fr. John W. Morris

In Slovakia and Ukraine, the ECC are called "Greek Catholic" NEVER "Pravoslavnjy." Why is it so hard to get the point in English? My grandfathers knew the difference eighty years ago. When the non Greek Catholic churches entered Orthodoxy  in America they were often named "Russian (or Uhro-Russian or Carpatho-Russian) Orthodox Greek Catholic to distinguish them from the "real" Greek Catholics under Rome and from the "real" Russian ethnic churches , but over the years most are now simply called "Orthodox." When the Pennsylvania courts ruled that the Ruthenian Eparchy did not have exclusive rights to the term "Greek Catholic" in the early1950' s, they became Byzantine Catholic.

As I see it, from my own background, it is bull-headed, arrogant and offensive for an Eastern Catholic to call himself "Orthodox in communion with Rome", just as it is bull-headed, arrogant and offensive to for an Orthodox to argue that we shouldn't call the Church of Rome the Catholic Church. Carrying on and on about these things is like playground behavior befitting elementary school boys, not grown men. Tough to take any arguments structured in such a manner with any seriousness.

« Last Edit: December 20, 2013, 11:11:27 AM by podkarpatska » Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
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: 38,135



« Reply #214 on: December 20, 2013, 10:50:51 AM »

Actually the Melkites are a church of the Byzantine rite in Communion with the Pope, they are not a rite, but a church  Wink

Well said. Smiley
I'm not sure how old Fr. Morris is, but he might predate that change.
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
Moderated
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: 38,135



« Reply #215 on: December 20, 2013, 10:51:57 AM »

Being a descendent of New Rome, capital of the empire longer than old Rome, myself, no.

Alright, but you're severely weakening your claim that we shouldn't call ourselves "Orthodox".
How's that?: he's actually a descendant of New Rome.
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
Alpo
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Jerkodox
Posts: 7,040



« Reply #216 on: December 20, 2013, 10:53:01 AM »



I'm fascinated by the fact that a pope has similar glasses that I had in high school.

This topic is awesome now that Papist has gone Greek.

You should be banned for reopening this.

Always a pleasure. Kiss

Except that I didn't. Too bad. How awesome would that have been.
« Last Edit: December 20, 2013, 10:57:23 AM by Alpo » Logged

Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,404


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #217 on: December 20, 2013, 12:32:10 PM »

Carrying on and on about these things is like playground behavior befitting elementary school boys, not grown men. Tough to take any arguments structured in such a manner with any seriousness.


You are probably correct. Call us Catholics, Roman Catholics, Greek Catholics, Byzantine Catholics, or even the "U-word." Who cares? We are Christians loving, worshiping, and serving Christ.
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,174



« Reply #218 on: December 20, 2013, 01:31:55 PM »

Carrying on and on about these things is like playground behavior befitting elementary school boys, not grown men. Tough to take any arguments structured in such a manner with any seriousness.

You are probably correct. Call us Catholics, Roman Catholics, Greek Catholics, Byzantine Catholics, or even the "U-word." Who cares? We are Christians loving, worshiping, and serving Christ.

Well "Roman Catholics" is generally a shortened form of "Roman-Rite Catholics". So while it's not an offensive term, it's incorrect if applied to Greek Catholics.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Alpo
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Jerkodox
Posts: 7,040



« Reply #219 on: December 20, 2013, 01:54:05 PM »

Carrying on and on about these things is like playground behavior befitting elementary school boys, not grown men. Tough to take any arguments structured in such a manner with any seriousness.

You are probably correct. Call us Catholics, Roman Catholics, Greek Catholics, Byzantine Catholics, or even the "U-word." Who cares? We are Christians loving, worshiping, and serving Christ.

Well "Roman Catholics" is generally a shortened form of "Roman-Rite Catholics".

Most of the people are not aware of Eastern Catholics. Thus "Roman Catholics" is generally something like "the folks with old rituals and that pope in Rome".
Logged

Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,404


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #220 on: December 20, 2013, 03:06:41 PM »

Carrying on and on about these things is like playground behavior befitting elementary school boys, not grown men. Tough to take any arguments structured in such a manner with any seriousness.

You are probably correct. Call us Catholics, Roman Catholics, Greek Catholics, Byzantine Catholics, or even the "U-word." Who cares? We are Christians loving, worshiping, and serving Christ.

Well "Roman Catholics" is generally a shortened form of "Roman-Rite Catholics".

Most of the people are not aware of Eastern Catholics. Thus "Roman Catholics" is generally something like "the folks with old rituals and that pope in Rome".
That's what I was thinking.
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
frjohnmorris
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 1,177


« Reply #221 on: December 20, 2013, 03:26:51 PM »

If heretics call us schismatics, what's the harm.  The "curses of heretics are blessings and the blessings of heretics are curses" and all that.

I think I need to explain to you how ecumenism works ...

But that aside, if you're okay with us calling you "schismatics", then shouldn't you also be okay with us calling ourselves "Orthodox"?

Let me explain to you how ecumenism really works. The first principle of ecumenism is respect for the feelings of the group with which you are in dialogue. If you respect them, you strive not to offend them by the terms that you use. When in discussions with Eastern Catholics, I avoid the term "Uniate" because they have decided that it is offensive. You know that it offends us when someone calls himself Orthodox who is not in our Church. Melkites are not in the Orthodox Church. They are a Rite of the Catholic Church under the Pope. Therefore according to the real principles of ecumenism, you should respect our feelings and not call yourself Orthodox because that is the name of our Church and has a certain meaning to us. In Arabic, Melkites are called Catholic, not Orthodox.

Fr. John W. Morris

Actually the Melkites are a church of the Byzantine rite in Communion with the Pope, they are not a rite, but a church  Wink

Whatever the Melkites  are they are not Orthodox. The Melkites certainly do not have the right to self-rule that an autocephalous Church has within Orthodoxy, because by being in Communion with the Pope they recognize as valid the decisions of the 1st Vatican Council which gives all authority within the Catholic Church to the Pope. Orthodox do not recognize the papal claims to universal jurisdiction and infallibility. If the Melkites  do not accept the teachings of the Catholic Church, then why are they in Communion with Rome? I am not trying to offend or insult the Melkites, or any other Eastern Catholic group. I am just calling for honesty. If the Melkites were really Orthodox, they could not accept the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church on the authority of the Pope. When a Melkite Patriarch who has voiced some objections to Vatican 1 visited Pope Pius IX, the Pope ordered his guards to force the Patriarch to kneel before him and pushed his head down to the floor with his foot. No Orthodox Patriarch would take that kind of humiliation.

Fr. John W. Morris
Logged
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,174



« Reply #222 on: December 20, 2013, 04:15:01 PM »

Whatever the Melkites  are they are not Orthodox. The Melkites certainly do not have the right to self-rule that an autocephalous Church has within Orthodoxy, because by being in Communion with the Pope they recognize as valid the decisions of the 1st Vatican Council which gives all authority within the Catholic Church to the Pope. Orthodox do not recognize the papal claims to universal jurisdiction and infallibility. If the Melkites  do not accept the teachings of the Catholic Church, then why are they in Communion with Rome? I am not trying to offend or insult the Melkites, or any other Eastern Catholic group. I am just calling for honesty. If the Melkites were really Orthodox, they could not accept the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church on the authority of the Pope. When a Melkite Patriarch who has voiced some objections to Vatican 1 visited Pope Pius IX, the Pope ordered his guards to force the Patriarch to kneel before him and pushed his head down to the floor with his foot. No Orthodox Patriarch would take that kind of humiliation.

Fr. John W. Morris

It seems clear to me, Father, that you are acting as your own worst enemy: when you say that Patriarch Gregory II wasn't "Orthodox in communion with Rome" because of atrocious behavior by Pope Pius IX, you're bound to lose even the people who appreciated the good arguments you put forward earlier.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
frjohnmorris
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 1,177


« Reply #223 on: December 20, 2013, 04:30:05 PM »

Whatever the Melkites  are they are not Orthodox. The Melkites certainly do not have the right to self-rule that an autocephalous Church has within Orthodoxy, because by being in Communion with the Pope they recognize as valid the decisions of the 1st Vatican Council which gives all authority within the Catholic Church to the Pope. Orthodox do not recognize the papal claims to universal jurisdiction and infallibility. If the Melkites  do not accept the teachings of the Catholic Church, then why are they in Communion with Rome? I am not trying to offend or insult the Melkites, or any other Eastern Catholic group. I am just calling for honesty. If the Melkites were really Orthodox, they could not accept the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church on the authority of the Pope. When a Melkite Patriarch who has voiced some objections to Vatican 1 visited Pope Pius IX, the Pope ordered his guards to force the Patriarch to kneel before him and pushed his head down to the floor with his foot. No Orthodox Patriarch would take that kind of humiliation.

Fr. John W. Morris

It seems clear to me, Father, that you are acting as your own worst enemy: when you say that Patriarch Gregory II wasn't "Orthodox in communion with Rome" because of atrocious behavior by Pope Pius IX, you're bound to lose even the people who appreciated the good arguments you put forward earlier.

That is a matter of opinion. This incident shows that the Melkites are not Orthodox.  The Melkites stayed in Communion with Rome despite the public humiliation of their Patriarch by one of the most power hungry Popes in modern history. My argument is that you cannot be Orthodox and accept the dogmatic decrees of the 1st Vatican Council.

Fr. John W. Morris
Logged
biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Warned
Hoplitarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 14,675



WWW
« Reply #224 on: December 29, 2013, 05:35:22 PM »

I will utter things which have been kept secret, from the foundation of the world (Matt13:35)

Here are some of the images that John describes in his Book of Revelation.
Every image is 3 miles across, and oriented north/south.
Everything is in plain view, for those with eyes to see.

http://youtu.be/kFFLme4b0WE

All of the worlds religions will come to know the truth.



Uh... What?
Logged
Tags: Catholic Answers Forum Superman Eastern Catholic Church Universal jurisdiction papal claims authority ecclesiology 
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 »   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 0.185 seconds with 72 queries.