Topic: Do Romans and Orthodox wish Eastern Catholics didn't exist?

[Nigula Qian Zishi]

"Catholics in communion with Rome", "Papal Catholic", and things like that sound redundant with this definition, and shouldn't be used, as the terms set forth are already clear enough.

If those terms should not be used, then why is this forum called "Orthodox-Catholic (in Communion with Rome) Discussion"? God Bless!

[Mor Ephrem]

Because some may not see the hyphen for what it is...a separation of Orthodox (Catholics) and (Roman and Eastern) Catholics.  They may see it as simply "Orthodox Catholic".  But since the intent is the former, we have inserted the expression in parenthesis.  But in common speech, no one takes the effort to say "Catholics in communion with Rome" or "Papal Catholics" because the common use of that word is understood by all.

[emmaus]

Serge,  

If it helps, I have never thought of you as an 'Orthodox' Christian out of conviction--in the sense of the martyrs and saints--but by default. For certain, you are very Catholic-minded, culturally Anglo-Saxon American, and no fair- minded person would ever accuse you of having an Orthodox mindset.

And you certainly are not Russian...not even close.

I also believe all of the above applies to the majority of the members of this online community, which begs the question......?


rtss

Huh?  Whadidja just say to Serge?  And the majority of the members of this online community, rtss?  I'm half-Polish/half-Ukie and first-generation American on my mother's side.  My wife was born in L'viv.  I'm Ukrainian/Ruthenian Byzantine Catholic-turned-Orthodox--out of sincere conviction rather than continuing to be painfully afflicted with spiritual schizophrenia by being in the middle, neither fully one or the other--some 25 years ago at least.  Doesn't any of this count?

Hypo-Ortho

Sorry I upset you, but this is--more or less--a "tongue and cheek site."

Who takes it seriously, as an Orthodox Christian site?

It looks like I also rubbed salt into open wounds.

Take care.

rtss  

[Orthodoc]

[The thing that started this whole name problem in the first place, if I recall correctly, was the insistence of one or more Orthodox Catholics on calling themselves simply Catholics. ]

Thats not how it started at all.  Not one Orthodox Catholic on this board had ever insisted on identifying themselves as simply Catholics.  Including myself.  What we did object to, and still do, is having  the Roman Church use the term  exclusively for themselves.  I, nor anyone  want to deprive them of their Catholic identity.   However, we demand the same right for ourselves.  For it implies that some where along the way we left the Catholic and Apostolic Church we profess belief in every time we say the Creed.

What the hell is so redundent about putting an indentifying word in front of the word Catholic?  We as Orthodox Christians have a legal, moral, and theological right to define ourselves as Catholics.  It's as simple as that.

If this is truly and Orthodox Catholic site then why should we be forced to accept Roman Catholic definitions?  

It still amazes me how some one can profess love and loyality to the Roman Church and its Pope and then claim it is either redundant or insulting to identified with either that Church or its leader when defining their Catholicity.  

Orthodoc

[Robert]

Serge,  

If it helps, I have never thought of you as an 'Orthodox' Christian out of conviction--in the sense of the martyrs and saints--but by default. For certain, you are very Catholic-minded, culturally Anglo-Saxon American, and no fair- minded person would ever accuse you of having an Orthodox mindset.

And you certainly are not Russian...not even close.

I also believe all of the above applies to the majority of the members of this online community, which begs the question......?


rtss

Huh?  Whadidja just say to Serge?  And the majority of the members of this online community, rtss?  I'm half-Polish/half-Ukie and first-generation American on my mother's side.  My wife was born in L'viv.  I'm Ukrainian/Ruthenian Byzantine Catholic-turned-Orthodox--out of sincere conviction rather than continuing to be painfully afflicted with spiritual schizophrenia by being in the middle, neither fully one or the other--some 25 years ago at least.  Doesn't any of this count?

Hypo-Ortho

Sorry I upset you, but this is--more or less--a "tongue and cheek site."

Who takes it seriously, as an Orthodox Christian site?

It looks like I also rubbed salt into open wounds.

Take care.

rtss  

Rtss,

Suggestions as to how we can make this site serious? And less "tongue in cheek"?

Thanks,

Bobby

[Schultz]

It amazes you just as much as it amazes others that the use of a mere social convention agreed upon by the vast majority of society can upset you so much.  

Welcome to the real world.  Isn't it different?

[Orthodoc]

Just read some of the threads today.  Where both the Roman Catholic and Eastern Catholic Canons were quoted.
This is a perfect example of how different Roman Catholics and Orthodox Catholics see things.

According to Roman Catholic beliefs - If a person either rejects the authority of the Pope or any of the dogma he proclaims, protects, and upholds then he ceases being a Catholic and is excommunicated.

According to Orthodox Catholic beliefs - If a Roman Catholic  rejects Papal authority and dogma to become an Orthodox Catholic, he has not left the Catholic Church but has joined a more ancient branch of it.  He has fulfilled his Catholicity by believing that which was believed by the majority of Christians when the Church was still basically whole.  

If we are, for the sake of being PC going to use either RC terminology or western standards..... than this is not the Orthodox Catholic web site it claims to be.  It's as simple as that.

Orthodoc

[Schultz]

Orthodoc,

If someonesay, a tourist, asked you where the "nearest Catholic church" was,  where would you point them to?  Or would you point them anywhere at all and rather go into a semantic argument on them because this person is trying to usurp your catholicity by meaning "Roman Catholic" when he says "Catholic church".

We are not in Turkey, nor are we in Russia or Ukraine or in the East.  We are in the West, indeed "THE" West.  And here in the West, when one says "Catholic", one means "Roman Catholic".  No one is trying to take away the catholicity of your Church by saying so, especially none of us here.  For the sake of peace, please, brother, let it drop.  Does it really shake the foundations of your faith that much, if at all?

[Orthodoc]

If someonesay, a tourist, asked you where the "nearest Catholic church" was, where would you point them to? Or would you point them anywhere at all and rather go into a semantic argument on them because this person is trying to usurp your catholicity by meaning "Roman Catholic" when he says "Catholic church".]

I get so tired of answering this Roman Catholic response.
And if I asked those same people if they are Roman Catholic, those that are, would answer yes without hesitation  rather than  than getting insulted and answering -  'No, we are simply Catholics'.  So, what is your point exactly?

If you ask those same people if either the Mormon Church or the Church of Scientology are Christians 99% would answer yes because they have the word Church in their title.  Based on that, do you believe Mormons or Church of Scientology are Christians because the vast majority of people would answer yes?
   
[ Does it really shake the foundations of your faith that much, if at all?]

It most certainly does.  More than you as a Roman Catholic can fully understand.  It is terminology that has been used against my church by the RCC for centuries  by falsely  teaching that those of us who  identify ourselves as Orthodox separated ourselves from the Pope and the Catholic Church.   

You have stated that you are in this forum as a Roman Catholic to learn.   Then by all means do so.  If there is a thread you either don't like or don't agree with then by all means don't read it or access  it.  But please don't  bring your standards as a Roman Catholic in here and either complain or try and enforce them on us.

Orthodoc
   
   

[Schultz]

Orthodoc,

I cannot enforce anything.  I have no authority to do so.  Nor am I the one complaining.  You seem to be the one complaining at the drop of a hat whenever anyone uses the term "Catholic" to describe anything other than your own narrow definition.  But of course, what do I know?  I'm just a stupid Roman Catholic; how nice of you to throw that back in my face, particularly when it has little to do with the discussion.  My Evangelical future-father-in-law, who has no love for the Roman Church (happy?), would say the same thing I just said regarding the use of the word "Catholic".

And, my friend, it is difficult to learn when the only thing discussed is your pre-occupation with one single word.  The only other thread with any posts involves "Orthodox vs. orthodox".  Again with the words.  The only thing I seem to learn here is that after 1000 years, East and West still can't come to a single language to discuss their differences, even when they both speak the same language, presumably.  If a single social convention can shake the foundations of your faith, then you need to get off the damned computer and pray some more.  I'm sorry if I offend you or anyone else by that statement, but that's how I see it.

Maybe it's time I did that as well.

[Anastasios]

According to Orthodox Catholic beliefs - If a Roman Catholic  rejects Papal authority and dogma to become an Orthodox Catholic, he has not left the Catholic Church but has joined a more ancient branch of it.  He has fulfilled his Catholicity by believing that which was believed by the majority of Christians when the Church was still basically whole.  

Orthodoc

Orthodoc,

That is a totally faulty analogy.

You argue that:

A. If a Roman Catholic rejects Roman teaching, the Roman Church views him as a heretic.
B. If a Roman Catholic rejects Roman teaching, the Orthodox (Catholic) Church views him as coming to the truth.

Therefore, in your conclusion, there is a big difference between Roman Catholics and Orthodox Catholics.

Your analogy is faulty because a true analogy would be:

If a Roman Catholic rejects Roman teaching, the Roman Church views him as a heretic.

If an Orthodox Catholic rejects Orthodox teaching, the Orthodox Church views him as a heretic.

The teaching is exactly the same.

In Christ,

anastasios

[Anastasios]

What I actually wrote was that, in the English language, Catholic refers to those Christians under/in communion with the Pope.  To say this does not deny the Catholicity of the Orthodox; it is just a concession to common usage.  For clarity, however, one is encouraged to write out Roman or Byzantine or Armenian or whatever Catholic.  "Catholics in communion with Rome", "Papal Catholic", and things like that sound redundant with this definition, and shouldn't be used, as the terms set forth are already clear enough.  


Orthodox Christians are always allowed to call themselves "Orthodox Catholics" or "Greek Orthodox Catholics" or "Ethiopian Orthodox Catholics" or whatever, because they are "Catholic".  The thing that started this whole name problem in the first place, if I recall correctly, was the insistence of one or more Orthodox Catholics on calling themselves simply Catholics.  This is confusing to those used to the English language, and the bickering that ensued about the right of the Orthodox to use that term was just silly.  No one denied that the Orthodox are Catholic, but to simply call oneself a Catholic would be confusing.  

I agree with Phil but I'd like to remind him that the reason that the forum is called the "Orthodox-Catholic (in Communion with Rome) Forum" is a concession to Orthodoc *personally* so that everyone is clear on who is who.

I'd also like to let Orthodoc know personally that his comments about people "forcing" him to use terminology and therefore this "maybe not being the board it claims to be" are not appreciated, especially since the Forum name was specifically created in response to his request, and because no one is forcing him to use any term, but merely responding to his insistance on using his terms (You have the right to use your terms, and people have the right to argue with you for using the terms!), and because he is already this quickly questioning the board as being false to its mission statement.

In Christ,

anastasios
ADMINISTRATOR

[The young fogey]

If you did the cabbie experiment in New York with this semantic game, if you asked for the biggest Catholic church you'd end up at St Patrick's. Not St Nicholas, not Pokrova, not 'Synod' (ROCOR HQ), not the Greeks. The biggest Orthodox church? You'd wind up at a synagogue somewhere, maybe in Brooklyn. In the unlikely event the cabbie did have some idea what you really meant, you could end up anywhere from a Ukrainian Catholic church in the East Village to St Vartan's Armenian Cathedral. Apostolic? Either the cabbie would have no idea what you're talking about, or, if he's black, you'd probably end up in Harlem at some Protestant establishment.

I've written before (sigh) that I have no problem with people writing Orthodox Catholic or Oriental Orthodox here - the capitalized qualifiers make it clear to this informed readership what the writer means.

Mor Ephrem has posted the link to the rules and they're fair.

[SamB]

Let's wrap it up, please.

The chronic fixation on terminology omnipresent in the entire board can best be summed up so.

(tongue in cheek, audience)

In IC XC
Samer

[Orthodoc]

[A. If a Roman Catholic rejects Roman teaching, the Roman Church views him as a heretic.
B. If a Roman Catholic rejects Roman teaching, the Orthodox (Catholic) Church views him as coming to the truth.]

Anastasios:  b. Is not what I said at all.  What I said was  (from my post) -

According to Orthodox Catholic beliefs - If a Roman Catholic  rejects Papal authority and dogma to become an Orthodox Catholic, he has not left the Catholic Church but has joined a more ancient branch of it.  He has fulfilled his Catholicity by believing that which was believed by the majority of Christians when the Church was still basically whole.  

The implication is not on truth but on the fact that he has not given up is Catholicity he has just reverted to a more ancient forum.  That is the whole point of the post.

[If a Roman Catholic rejects Roman teaching, the Roman Church views him as a heretic.

If an Orthodox Catholic rejects Orthodox teaching, the Orthodox Church views him as a heretic.]

We are not discussing who is or who isn't a heretic here.  We are discussing who is or who isn't a Catholic.  
I don't understand your response at all Anastasios.

[Therefore, in your conclusion, there is a big difference between Roman Catholics and Orthodox Catholics.]

In my opinion, and the opinion of most Orthodox Catholics I know, there is Anastasios.


[I'd also like to let Orthodoc know personally that his comments about people "forcing" him to use terminology and therefore this "maybe not being the board it claims to be" are not appreciated, ]

What I said was -

If we are, for the sake of being PC going to use either RC terminology or western standards..... than this is not the Orthodox Catholic web site it claims to be.  It's as simple as that.
Where do I say I being forced to do anything?  I will continue to identify myself by what I am...an Orthodox Catholic.  Other Catholics will be either 'Roman' or Eastern'.

Orthodoc

[Anastasios]

[The implication is not on truth but on the fact that he has not given up is Catholicity he has just reverted to a more ancient forum.  That is the whole point of the post.]

Right, but that's not the implication I got from reading the post. You pitted Roman Catholics against Orthodox based on their views of a Roman Catholic who has rejected Roman teachings.

[If a Roman Catholic rejects Roman teaching, the Roman Church views him as a heretic.

If an Orthodox Catholic rejects Orthodox teaching, the Orthodox Church views him as a heretic.]

We are not discussing who is or who isn't a heretic here.  We are discussing who is or who isn't a Catholic.  
I don't understand your response at all Anastasios.

I'm sorry, but I totally don't understand your post then.

[In my opinion, and the opinion of most Orthodox Catholics I know, there is Anastasios.]

Right, there is a difference, Orthodoc, but we are talking about the conclusion reached from your analogy, not about whether in general there is a difference.

[What I said was -

If we are, for the sake of being PC going to use either RC terminology or western standards..... than this is not the Orthodox Catholic web site it claims to be.  It's as simple as that.
Where do I say I being forced to do anything?  I will continue to identify myself by what I am...an Orthodox Catholic.  Other Catholics will be either 'Roman' or Eastern'.

Orthodoc]

The implication is that you WILL be forced to use the terms, and that by so doing, this board will not be Orthodox.  I am saying no one is going to be compelled to use any term they don't want to, but that will have to defend their use or non use of whatever term they employ.

Sorry Orthodoc if we are talking past each other.  I just got very confused with the analogy.

In Christ,

anastasios

[Dan Lauffer]

Is purgatory a dogma?  I didn't think it was.

Dan Lauffer

[Dan Lauffer]

Orthodoc,

"Are the Eastern Catholics being faithful to the teachings of  Scripture when claim to accept Orthodox theology while recognizing as their earthy head a bishop who proclaims, protects, and upholds a different theology?  What about  I Corinthians 1:10 Dan -

I Corinthians 1:10:  [Caps are mine to emphasize)  Now I plead with you brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, THAT YOU ALL SPEAK THE SAME THING, and that there be no divisions among you, BUT THAT YOU BE PERFECTLY JOINED TOGETHER IN THE SAME MIND AND IN THE SAME JUDGEMENT."

**Of course.**

Dan Lauffer

[Anastasios]

  Dear friends,

I am locking this thread.  My reason for doing so is that it has got wild and wandered far from its original intent.

Some people have posted posts waiting for an answer, or have posted something specific that could be furthered in constructive dialogue.  So I invite whoever wishes to open a new thread IF it the subject has a specific intent/purpose.  Two examples are: if Orthodoc wishes to discuss his analogy with me further, he may respond in a new thread, or if someone else wants to address Dan Lauffer's last post on purgatory, let him do it in a new thread.

Thanks for your cooperation!  I enjoyed this exciting thread even though it got a little out of hand!

In Christ,

anastasios
ADMINISTRATOR