OrthodoxChristianity.net
August 28, 2014, 09:17:10 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 2 3 All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Russian Church wants "concrete steps" from Vatican to make Patriarch-Pope meetin  (Read 13560 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« on: December 08, 2009, 04:57:02 PM »

http://www.interfax-religion.com/?act=news&div=6712

07 December 2009, 11:56

Russian Church wants "concrete steps" from Vatican to make Patriarch-Pope meeting possible

Moscow, December 7, Interfax - The Russian Orthodox Church is not against a meeting between its head, Patriarch Kirill, and Pope Benedict XVI but expects the Vatican to "take "concrete steps to show that there is a desire to be cooperative," the Russian Church's foreign relations chief said in a television program on Saturday.

"Our position has remained unchanged for many years: we have never excluded the possibility of such a meeting. So said the late Patriarch Alexy II and so says the incumbent Patriarch, Kirill," head of the Moscow Patriarchate Department for External Church Relations Archbishop Hilarion of Volokolamsk told Rossiya television.

But such a meeting needs good preparation "so that the current tension is eliminated," he said.

"We expect the Vatican, the Roman Catholic Church, to take concrete steps to show that there is a desire to be cooperative and heal all the wounds that were inflicted in the extremely harrowing period of the early 90s," the Archbishop said.

In that period, more than 500 Orthodox churches in Ukraine "were forcibly seized by Greek Catholics and the Orthodox believes were ousted from them".

"We are suggesting concrete solutions to the problems that exist," he said.

Archbishop Hilarion also commented on a recent decision by Russian President Dmitry Medvedev to seek diplomatic relations between Russia and the Vatican.

"This move on the part of the Russian state deserves nothing but being hailed," he said.

At the same time, there are problems in relations between the Russian Orthodox and Catholic Churches "that need to be solved in a completely different way and by different means, that cannot be solved merely by establishing diplomatic relations," he said.

"Above all, it is the problems of Western Ukraine, where there remains tension in relations between the Orthodox and Greek Catholics," Archbishop Hilarion said.


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

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,182


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #1 on: December 09, 2009, 10:48:51 AM »

^ I wonder if any of the churches that were "stolen" were Eastern Catholic Churches originally and then were seized and given to the RO Church during the the rule of communism.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
Pravoslavbob
Section Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 3,181


St. Sisoes the Great


« Reply #2 on: December 09, 2009, 11:10:23 AM »

^ I don't think there's much doubt about that.  On the other hand, it doesn't look like either side was innocent in this conflict in the early '90's, though I must confess that I am pretty foggy on the details.  I have heard that the Eastern Catholics took churches that had never been Eastern Catholic before as well.
« Last Edit: December 09, 2009, 11:13:03 AM by Pravoslavbob » Logged

Religion is a disease, and Orthodoxy is its cure.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
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: 37,453



« Reply #3 on: December 09, 2009, 11:45:56 AM »

^ I wonder if any of the churches that were "stolen" were Eastern Catholic Churches originally and then were seized and given to the RO Church during the the rule of communism.

I remember a Time or Newsweek article when communism was loosing its grip.  Some priest, stating that he "hear[d] the confessions" and that he "kn[e]w what [his] people believed," being installed in a brand new Church built by the ROC, began to commemorate the pope of Rome.   I wonder where that Church ended up, because he was still in possession of it after seizing it with false pretenses.

Then there is the problem that the Polish government, which invaded and occupied Galicia in the interwar period seized Orthodox properties as "restitution" for the Russian occupation, and turned them over to the Vatican.

Then there is the problem of Austria-Hungary denying the Back to Orthodoxy movement going on under their noses in Sub-carpathia.  That is when they weren't trying the Orthodox for treason.

And of course then there are the Churches which were forced into "union" under Brest and Uzhhorod.

And then there are the churches the Vatican built on the demolished Orthodox Churches, e.g. St. George Cathedral in Lviv.
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
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,182


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #4 on: December 09, 2009, 11:47:29 AM »



And of course then there are the Churches which were forced into "union" under Brest and Uzhhorod.

Still upset about these are we?  Wink
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
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: 37,453



« Reply #5 on: December 09, 2009, 12:28:45 PM »



And of course then there are the Churches which were forced into "union" under Brest and Uzhhorod.

Still upset about these are we?  Wink

Gotta pull weeds up by the root.

I've always been puzzled on how Latin Poles were so crazy about their saint Josephat Kuntsevych.  It only seems recently that the more extreme Ukrainians who want to be more Ultramontanist than the Vatican have picked up his cause. I seem to have found the reason why:
Religion and nationality in Western Ukraine: the Greek Catholic Church and the Ruthenians National Movement 1867-1900, By John-Paul Himka "The Canonization of Iosafat Kuntsevych and Its Reception in Galica."
http://books.google.com/books?id=j2yhkvCx60IC&pg=PA28&dq=canonization+of+Kuntsevych&cd=1#v=onepage&q=canonization%20of%20Kuntsevych&f=false
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
HandmaidenofGod
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the USA (Ecumenical Patriarch)
Posts: 3,397


O Holy St. Demetrius pray to God for us!


« Reply #6 on: December 09, 2009, 12:37:00 PM »

May the Lord's will be done!
Logged

"For I know the thoughts that I think toward you, says the LORD, thoughts of peace and not of evil, to give you a future and a hope." Jer 29:11
Orthodoc
Supporter & Defender Of Orthodoxy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 2,526

Those who ignore history tend to repeat it.


« Reply #7 on: December 09, 2009, 01:26:08 PM »



And of course then there are the Churches which were forced into "union" under Brest and Uzhhorod.

Still upset about these are we?  Wink

Darn right we are and will continue to be. 

"Those who ignore history enable it to be repeated".  Especially the RCC which has a 1000 year old history of lies, deception, and broken promises where the Orthodox are concerned.

Your comment seems funny coming from a person who states here that the 'Quadripartite Agreement/Comission should have been burned.  Thereby preventing each parish from deciding what church they wanted to belong to.  Which is what happened in the end.  You defend what happened in the FORCED UNION of 1596 and then also defend what ultimately happened in the 1990's.  One can only surmise from this that you condone the use of force by RCC's to replenish their flock every time they lose adherents because of their deceit and treachory.  Examples:  The Protestant Reformation of the 1600's (forced union of Brest) and the use of force in the 1990's (when the RCC is closing parishes in leaps & bounds to pay for legal costs and LACK OF ATTENDANCE).

Orthodoc

Orthodoc
Logged

Oh Lord, Save thy people and bless thine inheritance.
Grant victory to the Orthodox Christians over their adversaries.
And by virtue of thy Cross preserve thy habitation.
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,182


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #8 on: December 09, 2009, 01:26:59 PM »



And of course then there are the Churches which were forced into "union" under Brest and Uzhhorod.

Still upset about these are we?  Wink

Darn right we are and will continue to be. 

"Those who ignore history enable it to be repeated".  Especially the RCC which has a 1000 year old history of lies, deception, and broken promises where the Orthodox are concerned.

Your comment seems funny coming from a person who states here that the 'Quadripartite Agreement/Comission should have been burned.  Thereby preventing each parish from deciding what church they wanted to belong to.  Which is what happened in the end.  You defend what happened in the FORCED UNION of 1596 and then also defend what ultimately happened in the 1990's.  One can only surmise from this that you condone the use of force by RCC's to replenish their flock every time they lose adherents because of their deceit and treachory.  Examples:  The Protestant Reformation of the 1600's (forced union of Brest) and the use of force in the 1990's (when the RCC is closing parishes in leaps & bounds to pay for legal costs and LACK OF ATTENDANCE).

Orthodoc

Orthodoc
You are an angry man.  Cheesy
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
scamandrius
Crusher of Secrets; House Lannister
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek by desire; Antiochian by necessity
Posts: 5,945



« Reply #9 on: December 09, 2009, 03:03:11 PM »



And of course then there are the Churches which were forced into "union" under Brest and Uzhhorod.

Still upset about these are we?  Wink

You seem to be pretty upset over EO churches being handed back to the EO that are currently controlled by Latin Rite or Byzantine Rite Catholics.
Logged

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

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

What earthly joy remains untouched by grief?--St. John Damascene
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,182


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #10 on: December 09, 2009, 03:05:20 PM »



And of course then there are the Churches which were forced into "union" under Brest and Uzhhorod.

Still upset about these are we?  Wink

You seem to be pretty upset over EO churches being handed back to the EO that are currently controlled by Latin Rite or Byzantine Rite Catholics.
Only the ones that rightfully belong to my Catholic Bretheren in Eastern Europe.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
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: 37,453



« Reply #11 on: December 09, 2009, 03:31:33 PM »



And of course then there are the Churches which were forced into "union" under Brest and Uzhhorod.

Still upset about these are we?  Wink

Darn right we are and will continue to be. 

"Those who ignore history enable it to be repeated".  Especially the RCC which has a 1000 year old history of lies, deception, and broken promises where the Orthodox are concerned.

Your comment seems funny coming from a person who states here that the 'Quadripartite Agreement/Comission should have been burned.  Thereby preventing each parish from deciding what church they wanted to belong to.  Which is what happened in the end.  You defend what happened in the FORCED UNION of 1596 and then also defend what ultimately happened in the 1990's.  One can only surmise from this that you condone the use of force by RCC's to replenish their flock every time they lose adherents because of their deceit and treachory.  Examples:  The Protestant Reformation of the 1600's (forced union of Brest) and the use of force in the 1990's (when the RCC is closing parishes in leaps & bounds to pay for legal costs and LACK OF ATTENDANCE).

Orthodoc

Orthodoc
You are an angry man.  Cheesy

http://www.aug.edu/augusta/iconography/webmuseum/cleanseTempleElGreco.1600.jpg
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
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,182


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #12 on: December 09, 2009, 03:46:51 PM »



And of course then there are the Churches which were forced into "union" under Brest and Uzhhorod.

Still upset about these are we?  Wink

Darn right we are and will continue to be. 

"Those who ignore history enable it to be repeated".  Especially the RCC which has a 1000 year old history of lies, deception, and broken promises where the Orthodox are concerned.

Your comment seems funny coming from a person who states here that the 'Quadripartite Agreement/Comission should have been burned.  Thereby preventing each parish from deciding what church they wanted to belong to.  Which is what happened in the end.  You defend what happened in the FORCED UNION of 1596 and then also defend what ultimately happened in the 1990's.  One can only surmise from this that you condone the use of force by RCC's to replenish their flock every time they lose adherents because of their deceit and treachory.  Examples:  The Protestant Reformation of the 1600's (forced union of Brest) and the use of force in the 1990's (when the RCC is closing parishes in leaps & bounds to pay for legal costs and LACK OF ATTENDANCE).

Orthodoc

Orthodoc
You are an angry man.  Cheesy

http://www.aug.edu/augusta/iconography/webmuseum/cleanseTempleElGreco.1600.jpg
Well, at least Jesus' anger was righteous.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
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: 37,453



« Reply #13 on: December 09, 2009, 04:10:19 PM »

Well, at least Jesus' anger was righteous.
So was St. Alexei Kabalyuk's
« Last Edit: December 09, 2009, 04:19:32 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
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,182


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #14 on: December 09, 2009, 04:34:22 PM »

Well, at least Jesus' anger was righteous.
So was St. Alexei Kabalyuk's

Who is this?
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,182


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #15 on: December 09, 2009, 04:36:49 PM »

Well, at least Jesus' anger was righteous.
So was St. Alexei Kabalyuk's

I found this online:  "as the primary Orthodox leader who assisted the Soviets in the 1946 liquidation, is offensive to the Greek Catholics."

Now I see why you like him so much. He helped oppress Catholics.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,467


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #16 on: December 09, 2009, 04:40:15 PM »

And the wheels on the bus go 'round and 'round, 'round and 'round, 'round and 'round...

LOOK, DRIVER, IT'S A kallikantzaros!!!
Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
Orthodoc
Supporter & Defender Of Orthodoxy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 2,526

Those who ignore history tend to repeat it.


« Reply #17 on: December 09, 2009, 05:06:03 PM »



This post was excluded by Orthodoc
« Last Edit: December 09, 2009, 05:09:13 PM by Orthodoc » Logged

Oh Lord, Save thy people and bless thine inheritance.
Grant victory to the Orthodox Christians over their adversaries.
And by virtue of thy Cross preserve thy habitation.
Orthodoc
Supporter & Defender Of Orthodoxy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 2,526

Those who ignore history tend to repeat it.


« Reply #18 on: December 09, 2009, 05:07:28 PM »

Papist:  Only the ones that rightfully belong to my Catholic Bretheren in Eastern Europe.

Reply:  Shouldn't the paishioners decide this rather than the Vatican or the MP?  This is why the Quadripartite Agreement/Comission would have ensured.

Papist:  You are an angry man. 
   
Reply:  As is any Orthodox Catholic who knows thw whole history of what the RCC has done to their church in thast 100+ years.  Once again you avoid an answer to the Quardrpartite Ageement/Commission.  You no response says it all.  You like somany in the RCC are only to go back in history so far to TRY and prove the justification for what your church has done.  You are not willing to discuss what happened before or even after (in this case) to know why the distrust is there in the first place.  BY THEIR DEEDS THEY SHALL BE KNOWN.  To completely understand eany great novel one has to start from chapter one, page one and read to the last page.  One desn't just read the second half of the last chapter to base their understanding of the novel.   
   
scamandrius :  You seem to be pretty upset over EO churches being handed back to the EO that are currently controlled by Latin Rite or Byzantine Rite Catholics.
   
Reply:  Read my last reply above to Papist.   
   

Orthodoc   
   


   
Logged

Oh Lord, Save thy people and bless thine inheritance.
Grant victory to the Orthodox Christians over their adversaries.
And by virtue of thy Cross preserve thy habitation.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
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: 37,453



« Reply #19 on: December 09, 2009, 05:09:25 PM »

Well, at least Jesus' anger was righteous.
So was St. Alexei Kabalyuk's

I found this online:  "as the primary Orthodox leader who assisted the Soviets in the 1946 liquidation, is offensive to the Greek Catholics."

Now I see why you like him so much. He helped oppress Catholics.

No, he led Catholics.

Btw, I notice how you skipped the sentence before your quote "On the eve of WWI, Kabalyuk was jailed, and later was a major leader of the Carpathian Orthodox until his death in 1947."

Jailed is euphemistic, here's a contemporary source:
Quote
A movement led by an Orthodox priest of fascinating presence, Father Alexis Kabalyuk, resulted in large numbers of the Ruthenians in Hungary leaving the Greek Catholic for the Russian Orthodox Church...Accordingly 189 Ruthenians were accused of treason and put on trial at Marmaros
Sziget. The trial lasted two months and resulted in the finding of of thirty-two of the accused guilty of incitement against Church and State.  The heaviest was that imposed upon Kabalyuk, four and a half years' imprisonment...
http://books.google.com/books?id=IajPAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA17&dq=Kabalyuk&cd=2#v=onepage&q=Kabalyuk&f=false
Quote
The truth was that under Polish influences new customs and ceremonies, abhorred by the people, were introduced into the Uniate Church by their Metropolitan, Count Andrew Shepticky.  As a result, thousands were leaving it, and were going back to the Orthodox Church.  Uniate priests who remained faithful to the ancient Slavonic Liturgy, so loved by the people, were harshly persecuted, while Orthodox priests, althoug native Galicians, were imprisoned.  The action of the Uniate ecclesiastical authorities, and not any propoganda from the neighbouring Russian Empire, was the cause of the Orthodox movement.
The inside story of Austro-German intrigue: or, How the World War was Brought About By Josef Goričar, Lyman Beecher Stowe
http://books.google.com/books?id=zOs1AAAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_v2_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q=Orthodox&f=false
« Last Edit: December 09, 2009, 05:27:24 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
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,053


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #20 on: December 09, 2009, 05:31:51 PM »

scamandrius :  You seem to be pretty upset over EO churches being handed back to the EO that are currently controlled by Latin Rite or Byzantine Rite Catholics.
   
Reply:  Read my last reply above to Papist.   

Pardon me if I'm wrong, but Scamandrius' comment seemed to be directed to Papist; he is in essence saying "RCs are upset about Eastern-Rite Churches which were really EO Churches being handed back to the EO."
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,467


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #21 on: December 09, 2009, 05:33:33 PM »

Quote
The truth was that under Polish influences new customs and ceremonies, abhorred by the people, were introduced into the Uniate Church by their Metropolitan, Count Andrew Shepticky.  As a result, thousands were leaving it, and were going back to the Orthodox Church.  Uniate priests who remained faithful to the ancient Slavonic Liturgy, so loved by the people, were harshly persecuted, while Orthodox priests, althoug native Galicians, were imprisoned.  The action of the Uniate ecclesiastical authorities, and not any propoganda from the neighbouring Russian Empire, was the cause of the Orthodox movement.


What were these abhorrent Polish-influenced customs and ceremonies?
Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,228


SS Cyril and Methodius Church, Mercer, PA


WWW
« Reply #22 on: December 09, 2009, 05:54:28 PM »

This discussion has certainly provoked strong statements and evoked strong opinions. History placed the Galicians and Rusyns at the fault line of Europe, caught between the shifting geopolitical boundaries of three empires, i.e. the Russian, the Austro-Hungarian and the Polish-Lithuanian. What happened to these peoples, whose deep faith and simple piety was profound, ought to serve as warning to those of you who would put your trust in princes and expect any government to further the aims of the Faith. My family in both the United States and in Europe has members who remain Eastern Catholic and members, such as my immediate family, who returned to Orthodoxy. We have tried to understand the past and move forward into the future. In the United States the Rusyn community was driven asunder in community after community at least twice during the 20th Century as a result of arguments over forced Westernization (as perceived by some ) and forced Russification, as perceived by others."Neither to Moscow nor to Rome" became the rallying cry of many as a result. Property rights and congregationalism became foundations of 'faith' to many. Through the wisdom and courage of then Archbishop (later Ecumenical Patriarch) Athenagoras many Eastern Catholics began the long journey home to Orthodoxy. My point is simple, seeking apologies and recriminations over the sins committed by some and the good faith actions of others,is akin to putting spilled milk back into a bottle. The laity and the clergy of both sides need to work together on a community by community basis to resolve these difficult and emotionally tough issues. Proclamations and slogans won't work.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
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: 37,453



« Reply #23 on: December 09, 2009, 06:20:40 PM »

Quote
The truth was that under Polish influences new customs and ceremonies, abhorred by the people, were introduced into the Uniate Church by their Metropolitan, Count Andrew Shepticky.  As a result, thousands were leaving it, and were going back to the Orthodox Church.  Uniate priests who remained faithful to the ancient Slavonic Liturgy, so loved by the people, were harshly persecuted, while Orthodox priests, althoug native Galicians, were imprisoned.  The action of the Uniate ecclesiastical authorities, and not any propoganda from the neighbouring Russian Empire, was the cause of the Orthodox movement.


What were these abhorrent Polish-influenced customs and ceremonies?
For a list from a sympathetic account:Morality and reality: the life and times of Andrei Sheptyts'kyi By Paul R. Magocsi, Andrii Krawchuk, Canadian Institute of Ukrainian Studies
http://books.google.com/books?id=TmXYeKOISCoC&pg=PA207&dq=Morality+and+reality+Andrei+Corpus+Christi&cd=1#v=onepage&q=&f=false
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
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,467


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #24 on: December 09, 2009, 06:28:44 PM »

Quote
The truth was that under Polish influences new customs and ceremonies, abhorred by the people, were introduced into the Uniate Church by their Metropolitan, Count Andrew Shepticky.  As a result, thousands were leaving it, and were going back to the Orthodox Church.  Uniate priests who remained faithful to the ancient Slavonic Liturgy, so loved by the people, were harshly persecuted, while Orthodox priests, althoug native Galicians, were imprisoned.  The action of the Uniate ecclesiastical authorities, and not any propoganda from the neighbouring Russian Empire, was the cause of the Orthodox movement.


What were these abhorrent Polish-influenced customs and ceremonies?
For a list from a sympathetic account:Morality and reality: the life and times of Andrei Sheptyts'kyi By Paul R. Magocsi, Andrii Krawchuk, Canadian Institute of Ukrainian Studies
http://books.google.com/books?id=TmXYeKOISCoC&pg=PA207&dq=Morality+and+reality+Andrei+Corpus+Christi&cd=1#v=onepage&q=&f=false

Thanks, Isa.  I'll have a look-see at these later.
Logged

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

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,884


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #25 on: December 09, 2009, 07:19:18 PM »

Quote
The truth was that under Polish influences new customs and ceremonies, abhorred by the people, were introduced into the Uniate Church by their Metropolitan, Count Andrew Shepticky.  As a result, thousands were leaving it, and were going back to the Orthodox Church.  Uniate priests who remained faithful to the ancient Slavonic Liturgy, so loved by the people, were harshly persecuted, while Orthodox priests, althoug native Galicians, were imprisoned.  The action of the Uniate ecclesiastical authorities, and not any propoganda from the neighbouring Russian Empire, was the cause of the Orthodox movement.

Well the above shows the author has no idea what he is talking about.  Metropolitan Andrew was the leader if not the founder of the de-Latinization among the Slav Greek Catholics.  It was his purging the books of Latinizations that led his suffragans to appeal to Rome.  The Pope appointed a commission which ended in upholding the Metropolitan's work and publishing the much praised Ruthenian Recension books.  If by Polish influences he means Sacred Heart Devotions, Rosary, 40 Hours devotion, etc., these were present long before Metropolitan Andrew.

Fr. Deacon Lance  
« Last Edit: December 09, 2009, 07:20:50 PM by Deacon Lance » Logged

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

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,884


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #26 on: December 09, 2009, 07:30:14 PM »

Since the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church had 2352 parishes before 1946 and they only took back less than 600 perhaps we can call it even and move on.
Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,228


SS Cyril and Methodius Church, Mercer, PA


WWW
« Reply #27 on: December 09, 2009, 07:58:59 PM »

Looking at this dispute as one whose family left the Eastern Catholic Church and joined the Orthodox Church in the late 1930's during the period of the celibacy dispute and church property disputes, it is indeed ironic to note that in the period of 'de-Latinization' following Vatican 2, many who stayed within the Eastern Catholic Church were , to say the least, confused, if not upset by the change of policies.
« Last Edit: December 09, 2009, 08:03:17 PM by podkarpatska » Logged
Orthodoc
Supporter & Defender Of Orthodoxy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 2,526

Those who ignore history tend to repeat it.


« Reply #28 on: December 09, 2009, 08:16:19 PM »

scamandrius :  You seem to be pretty upset over EO churches being handed back to the EO that are currently controlled by Latin Rite or Byzantine Rite Catholics.
   
Reply:  Read my last reply above to Papist.   

Pardon me if I'm wrong, but Scamandrius' comment seemed to be directed to Papist; he is in essence saying "RCs are upset about Eastern-Rite Churches which were really EO Churches being handed back to the EO."

Father, that's why I responded with my comment that Papist is not willing to back to understand how and why the situation was created.  He justifies FORCED conversion to RCC in 1596 as will as the 1990's but deplores correcting the injustices of the RCC against the Orthodox.

Orthodoc
Logged

Oh Lord, Save thy people and bless thine inheritance.
Grant victory to the Orthodox Christians over their adversaries.
And by virtue of thy Cross preserve thy habitation.
Orthodoc
Supporter & Defender Of Orthodoxy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 2,526

Those who ignore history tend to repeat it.


« Reply #29 on: December 09, 2009, 08:21:52 PM »

Quote
The truth was that under Polish influences new customs and ceremonies, abhorred by the people, were introduced into the Uniate Church by their Metropolitan, Count Andrew Shepticky.  As a result, thousands were leaving it, and were going back to the Orthodox Church.  Uniate priests who remained faithful to the ancient Slavonic Liturgy, so loved by the people, were harshly persecuted, while Orthodox priests, althoug native Galicians, were imprisoned.  The action of the Uniate ecclesiastical authorities, and not any propoganda from the neighbouring Russian Empire, was the cause of the Orthodox movement.

Well the above shows the author has no idea what he is talking about.  Metropolitan Andrew was the leader if not the founder of the de-Latinization among the Slav Greek Catholics.  It was his purging the books of Latinizations that led his suffragans to appeal to Rome.  The Pope appointed a commission which ended in upholding the Metropolitan's work and publishing the much praised Ruthenian Recension books.  If by Polish influences he means Sacred Heart Devotions, Rosary, 40 Hours devotion, etc., these were present long before Metropolitan Andrew.

Fr. Deacon Lance  

If the thirty three articles guaranteed in the Union of Brest were adhered to and protected by Rome in the first place, there would be no need to delatinize now.

Orthodoc
« Last Edit: December 09, 2009, 08:23:29 PM by Orthodoc » Logged

Oh Lord, Save thy people and bless thine inheritance.
Grant victory to the Orthodox Christians over their adversaries.
And by virtue of thy Cross preserve thy habitation.
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,182


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #30 on: December 09, 2009, 08:22:39 PM »

scamandrius :  You seem to be pretty upset over EO churches being handed back to the EO that are currently controlled by Latin Rite or Byzantine Rite Catholics.
   
Reply:  Read my last reply above to Papist.   

Pardon me if I'm wrong, but Scamandrius' comment seemed to be directed to Papist; he is in essence saying "RCs are upset about Eastern-Rite Churches which were really EO Churches being handed back to the EO."

Father, that's why I responded with my comment that Papist is not willing to back to understand how and why the situation was created.  He justifies FORCED conversion to RCC in 1596 as will as the 1990's but deplores correcting the injustices of the RCC against the Orthodox.

Orthodoc
Well, they should all be RCC anyway.
 Wink
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,053


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #31 on: December 09, 2009, 08:25:46 PM »

Father, that's why I responded with my comment that Papist is not willing to back to understand how and why the situation was created.  He justifies FORCED conversion to RCC in 1596 as will as the 1990's but deplores correcting the injustices of the RCC against the Orthodox. 

Ahh, right.  Thank you for the clarification!  My cold is keeping me from most higher-level thinking tonight Wink
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Orthodoc
Supporter & Defender Of Orthodoxy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 2,526

Those who ignore history tend to repeat it.


« Reply #32 on: December 09, 2009, 08:27:52 PM »

scamandrius :  You seem to be pretty upset over EO churches being handed back to the EO that are currently controlled by Latin Rite or Byzantine Rite Catholics.
   
Reply:  Read my last reply above to Papist.   

Pardon me if I'm wrong, but Scamandrius' comment seemed to be directed to Papist; he is in essence saying "RCs are upset about Eastern-Rite Churches which were really EO Churches being handed back to the EO."

Father, that's why I responded with my comment that Papist is not willing to back to understand how and why the situation was created.  He justifies FORCED conversion to RCC in 1596 as will as the 1990's but deplores correcting the injustices of the RCC against the Orthodox.

Orthodoc
Well, they should all be RCC anyway.
 Wink


You better not call them Roman Catholic to their face!  You might be surprised by the reaction you will get.  A large percent think they are not under the authority of the Pope.  That they are just 'In Communion' with him.  Their theological understanding is very poor.

Then how about asking them if they waant to be Roman Catholic or Orthodox Catholic?  How many do you think would opt to accept the worship and theology of the RCC?

Orthodoc
« Last Edit: December 09, 2009, 08:30:09 PM by Orthodoc » Logged

Oh Lord, Save thy people and bless thine inheritance.
Grant victory to the Orthodox Christians over their adversaries.
And by virtue of thy Cross preserve thy habitation.
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,182


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #33 on: December 09, 2009, 08:28:40 PM »

scamandrius :  You seem to be pretty upset over EO churches being handed back to the EO that are currently controlled by Latin Rite or Byzantine Rite Catholics.
   
Reply:  Read my last reply above to Papist.   

Pardon me if I'm wrong, but Scamandrius' comment seemed to be directed to Papist; he is in essence saying "RCs are upset about Eastern-Rite Churches which were really EO Churches being handed back to the EO."

Father, that's why I responded with my comment that Papist is not willing to back to understand how and why the situation was created.  He justifies FORCED conversion to RCC in 1596 as will as the 1990's but deplores correcting the injustices of the RCC against the Orthodox.

Orthodoc
Well, they should all be RCC anyway.
 Wink


You better not call them Roman Catholic to their face!  You might be surprised by the reaction you will get.  A large percent think they are not under the authority of the Pope.  That they are just 'In Communion' with him.  Their theological understanding is very poor.

Orthodoc
I was  using your nomenclature.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
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: 37,453



« Reply #34 on: December 09, 2009, 08:37:31 PM »

Quote
The truth was that under Polish influences new customs and ceremonies, abhorred by the people, were introduced into the Uniate Church by their Metropolitan, Count Andrew Shepticky.  As a result, thousands were leaving it, and were going back to the Orthodox Church.  Uniate priests who remained faithful to the ancient Slavonic Liturgy, so loved by the people, were harshly persecuted, while Orthodox priests, althoug native Galicians, were imprisoned.  The action of the Uniate ecclesiastical authorities, and not any propoganda from the neighbouring Russian Empire, was the cause of the Orthodox movement.

Well the above shows the author has no idea what he is talking about.  Metropolitan Andrew was the leader if not the founder of the de-Latinization among the Slav Greek Catholics.  It was his purging the books of Latinizations that led his suffragans to appeal to Rome.  The Pope appointed a commission which ended in upholding the Metropolitan's work and publishing the much praised Ruthenian Recension books.  If by Polish influences he means Sacred Heart Devotions, Rosary, 40 Hours devotion, etc., these were present long before Metropolitan Andrew.

Fr. Deacon Lance  

If the thirty three articles guaranteed in the Union of Brest were adhered to and protected by Rome in the first place, there would be no need to delatinize now.

Orthodoc

Or better yet, no "Union of Brest" at all.

Btw, the author of the quote is Josef Goričar, who was in the Austro-Hungarian Consular service, and espionage, who flipped. Hence he is viewing it from the center.  I think it is Magocsi who makes a comment about seeing in the Vatican documents the hiearchy in Lviv (or should I say "Lemberg") never saw, and reading newspapers in Galicia that no eye in Vienna or Rome ever saw, etc.
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
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,467


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #35 on: December 10, 2009, 10:43:47 AM »

Quote
The truth was that under Polish influences new customs and ceremonies, abhorred by the people, were introduced into the Uniate Church by their Metropolitan, Count Andrew Shepticky.  As a result, thousands were leaving it, and were going back to the Orthodox Church.  Uniate priests who remained faithful to the ancient Slavonic Liturgy, so loved by the people, were harshly persecuted, while Orthodox priests, althoug native Galicians, were imprisoned.  The action of the Uniate ecclesiastical authorities, and not any propoganda from the neighbouring Russian Empire, was the cause of the Orthodox movement.

Well the above shows the author has no idea what he is talking about.  Metropolitan Andrew was the leader if not the founder of the de-Latinization among the Slav Greek Catholics.  It was his purging the books of Latinizations that led his suffragans to appeal to Rome.  The Pope appointed a commission which ended in upholding the Metropolitan's work and publishing the much praised Ruthenian Recension books.  If by Polish influences he means Sacred Heart Devotions, Rosary, 40 Hours devotion, etc., these were present long before Metropolitan Andrew.

Fr. Deacon Lance  

Yeah, that's what I thought initially (and was always taught) and even the work ialmisry cited says that.  While Met. Andrew recognized that these "Polish things" were not a part of the authentic Eastern tradition, he also recognized that they were beloved by the faithful and could not just be wiped out without some serious problems arising in the wake of such a move (p. 213-215 in the work Isa cited).
Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
Orthodoc
Supporter & Defender Of Orthodoxy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 2,526

Those who ignore history tend to repeat it.


« Reply #36 on: December 10, 2009, 12:15:57 PM »

Since the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church had 2352 parishes before 1946 and they only took back less than 600 perhaps we can call it even and move on.

Depends upon how many of those 2352 parishes were left to take back.  How about giving some statistics on how many of those 2352 parishes were still in existence to give back?  Isn't it safe to assume that some of them were destroyed, or turned into barns, bar rooms, urinals, etc. as thousnads of Orthodox churches were? 

Orthodoc
Logged

Oh Lord, Save thy people and bless thine inheritance.
Grant victory to the Orthodox Christians over their adversaries.
And by virtue of thy Cross preserve thy habitation.
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,884


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #37 on: December 10, 2009, 06:09:37 PM »

I can't find statistics for that, what I could find was the UOC-MP now has over 7700 chuches, the UGCC over 3400.  Again the Greek Catholics are here to stay and Rome isn't going to force them back to the Orthodox Church no matter how much Moscow might want it.  So lets get to the business of turning the other cheek, forgiving our brother 7 X 70 times, and figuring out how to work together in the face of increasing secularization and consumerism.
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,182


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #38 on: December 10, 2009, 07:06:15 PM »

I can't find statistics for that, what I could find was the UOC-MP now has over 7700 chuches, the UGCC over 3400.  Again the Greek Catholics are here to stay and Rome isn't going to force them back to the Orthodox Church no matter how much Moscow might want it.  So lets get to the business of turning the other cheek, forgiving our brother 7 X 70 times, and figuring out how to work together in the face of increasing secularization and consumerism.
AMEN!!!
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
Orthodoc
Supporter & Defender Of Orthodoxy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 2,526

Those who ignore history tend to repeat it.


« Reply #39 on: December 10, 2009, 10:12:33 PM »

I can't find statistics for that, what I could find was the UOC-MP now has over 7700 chuches, the UGCC over 3400.  Again the Greek Catholics are here to stay and Rome isn't going to force them back to the Orthodox Church no matter how much Moscow might want it.  So lets get to the business of turning the other cheek, forgiving our brother 7 X 70 times, and figuring out how to work together in the face of increasing secularization and consumerism.

Which brings us back to the title of this folder.  Which means a better record on the part of the RCC on signing agreements AND ABIDING BY THEM as well  setting up meeting agenda's AND ABIDING BY THEM after they are annoucnced in the western news media. The RCC has a poor record when it comes to the sincerity of their words or agreements.  This not only involves the past the the present as well as the examples given show.



Orthodoc
Logged

Oh Lord, Save thy people and bless thine inheritance.
Grant victory to the Orthodox Christians over their adversaries.
And by virtue of thy Cross preserve thy habitation.
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,182


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #40 on: December 11, 2009, 10:48:34 AM »

I can't find statistics for that, what I could find was the UOC-MP now has over 7700 chuches, the UGCC over 3400.  Again the Greek Catholics are here to stay and Rome isn't going to force them back to the Orthodox Church no matter how much Moscow might want it.  So lets get to the business of turning the other cheek, forgiving our brother 7 X 70 times, and figuring out how to work together in the face of increasing secularization and consumerism.

Which brings us back to the title of this folder.  Which means a better record on the part of the RCC on signing agreements AND ABIDING BY THEM as well  setting up meeting agenda's AND ABIDING BY THEM after they are annoucnced in the western news media. The RCC has a poor record when it comes to the sincerity of their words or agreements.  This not only involves the past the the present as well as the examples given show.



Orthodoc
Those involved in the agreement probably should never have made the agreement since its generally a bad one.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
Orthodoc
Supporter & Defender Of Orthodoxy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 2,526

Those who ignore history tend to repeat it.


« Reply #41 on: December 11, 2009, 12:34:23 PM »

I can't find statistics for that, what I could find was the UOC-MP now has over 7700 chuches, the UGCC over 3400.  Again the Greek Catholics are here to stay and Rome isn't going to force them back to the Orthodox Church no matter how much Moscow might want it.  So lets get to the business of turning the other cheek, forgiving our brother 7 X 70 times, and figuring out how to work together in the face of increasing secularization and consumerism.

Which brings us back to the title of this folder.  Which means a better record on the part of the RCC on signing agreements AND ABIDING BY THEM as well  setting up meeting agenda's AND ABIDING BY THEM after they are annoucnced in the western news media. The RCC has a poor record when it comes to the sincerity of their words or agreements.  This not only involves the past the the present as well as the examples given show.



Orthodoc
Those involved in the agreement probably should never have made the agreement since its generally a bad one.

Bad for who and in what way?  What could be better than having the parishioners themselves determine what religion they want to be?  Once again, why do you sanction the use of force as justifiable only when it's to the advantage of the Roman Catholic Church?

By the way, regarding your comment in a previous reply -

"Well, they should all be RCC anyway."

Care to elaborate on that?  Does that mean that you consider them as Eastern Rite Roman Catholics?

Bob
 





« Last Edit: December 11, 2009, 12:36:12 PM by Orthodoc » Logged

Oh Lord, Save thy people and bless thine inheritance.
Grant victory to the Orthodox Christians over their adversaries.
And by virtue of thy Cross preserve thy habitation.
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,182


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #42 on: December 11, 2009, 12:48:03 PM »

I can't find statistics for that, what I could find was the UOC-MP now has over 7700 chuches, the UGCC over 3400.  Again the Greek Catholics are here to stay and Rome isn't going to force them back to the Orthodox Church no matter how much Moscow might want it.  So lets get to the business of turning the other cheek, forgiving our brother 7 X 70 times, and figuring out how to work together in the face of increasing secularization and consumerism.

Which brings us back to the title of this folder.  Which means a better record on the part of the RCC on signing agreements AND ABIDING BY THEM as well  setting up meeting agenda's AND ABIDING BY THEM after they are annoucnced in the western news media. The RCC has a poor record when it comes to the sincerity of their words or agreements.  This not only involves the past the the present as well as the examples given show.



Orthodoc
Those involved in the agreement probably should never have made the agreement since its generally a bad one.

Bad for who and in what way?  What could be better than having the parishioners themselves determine what religion they want to be?  Once again, why do you sanction the use of force as justifiable only when it's to the advantage of the Roman Catholic Church?

By the way, regarding your comment in a previous reply -

"Well, they should all be RCC anyway."

Care to elaborate on that?  Does that mean that you consider them as Eastern Rite Roman Catholics?

Bob
 






I think its bad for the Catholic Church. First, if we Catholics really believe our Church is the Church founded by Jesus Christ, then we should be evangelizing the world and that includes EOs. Second, just because a particular parish of ECs decide they want to be EO (which is within their rights) does not mean that they should be able to keep the church in which they meet because it is a Catholic Church.

As for what I meant about everybody being RC: I was using the term RC to refer to the entire Catholic Communion, not just the latin rite. No, I don't think that Eastern Catholics should become latin Catholics.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
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: 37,453



« Reply #43 on: December 11, 2009, 02:59:39 PM »

I can't find statistics for that, what I could find was the UOC-MP now has over 7700 chuches, the UGCC over 3400.  Again the Greek Catholics are here to stay and Rome isn't going to force them back to the Orthodox Church no matter how much Moscow might want it.  So lets get to the business of turning the other cheek, forgiving our brother 7 X 70 times, and figuring out how to work together in the face of increasing secularization and consumerism.

Which brings us back to the title of this folder.  Which means a better record on the part of the RCC on signing agreements AND ABIDING BY THEM as well  setting up meeting agenda's AND ABIDING BY THEM after they are annoucnced in the western news media. The RCC has a poor record when it comes to the sincerity of their words or agreements.  This not only involves the past the the present as well as the examples given show.



Orthodoc
Those involved in the agreement probably should never have made the agreement since its generally a bad one.

Bad for who and in what way?  What could be better than having the parishioners themselves determine what religion they want to be?  Once again, why do you sanction the use of force as justifiable only when it's to the advantage of the Roman Catholic Church?

By the way, regarding your comment in a previous reply -

"Well, they should all be RCC anyway."

Care to elaborate on that?  Does that mean that you consider them as Eastern Rite Roman Catholics?

Bob
 






I think its bad for the Catholic Church. First, if we Catholics really believe our Church is the Church founded by Jesus Christ, then we should be evangelizing the world and that includes EOs. Second, just because a particular parish of ECs decide they want to be EO (which is within their rights) does not mean that they should be able to keep the church in which they meet because it is a Catholic Church.

As for what I meant about everybody being RC: I was using the term RC to refer to the entire Catholic Communion, not just the latin rite. No, I don't think that Eastern Catholics should become latin Catholics.
Does that apply to Florence, Brest, Uzhhorod and Alba Iulia?
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
Orthodoc
Supporter & Defender Of Orthodoxy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 2,526

Those who ignore history tend to repeat it.


« Reply #44 on: December 11, 2009, 04:31:16 PM »

I can't find statistics for that, what I could find was the UOC-MP now has over 7700 chuches, the UGCC over 3400.  Again the Greek Catholics are here to stay and Rome isn't going to force them back to the Orthodox Church no matter how much Moscow might want it.  So lets get to the business of turning the other cheek, forgiving our brother 7 X 70 times, and figuring out how to work together in the face of increasing secularization and consumerism.

Which brings us back to the title of this folder.  Which means a better record on the part of the RCC on signing agreements AND ABIDING BY THEM as well  setting up meeting agenda's AND ABIDING BY THEM after they are annoucnced in the western news media. The RCC has a poor record when it comes to the sincerity of their words or agreements.  This not only involves the past the the present as well as the examples given show.



Orthodoc
Those involved in the agreement probably should never have made the agreement since its generally a bad one.

Bad for who and in what way?  What could be better than having the parishioners themselves determine what religion they want to be?  Once again, why do you sanction the use of force as justifiable only when it's to the advantage of the Roman Catholic Church?

By the way, regarding your comment in a previous reply -

"Well, they should all be RCC anyway."

Care to elaborate on that?  Does that mean that you consider them as Eastern Rite Roman Catholics?

Bob
 






I think its bad for the Catholic Church. First, if we Catholics really believe our Church is the Church founded by Jesus Christ, then we should be evangelizing the world and that includes EOs. Second, just because a particular parish of ECs decide they want to be EO (which is within their rights) does not mean that they should be able to keep the church in which they meet because it is a Catholic Church.

As for what I meant about everybody being RC: I was using the term RC to refer to the entire Catholic Communion, not just the latin rite. No, I don't think that Eastern Catholics should become latin Catholics.
Does that apply to Florence, Brest, Uzhhorod and Alba Iulia?


Of course not!  Since Papist as well as many RC's are only willing to go back as far as it takes to attempt to justify their claims.  In this case only going back to 1947 rather than 988 or a century before when these particular Orthodox Churches came into being.

« Last Edit: December 11, 2009, 04:32:41 PM by Orthodoc » Logged

Oh Lord, Save thy people and bless thine inheritance.
Grant victory to the Orthodox Christians over their adversaries.
And by virtue of thy Cross preserve thy habitation.
augustin717
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: The other ROC
Posts: 5,631



« Reply #45 on: December 11, 2009, 04:39:10 PM »

Now the truth is-knowing our situation in Transylvania- that the Orthodox churches confiscated at the time of the Unia were, generally, rather shabby wooden buildings, whereas the ones confiscated from the Greek Catholics in 1948 are newer, larger and sturdier buildings, build during the Unia.
I think that is up to the particular village/town to decide their fate: if the Greek Catholic form the majority, let the church be theirs. If the Orthodox are the majority, let they keep it, since they too, are the offspring of the founders of the church.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
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: 37,453



« Reply #46 on: December 11, 2009, 05:55:51 PM »

Now the truth is-knowing our situation in Transylvania- that the Orthodox churches confiscated at the time of the Unia were, generally, rather shabby wooden buildings,
How about those destroyed?
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
Orthodoc
Supporter & Defender Of Orthodoxy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 2,526

Those who ignore history tend to repeat it.


« Reply #47 on: December 11, 2009, 07:39:02 PM »

Now the truth is-knowing our situation in Transylvania- that the Orthodox churches confiscated at the time of the Unia were, generally, rather shabby wooden buildings, whereas the ones confiscated from the Greek Catholics in 1948 are newer, larger and sturdier buildings, build during the Unia.
I think that is up to the particular village/town to decide their fate: if the Greek Catholic form the majority, let the church be theirs. If the Orthodox are the majority, let they keep it, since they too, are the offspring of the founders of the church.

Which is exactly what the Quadripartite Agreement/Commission signed with the Vatican & UGCC regarding those former UGCC in Ukraine would have done.  But we all know what happened there.

Orthodoc
Logged

Oh Lord, Save thy people and bless thine inheritance.
Grant victory to the Orthodox Christians over their adversaries.
And by virtue of thy Cross preserve thy habitation.
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,884


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #48 on: December 11, 2009, 11:45:32 PM »

A good article on the reemergence of the UGCC and tensions with the MP:

http://www.cas.umn.edu/assets/pdf/WP955.PDF
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
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: 37,453



« Reply #49 on: December 12, 2009, 12:27:21 AM »

A good article on the reemergence of the UGCC and tensions with the MP:

http://www.cas.umn.edu/assets/pdf/WP955.PDF

LOL.  I could barely get past the first couple sentences.

"The origins of the Ukrainian Catholic Church like in the time when much of the present-day Ukraine formed part of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.  It was then, in 1596, that for a variety of reasons...."

LOL. Variety?  They are boil down to one: PERSECUTION.

"The Church was centered in dioceses in Ukraine and Belarus, and in the late eighteenth century had a following of some twelve million faithful."

LOL.  12 million?  The PL Commonwealth only had about 12 million at time, and most of them were following the Vatican or Calvin.  And it is only where the Polish king hold sway that "the Church" existed at all.

"In areas absorbed by the Russian Empire the Uniate Church was systematically harrassed and in time abolished, its property confiscated by the Russian Orthodox Church...."

It seems your source is in denial about the failure of the "union": within a generation a clandestine, and illegal, Orthodox hiearchy was set up and was functioning, and shortly thereafter, in 1632 even the Polish king had to admit the failure and allow a legal Orthodox Metropolitan in Kiev.

And for the "absorbtion" in the Russian empire, much of that was done by those who returned to Orthodoxy from Galicia, where the Austro-Hungarian authorities went in denial about the Return to Orthodoxy movement, all the while hearding those who did so in concetration camps and otherwise making martyrs and confessors for the Orthodox Faith.  The autocephalous Church of Bukowina set up by the Austrian emperor ended up with over a half million Orthodox Ruthenians.

"The main seat of the Church came to be established in the ity of L'viv, as it could no longer operate in the Russian-occupied areas, including Kiev, the original seat of the Church's Metropolitan."

LOL.  That Metropolitan never took up his "seat."  Kiev was firmly Orthodox, and as stated above, was so officially and legally within a generation of the "union."  The HQ was always L'viv, where they demolished the Orthodox Cathedral (can we get that back?) and built their own St. George's on top of it.

I notice that your source doesn't mention a word about interwar Poland ethnic and religious cleansing of the area.  Many who submitted to the Vatican found that that didn't impress the Polish authorities.  It mentions interwar Czechoslovakia, but not the large movement to Orthodoxy in it, creating the Orthodox Church of the Czech Lands and Slovakia: its primate, St. Gorazd, was a former priest of the Vatican, and Latin rite.

Given what the Poles did in Galicia, one may question the inflated figures for the "faithful."

"In 1968, the Uniate Church of Czechoslovakia was restored..."

No mention that no all went back, although they could.  Nor anything about those who embraced Orthodoxy in Austria-Hungary times or inter-war Czechoslovakia.
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
podkarpatska
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,228


SS Cyril and Methodius Church, Mercer, PA


WWW
« Reply #50 on: December 12, 2009, 01:15:51 AM »

A good article on the reemergence of the UGCC and tensions with the MP:

http://www.cas.umn.edu/assets/pdf/WP955.PDF

LOL.  I could barely get past the first couple sentences.

"The origins of the Ukrainian Catholic Church like in the time when much of the present-day Ukraine formed part of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.  It was then, in 1596, that for a variety of reasons...."

LOL. Variety?  They are boil down to one: PERSECUTION.

"The Church was centered in dioceses in Ukraine and Belarus, and in the late eighteenth century had a following of some twelve million faithful."

LOL.  12 million?  The PL Commonwealth only had about 12 million at time, and most of them were following the Vatican or Calvin.  And it is only where the Polish king hold sway that "the Church" existed at all.

"In areas absorbed by the Russian Empire the Uniate Church was systematically harrassed and in time abolished, its property confiscated by the Russian Orthodox Church...."

It seems your source is in denial about the failure of the "union": within a generation a clandestine, and illegal, Orthodox hiearchy was set up and was functioning, and shortly thereafter, in 1632 even the Polish king had to admit the failure and allow a legal Orthodox Metropolitan in Kiev.

And for the "absorbtion" in the Russian empire, much of that was done by those who returned to Orthodoxy from Galicia, where the Austro-Hungarian authorities went in denial about the Return to Orthodoxy movement, all the while hearding those who did so in concetration camps and otherwise making martyrs and confessors for the Orthodox Faith.  The autocephalous Church of Bukowina set up by the Austrian emperor ended up with over a half million Orthodox Ruthenians.

"The main seat of the Church came to be established in the ity of L'viv, as it could no longer operate in the Russian-occupied areas, including Kiev, the original seat of the Church's Metropolitan."

LOL.  That Metropolitan never took up his "seat."  Kiev was firmly Orthodox, and as stated above, was so officially and legally within a generation of the "union."  The HQ was always L'viv, where they demolished the Orthodox Cathedral (can we get that back?) and built their own St. George's on top of it.

I notice that your source doesn't mention a word about interwar Poland ethnic and religious cleansing of the area.  Many who submitted to the Vatican found that that didn't impress the Polish authorities.  It mentions interwar Czechoslovakia, but not the large movement to Orthodoxy in it, creating the Orthodox Church of the Czech Lands and Slovakia: its primate, St. Gorazd, was a former priest of the Vatican, and Latin rite.

Given what the Poles did in Galicia, one may question the inflated figures for the "faithful."

"In 1968, the Uniate Church of Czechoslovakia was restored..."

No mention that no all went back, although they could.  Nor anything about those who embraced Orthodoxy in Austria-Hungary times or inter-war Czechoslovakia.

A good critique. It should be noted that in addition to persecution as a basis for the 'acceptance' of the Unia , as least as it applies to the Austro-Hungarian Empire, that the Roman clergy had a social/political status that was higher than the Orthodox, who prior to the Unia lived among, and with the status of the serfs. I had always been taught growing up that the root causes of the Unia in the 16th and 17th centuries had little if anything to do with theology and issues of faith, but had everything to do with the geopolitics of the era and the continued fallout from the fall of Constantinope in 1453. Likewise, the return to Orthodoxy of some (if not many) in America during the twentieth century did not spring initially from a faith based revival, but rather arose from the arrogant treatment of the Ruthentian/Rusyn and Galician immigrants and their clergy by the Roman hierarchy in America and a lack of support from the Old World, both from the old homelands and from Rome. That certainly was the experience of St. Alexis Toth and , forty years later, Bishop Orestes (Chornock). That being said, we need to respect each other and move forward, not dwelling in the past.
« Last Edit: December 12, 2009, 01:26:57 AM by podkarpatska » Logged
Orthodoc
Supporter & Defender Of Orthodoxy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 2,526

Those who ignore history tend to repeat it.


« Reply #51 on: December 12, 2009, 02:17:32 AM »

A good article on the reemergence of the UGCC and tensions with the MP:

http://www.cas.umn.edu/assets/pdf/WP955.PDF

LOL.  I could barely get past the first couple sentences.

"The origins of the Ukrainian Catholic Church like in the time when much of the present-day Ukraine formed part of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.  It was then, in 1596, that for a variety of reasons...."

LOL. Variety?  They are boil down to one: PERSECUTION.

"The Church was centered in dioceses in Ukraine and Belarus, and in the late eighteenth century had a following of some twelve million faithful."

LOL.  12 million?  The PL Commonwealth only had about 12 million at time, and most of them were following the Vatican or Calvin.  And it is only where the Polish king hold sway that "the Church" existed at all.

"In areas absorbed by the Russian Empire the Uniate Church was systematically harrassed and in time abolished, its property confiscated by the Russian Orthodox Church...."

It seems your source is in denial about the failure of the "union": within a generation a clandestine, and illegal, Orthodox hiearchy was set up and was functioning, and shortly thereafter, in 1632 even the Polish king had to admit the failure and allow a legal Orthodox Metropolitan in Kiev.

And for the "absorbtion" in the Russian empire, much of that was done by those who returned to Orthodoxy from Galicia, where the Austro-Hungarian authorities went in denial about the Return to Orthodoxy movement, all the while hearding those who did so in concetration camps and otherwise making martyrs and confessors for the Orthodox Faith.  The autocephalous Church of Bukowina set up by the Austrian emperor ended up with over a half million Orthodox Ruthenians.

"The main seat of the Church came to be established in the ity of L'viv, as it could no longer operate in the Russian-occupied areas, including Kiev, the original seat of the Church's Metropolitan."

LOL.  That Metropolitan never took up his "seat."  Kiev was firmly Orthodox, and as stated above, was so officially and legally within a generation of the "union."  The HQ was always L'viv, where they demolished the Orthodox Cathedral (can we get that back?) and built their own St. George's on top of it.

I notice that your source doesn't mention a word about interwar Poland ethnic and religious cleansing of the area.  Many who submitted to the Vatican found that that didn't impress the Polish authorities.  It mentions interwar Czechoslovakia, but not the large movement to Orthodoxy in it, creating the Orthodox Church of the Czech Lands and Slovakia: its primate, St. Gorazd, was a former priest of the Vatican, and Latin rite.

Given what the Poles did in Galicia, one may question the inflated figures for the "faithful."

"In 1968, the Uniate Church of Czechoslovakia was restored..."

No mention that no all went back, although they could.  Nor anything about those who embraced Orthodoxy in Austria-Hungary times or inter-war Czechoslovakia.

I was for some reason or another unable to open Fr Deacon Lance's website recommendation.  Based on your excellent response it's probably better I hadn't succeeded.  Thanks for responding.  It's amazing how history is distorted and rewritten by those who use force and politics rather than theology as their chief weapon.

Orthodoc
Logged

Oh Lord, Save thy people and bless thine inheritance.
Grant victory to the Orthodox Christians over their adversaries.
And by virtue of thy Cross preserve thy habitation.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
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: 37,453



« Reply #52 on: December 12, 2009, 09:58:46 AM »

A good article on the reemergence of the UGCC and tensions with the MP:

http://www.cas.umn.edu/assets/pdf/WP955.PDF

LOL.  I could barely get past the first couple sentences.

"The origins of the Ukrainian Catholic Church like in the time when much of the present-day Ukraine formed part of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.  It was then, in 1596, that for a variety of reasons...."

LOL. Variety?  They are boil down to one: PERSECUTION.

"The Church was centered in dioceses in Ukraine and Belarus, and in the late eighteenth century had a following of some twelve million faithful."

LOL.  12 million?  The PL Commonwealth only had about 12 million at time, and most of them were following the Vatican or Calvin.  And it is only where the Polish king hold sway that "the Church" existed at all.

"In areas absorbed by the Russian Empire the Uniate Church was systematically harrassed and in time abolished, its property confiscated by the Russian Orthodox Church...."

It seems your source is in denial about the failure of the "union": within a generation a clandestine, and illegal, Orthodox hiearchy was set up and was functioning, and shortly thereafter, in 1632 even the Polish king had to admit the failure and allow a legal Orthodox Metropolitan in Kiev.

And for the "absorbtion" in the Russian empire, much of that was done by those who returned to Orthodoxy from Galicia, where the Austro-Hungarian authorities went in denial about the Return to Orthodoxy movement, all the while hearding those who did so in concetration camps and otherwise making martyrs and confessors for the Orthodox Faith.  The autocephalous Church of Bukowina set up by the Austrian emperor ended up with over a half million Orthodox Ruthenians.

"The main seat of the Church came to be established in the ity of L'viv, as it could no longer operate in the Russian-occupied areas, including Kiev, the original seat of the Church's Metropolitan."

LOL.  That Metropolitan never took up his "seat."  Kiev was firmly Orthodox, and as stated above, was so officially and legally within a generation of the "union."  The HQ was always L'viv, where they demolished the Orthodox Cathedral (can we get that back?) and built their own St. George's on top of it.

I notice that your source doesn't mention a word about interwar Poland ethnic and religious cleansing of the area.  Many who submitted to the Vatican found that that didn't impress the Polish authorities.  It mentions interwar Czechoslovakia, but not the large movement to Orthodoxy in it, creating the Orthodox Church of the Czech Lands and Slovakia: its primate, St. Gorazd, was a former priest of the Vatican, and Latin rite.

Given what the Poles did in Galicia, one may question the inflated figures for the "faithful."

"In 1968, the Uniate Church of Czechoslovakia was restored..."

No mention that no all went back, although they could.  Nor anything about those who embraced Orthodoxy in Austria-Hungary times or inter-war Czechoslovakia.

A good critique. It should be noted that in addition to persecution as a basis for the 'acceptance' of the Unia , as least as it applies to the Austro-Hungarian Empire, that the Roman clergy had a social/political status that was higher than the Orthodox, who prior to the Unia lived among, and with the status of the serfs. I had always been taught growing up that the root causes of the Unia in the 16th and 17th centuries had little if anything to do with theology and issues of faith, but had everything to do with the geopolitics of the era and the continued fallout from the fall of Constantinope in 1453. Likewise, the return to Orthodoxy of some (if not many) in America during the twentieth century did not spring initially from a faith based revival, but rather arose from the arrogant treatment of the Ruthentian/Rusyn and Galician immigrants and their clergy by the Roman hierarchy in America and a lack of support from the Old World, both from the old homelands and from Rome. That certainly was the experience of St. Alexis Toth and , forty years later, Bishop Orestes (Chornock). That being said, we need to respect each other and move forward, not dwelling in the past.

Yes, I have no interest in picking scabs.  As I've said before, I am more than willing to express my distaste with the idea of state power reclaiming the Orthodox of the area, and in the interest of peace support the agreement that had been worked out with the Vatican on the basis of present communicants freely choosing.  However, I do find acts like the claim made above about Kiev being the seat of their Metropolitan-now self proclaimed patriach-and moving his see to Kiev as provoking problems.  I don't want to see history repeat itself, and it has been my experience that when someone denies ever having wronged, it means "if given the opportunity, I will do it again."
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
podkarpatska
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,228


SS Cyril and Methodius Church, Mercer, PA


WWW
« Reply #53 on: December 12, 2009, 11:08:37 AM »

A good article on the reemergence of the UGCC and tensions with the MP:

http://www.cas.umn.edu/assets/pdf/WP955.PDF

LOL.  I could barely get past the first couple sentences.

"The origins of the Ukrainian Catholic Church like in the time when much of the present-day Ukraine formed part of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.  It was then, in 1596, that for a variety of reasons...."

LOL. Variety?  They are boil down to one: PERSECUTION.

"The Church was centered in dioceses in Ukraine and Belarus, and in the late eighteenth century had a following of some twelve million faithful."

LOL.  12 million?  The PL Commonwealth only had about 12 million at time, and most of them were following the Vatican or Calvin.  And it is only where the Polish king hold sway that "the Church" existed at all.

"In areas absorbed by the Russian Empire the Uniate Church was systematically harrassed and in time abolished, its property confiscated by the Russian Orthodox Church...."

It seems your source is in denial about the failure of the "union": within a generation a clandestine, and illegal, Orthodox hiearchy was set up and was functioning, and shortly thereafter, in 1632 even the Polish king had to admit the failure and allow a legal Orthodox Metropolitan in Kiev.

And for the "absorbtion" in the Russian empire, much of that was done by those who returned to Orthodoxy from Galicia, where the Austro-Hungarian authorities went in denial about the Return to Orthodoxy movement, all the while hearding those who did so in concetration camps and otherwise making martyrs and confessors for the Orthodox Faith.  The autocephalous Church of Bukowina set up by the Austrian emperor ended up with over a half million Orthodox Ruthenians.

"The main seat of the Church came to be established in the ity of L'viv, as it could no longer operate in the Russian-occupied areas, including Kiev, the original seat of the Church's Metropolitan."

LOL.  That Metropolitan never took up his "seat."  Kiev was firmly Orthodox, and as stated above, was so officially and legally within a generation of the "union."  The HQ was always L'viv, where they demolished the Orthodox Cathedral (can we get that back?) and built their own St. George's on top of it.

I notice that your source doesn't mention a word about interwar Poland ethnic and religious cleansing of the area.  Many who submitted to the Vatican found that that didn't impress the Polish authorities.  It mentions interwar Czechoslovakia, but not the large movement to Orthodoxy in it, creating the Orthodox Church of the Czech Lands and Slovakia: its primate, St. Gorazd, was a former priest of the Vatican, and Latin rite.

Given what the Poles did in Galicia, one may question the inflated figures for the "faithful."

"In 1968, the Uniate Church of Czechoslovakia was restored..."

No mention that no all went back, although they could.  Nor anything about those who embraced Orthodoxy in Austria-Hungary times or inter-war Czechoslovakia.

A good critique. It should be noted that in addition to persecution as a basis for the 'acceptance' of the Unia , as least as it applies to the Austro-Hungarian Empire, that the Roman clergy had a social/political status that was higher than the Orthodox, who prior to the Unia lived among, and with the status of the serfs. I had always been taught growing up that the root causes of the Unia in the 16th and 17th centuries had little if anything to do with theology and issues of faith, but had everything to do with the geopolitics of the era and the continued fallout from the fall of Constantinope in 1453. Likewise, the return to Orthodoxy of some (if not many) in America during the twentieth century did not spring initially from a faith based revival, but rather arose from the arrogant treatment of the Ruthentian/Rusyn and Galician immigrants and their clergy by the Roman hierarchy in America and a lack of support from the Old World, both from the old homelands and from Rome. That certainly was the experience of St. Alexis Toth and , forty years later, Bishop Orestes (Chornock). That being said, we need to respect each other and move forward, not dwelling in the past.

Yes, I have no interest in picking scabs.  As I've said before, I am more than willing to express my distaste with the idea of state power reclaiming the Orthodox of the area, and in the interest of peace support the agreement that had been worked out with the Vatican on the basis of present communicants freely choosing.  However, I do find acts like the claim made above about Kiev being the seat of their Metropolitan-now self proclaimed patriach-and moving his see to Kiev as provoking problems.  I don't want to see history repeat itself, and it has been my experience that when someone denies ever having wronged, it means "if given the opportunity, I will do it again."

You are quite right about Kiev and the lack of an historical Eastern Catholic presence there. To claim that it is the See of the UGCC is an affront. We Orthodox need to work towards canonical order within our own house in Ukraine. Issues within Ukraine go well beyond religious affiliation and one can not ignore the vast regional differences of opinion.  However, this is neither the thread, nor the board, to go down that discussion path.
Logged
John Larocque
Catholic
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox
Posts: 530


« Reply #54 on: December 12, 2009, 11:38:22 AM »

This same archbishop Hilarion now describes "prosletysm" as not as large a problem then it used to be. Which means that the bulk of the MP's issues with RCC (non-doctrinal) are essentially church property issues. I hope they work them out.

The ROC, and Hilarion, seem enthusiastic about partnering with the RCC in combating secularism and liberalism in Europe. It's fascinating to watch, given the history between them. Check out this story.
http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0905462.htm
Logged
Orthodoc
Supporter & Defender Of Orthodoxy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 2,526

Those who ignore history tend to repeat it.


« Reply #55 on: December 12, 2009, 11:51:46 AM »

This same archbishop Hilarion now describes "prosletysm" as not as large a problem then it used to be. Which means that the bulk of the MP's issues with RCC (non-doctrinal) are essentially church property issues. I hope they work them out.The ROC, and Hilarion, seem enthusiastic about partnering with the RCC in combating secularism and liberalism in Europe. It's fascinating to watch, given the history between them. Check out this story.
http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0905462.htm


Can you show me exactly where in this article Archbishop Hilarion states "proseltysm" is no longer as large a problem as it used to be?

Orthodoc
« Last Edit: December 12, 2009, 11:52:18 AM by Orthodoc » Logged

Oh Lord, Save thy people and bless thine inheritance.
Grant victory to the Orthodox Christians over their adversaries.
And by virtue of thy Cross preserve thy habitation.
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,884


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #56 on: December 12, 2009, 12:18:32 PM »

Quote
"LOL.  12 million?  The PL Commonwealth only had about 12 million at time, and most of them were following the Vatican or Calvin.  And it is only where the Polish king hold sway that "the Church" existed at all."

That figure is from Fr. Serge Keheler's book.  Go over to byzcath and ask where he got it.

Quote
"It seems your source is in denial about the failure of the "union": within a generation a clandestine, and illegal, Orthodox hiearchy was set up and was functioning, and shortly thereafter, in 1632 even the Polish king had to admit the failure and allow a legal Orthodox Metropolitan in Kiev."

The Greek Catholic eparchies in Belarus were forcibly suppressed by the Czar in the late 1800s.  In fact a feast days was instituted to commemorate it.  

Quote
"And for the "absorbtion" in the Russian empire, much of that was done by those who returned to Orthodoxy from Galicia, where the Austro-Hungarian authorities went in denial about the Return to Orthodoxy movement, all the while hearding those who did so in concetration camps and otherwise making martyrs and confessors for the Orthodox Faith.  The autocephalous Church of Bukowina set up by the Austrian emperor ended up with over a half million Orthodox Ruthenians."

What the Austrians did was wrong, and I have never defended it.


Quote
LOL.  That Metropolitan never took up his "seat."  Kiev was firmly Orthodox, and as stated above, was so officially and legally within a generation of the "union."  The HQ was always L'viv, where they demolished the Orthodox Cathedral (can we get that back?) and built their own St. George's on top of it.

Well you don't know your history very well then.  Of the eight bishops who met at Brest, six joined the union including Metropolitan Michael of Kiev.  The two who did not sign and remained Orthodox were those of Przemyśl and Lviv who did not join the union until 1693 and 1700 respectively.

Quote
I notice that your source doesn't mention a word about interwar Poland ethnic and religious cleansing of the area.  Many who submitted to the Vatican found that that didn't impress the Polish authorities.  It mentions interwar Czechoslovakia, but not the large movement to Orthodoxy in it, creating the Orthodox Church of the Czech Lands and Slovakia: its primate, St. Gorazd, was a former priest of the Vatican, and Latin rite.

She didn't write about the Greek Catholics of Mukachevo, Presov, Hadudorog, or Krizevci either.  Her paper was about the re-emergence of the UGCC in Western Ukraine.

« Last Edit: December 12, 2009, 12:19:25 PM by Deacon Lance » Logged

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

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,884


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #57 on: December 12, 2009, 12:22:21 PM »

I don't want to see history repeat itself, and it has been my experience that when someone denies ever having wronged, it means "if given the opportunity, I will do it again."

Well the UOC-MP denies having done anything wrong to the UGCC...
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
John Larocque
Catholic
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox
Posts: 530


« Reply #58 on: December 12, 2009, 12:25:38 PM »

Can you show me exactly where in this article Archbishop Hilarion states "proseltysm" is no longer as large a problem as it used to be?

It was a different article, this one.

http://www.mospat.ru/en/2009/11/12/news8273/

Quote
Archbishop Hilarion continued, noting that the problem of proselytism was not as acute today as it was ten years ago. ‘Today the Roman Catholic Church is aware that proselytism is inadmissible and this awareness exists not only on the official level but also among ordinary missionaries and members of Catholic monastic orders’, he said, adding that there were a special bilateral commission for considering particular cases of proselytism. ‘I would say therefore that it is the theme of Unia that remains today the main stumbling block in our Orthodox-Catholic relations’, he stressed.
« Last Edit: December 12, 2009, 12:26:20 PM by John Larocque » Logged
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,884


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #59 on: December 12, 2009, 12:27:46 PM »


I was for some reason or another unable to open Fr Deacon Lance's website recommendation.  Based on your excellent response it's probably better I hadn't succeeded.  Thanks for responding.  It's amazing how history is distorted and rewritten by those who use force and politics rather than theology as their chief weapon.

Orthodoc

The salient quote was:

"In anticipation of difficulties over the "normalization" of the Ukrainian Catholic Church in the Soviet Union, the Vatican and the Russian Orthodox Church agreed in January 1990 to strike a commission to try and resolve property issues.(88) This "Quadripartite Commission" consisted of two representatives each of the Vatican, the Ukrainian Catholic Church, the Russian Orthodox Church and the "autonomous" Ukrainian
Orthodox Church. It began its activities in March, but in Kiev, and not, as had been anticipated, in L'viv.(89) Its beginnings did not augur well for its future work, for the Ukrainian Catholic representatives were suddenly summoned to Kiev and given tickets for the train that night. The thorny issue of the future of L'viv's St. George's Cathedral almost derailed the commission at the outset. Nevertheless, rules were formulated about how church properties were to be allocated: if there was an evident majority of a given confession in a community, the church would belong to that confession. If the majority was not evident, "a free and secret vote," supervised by the commission, would be held. Despite this eminently sensible solution, the commission did not complete its work. On March 13, the Ukrainian Catholic Archbishop of L'viv, Volodymyr Sterniuk, walked out of its deliberations, claiming that the Russian Orthodox Church was issuing disinformation through the Russian-language press and that it was not ready to recognize the Greek Catholic Church as a Church but only as a group of Greek Catholics. On March 17 Archbishop Sterniuk issued a 14 point statement listing the issues that were crucial for the Ukrainian Catholic Church.(90) Clearly, he felt that the Vatican representatives on the Quadripartite Commission had not been responsive enough to the needs of the Ukrainian Catholic Church, and too accommodating to the Russian Orthodox Church's viewpoints. This was confirmed by a Vatican statement that the Archbishop was "taking a harder line than the Vatican."(91)
Sterniuk had judged correctly the likely effect of his "hard line" in L'viv itself. One of his demands was that St. George's Cathedral--the most visible symbol of the Church--be returned to the Ukrainian Catholic Church. This was discussed by the L'viv city council, which had some administrative authority over such issues, on April 6, 1990, and the council voted in favor of such a return. The Russian Orthodox Church representatives were told to begin moving their possessions to another church. Although Orthodox procrastination resulted in delays and the Cathedral was not in fact handed over until August, the direction of Church events in L'viv was clearly established. Naturally enough, the Russian Orthodox Church was most dissatisfied at this turn of events, against which it protested vigorously. Its most venomous utterances were directed at who it regarded as the usurpers: Bishop Ireney of Ivano-Frankivsk, of the newly-formed Ukrainian Orthodox Church (Moscow Patriarchate), was reported to have said "(y)ou Ukrainian Catholics will be chased like dogs."(92) Still, Easter in L'viv was celebrated in grand traditional style, even if not in St. George's, with the blessing of thousands of Easter baskets and midnight services in other churches. Meanwhile intemperate language continued. Bishop Ionafan, Secretary of the Synod of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (Moscow Patriarchate) and Assistant to Metropolitan Filaret, referred to the tensions over St. George's and other properties, and the failure of the Quadripartite Commission, as a "spiritual Chornobyl" and compared West Ukraine to another Northern Ireland.(93) In response, Bishop Pavlo Vasylyk, the Ukrainian Catholic Auxiliary Bishop of Ivano-Frankivsk, said that "the work of the commission was not only senseless but in some ways absurd, because it was impossible for the persecuted to dialogue with the persecutors."(94) Plainly, the two sides had nothing useful to say to each other.
Archbishop Sterniuk, the senior Ukrainian Catholic prelate in Ukraine itself, was critical of both the Holy See and the Russian Orthodox Church. The Vatican, he let it be known,
"seems willing to give away our churches," while the Russian Orthodox Church "was not ready to recognize the Ukrainian Catholic Church as a Church"
and refused to recognize the Ukrainian Catholic bishops as official because they had not been appointed by the Pope.(95) Unheeded by the Vatican, Archbishop Sterniuk was described by one writer as a "marginalized Lvivite."(96) However, he was supported in his tough stand by the L'viv city council and by Rukh leaders who "voiced their complete distrust of the Russian Orthodox Church, and incomprehension of the Vatican's intentions with regard to the Quadripartite commission."(97)
By this time, May 1990, 800 registration applications for Ukrainian Catholic churches had been made and only seven had been granted."
« Last Edit: December 12, 2009, 12:32:12 PM by Deacon Lance » Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
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: 37,453



« Reply #60 on: December 12, 2009, 01:23:58 PM »

Quote
"LOL.  12 million?  The PL Commonwealth only had about 12 million at time, and most of them were following the Vatican or Calvin.  And it is only where the Polish king hold sway that "the Church" existed at all."

That figure is from Fr. Serge Keheler's book.  Go over to byzcath and ask where he got it.

Quote
"It seems your source is in denial about the failure of the "union": within a generation a clandestine, and illegal, Orthodox hiearchy was set up and was functioning, and shortly thereafter, in 1632 even the Polish king had to admit the failure and allow a legal Orthodox Metropolitan in Kiev."

The Greek Catholic eparchies in Belarus were forcibly suppressed by the Czar in the late 1800s.  In fact a feast days was instituted to commemorate it.

You mean the return of Saint Sophia Cathedral in Polatsk, and its diocese (the one Kuntsevich used as his base to suppress the Orthodox), to Orthodoxy, after the failure of the "Union" supported November Uprising in Poland?

Quote
Quote
"And for the "absorbtion" in the Russian empire, much of that was done by those who returned to Orthodoxy from Galicia, where the Austro-Hungarian authorities went in denial about the Return to Orthodoxy movement, all the while hearding those who did so in concetration camps and otherwise making martyrs and confessors for the Orthodox Faith.  The autocephalous Church of Bukowina set up by the Austrian emperor ended up with over a half million Orthodox Ruthenians."

What the Austrians did was wrong, and I have never defended it.


But your supreme pontiff has celebrated it.

Quote
Quote
LOL.  That Metropolitan never took up his "seat."  Kiev was firmly Orthodox, and as stated above, was so officially and legally within a generation of the "union."  The HQ was always L'viv, where they demolished the Orthodox Cathedral (can we get that back?) and built their own St. George's on top of it.

Well you don't know your history very well then.  Of the eight bishops who met at Brest, six joined the union including Metropolitan Michael of Kiev.  The two who did not sign and remained Orthodox were those of Przemyśl and Lviv who did not join the union until 1693 and 1700 respectively.

Although the Polish King closed all the Churches in Brest except St. Nicholas, which was left open so the "union" could be proclaimed, the Orthodox did hold their Synod, which on October 9 deposed Metropolitan Michael and those bishops with him for their "synod" on October 8.  The deposed Metropolitan Michael died shortly thereafter, without ever making Kiev a center for his "union," its activities always restricted to the West, i.e. when the Polish king had firmest control.

The Cossacks and religion in early modern Ukraine By Serhii Plokhy
http://books.google.com/books?id=NCzzxNisc1MC&pg=PA84&dq=Union+of+Brest+St.+Nicholas+Mykhail+Rohoza&lr=&cd=1#v=onepage&q=Union%20of%20Brest%20St.%20Nicholas%20Mykhail%20Rohoza&f=false

Quote
Quote
I notice that your source doesn't mention a word about interwar Poland ethnic and religious cleansing of the area.  Many who submitted to the Vatican found that that didn't impress the Polish authorities.  It mentions interwar Czechoslovakia, but not the large movement to Orthodoxy in it, creating the Orthodox Church of the Czech Lands and Slovakia: its primate, St. Gorazd, was a former priest of the Vatican, and Latin rite.

She didn't write about the Greek Catholics of Mukachevo, Presov, Hadudorog, or Krizevci either.  Her paper was about the re-emergence of the UGCC in Western Ukraine.
Can you find Western Ukrain on these maps?

http://ivrozbiorpolski.pl/en/img/mapa1-4-3.gif

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/07/First_Czechoslovak_Republic.SVG/800px-First_Czechoslovak_Republic.SVG.png
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
Warned
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: 37,453



« Reply #61 on: December 12, 2009, 01:30:10 PM »


I was for some reason or another unable to open Fr Deacon Lance's website recommendation.  Based on your excellent response it's probably better I hadn't succeeded.  Thanks for responding.  It's amazing how history is distorted and rewritten by those who use force and politics rather than theology as their chief weapon.

Orthodoc

The salient quote was:

"In anticipation of difficulties over the "normalization" of the Ukrainian Catholic Church in the Soviet Union, the Vatican and the Russian Orthodox Church agreed in January 1990 to strike a commission to try and resolve property issues.(88) This "Quadripartite Commission" consisted of two representatives each of the Vatican, the Ukrainian Catholic Church, the Russian Orthodox Church and the "autonomous" Ukrainian
Orthodox Church. It began its activities in March, but in Kiev, and not, as had been anticipated, in L'viv.(89) Its beginnings did not augur well for its future work, for the Ukrainian Catholic representatives were suddenly summoned to Kiev and given tickets for the train that night. The thorny issue of the future of L'viv's St. George's Cathedral almost derailed the commission at the outset. Nevertheless, rules were formulated about how church properties were to be allocated: if there was an evident majority of a given confession in a community, the church would belong to that confession. If the majority was not evident, "a free and secret vote," supervised by the commission, would be held. Despite this eminently sensible solution, the commission did not complete its work. On March 13, the Ukrainian Catholic Archbishop of L'viv, Volodymyr Sterniuk, walked out of its deliberations, claiming that the Russian Orthodox Church was issuing disinformation through the Russian-language press and that it was not ready to recognize the Greek Catholic Church as a Church but only as a group of Greek Catholics. On March 17 Archbishop Sterniuk issued a 14 point statement listing the issues that were crucial for the Ukrainian Catholic Church.(90) Clearly, he felt that the Vatican representatives on the Quadripartite Commission had not been responsive enough to the needs of the Ukrainian Catholic Church, and too accommodating to the Russian Orthodox Church's viewpoints. This was confirmed by a Vatican statement that the Archbishop was "taking a harder line than the Vatican."(91)
Sterniuk had judged correctly the likely effect of his "hard line" in L'viv itself. One of his demands was that St. George's Cathedral--the most visible symbol of the Church--be returned to the Ukrainian Catholic Church. This was discussed by the L'viv city council, which had some administrative authority over such issues, on April 6, 1990, and the council voted in favor of such a return. The Russian Orthodox Church representatives were told to begin moving their possessions to another church. Although Orthodox procrastination resulted in delays and the Cathedral was not in fact handed over until August, the direction of Church events in L'viv was clearly established. Naturally enough, the Russian Orthodox Church was most dissatisfied at this turn of events, against which it protested vigorously. Its most venomous utterances were directed at who it regarded as the usurpers: Bishop Ireney of Ivano-Frankivsk, of the newly-formed Ukrainian Orthodox Church (Moscow Patriarchate), was reported to have said "(y)ou Ukrainian Catholics will be chased like dogs."(92) Still, Easter in L'viv was celebrated in grand traditional style, even if not in St. George's, with the blessing of thousands of Easter baskets and midnight services in other churches. Meanwhile intemperate language continued. Bishop Ionafan, Secretary of the Synod of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (Moscow Patriarchate) and Assistant to Metropolitan Filaret, referred to the tensions over St. George's and other properties, and the failure of the Quadripartite Commission, as a "spiritual Chornobyl" and compared West Ukraine to another Northern Ireland.(93) In response, Bishop Pavlo Vasylyk, the Ukrainian Catholic Auxiliary Bishop of Ivano-Frankivsk, said that "the work of the commission was not only senseless but in some ways absurd, because it was impossible for the persecuted to dialogue with the persecutors."(94)

You mean like at Brest, Florence....

Soooo the local Orthodox I take it then have no use to talk with the UCCC L'viv hiearchy then.


Quote
On March 13, the Ukrainian Catholic Archbishop of L'viv, Volodymyr Sterniuk, walked out of its deliberations, claiming that the Russian Orthodox Church was issuing disinformation through the Russian-language press and that it was not ready to recognize the Greek Catholic Church as a Church but only as a group of Greek Catholics. On March 17 Archbishop Sterniuk issued a 14 point statement listing the issues that were crucial for the Ukrainian Catholic Church.(90) Clearly, he felt that the Vatican representatives on the Quadripartite Commission had not been responsive enough to the needs of the Ukrainian Catholic Church, and too accommodating to the Russian Orthodox Church's viewpoints. This was confirmed by a Vatican statement that the Archbishop was "taking a harder line than the Vatican."(91)....
Plainly, the two sides had nothing useful to say to each other.
Archbishop Sterniuk, the senior Ukrainian Catholic prelate in Ukraine itself, was critical of both the Holy See and the Russian Orthodox Church. The Vatican, he let it be known,
"seems willing to give away our churches," while the Russian Orthodox Church "was not ready to recognize the Ukrainian Catholic Church as a Church"
and refused to recognize the Ukrainian Catholic bishops as official because they had not been appointed by the Pope.(95) Unheeded by the Vatican, Archbishop Sterniuk was described by one writer as a "marginalized Lvivite."(96) However, he was supported in his tough stand by the L'viv city council and by Rukh leaders who "voiced their complete distrust of the Russian Orthodox Church, and incomprehension of the Vatican's intentions with regard to the Quadripartite commission."(97)
By this time, May 1990, 800 registration applications for Ukrainian Catholic churches had been made and only seven had been granted."

Well, he's YOUR supreme pontiff, and you claim that is by choice.
« Last Edit: December 12, 2009, 01:33:41 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
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,884


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #62 on: December 12, 2009, 02:52:58 PM »

It's amazing how history is distorted and rewritten by those who use force and politics rather than theology as their chief weapon.

Orthodoc

You like to quote George Santayana: "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" (from "Life of Reason I").

We must remember the past but we cannot judge it out of context.  From the time of the schism through Councils of Lyons and Florence, and the Unions of Brest, Uzhorod, and Alba Julia both Catholic and Orthodox Churches were tied to politics and the the idea that the religion of the king should be the religion of the people.  We should not be surprised that during this time Emperors and Kings promoted and facilitated the movement of their populations from one church to the other.  From a theological and moral view this is inadmissable.  But as history shows from the time of St. Constantine till now politics unfortunately rise to the top.  We cannot, however, turn back the clock and pretend history did not happen.  Whether the formation of the Greek Catholic Churches was right or wrong, centuries have passed and they now exist full of people who don't want to be Orthodox and don't want to be Latin Catholic.  You have the right to think they are wrong for thinking that way but you don't have the right to tell them they can't be what they have been raised to be: Greek Catholic.  You also can't ask children to pay for the sins of their fathers.  The difference between 1596 and 1946 is that in 1990 people were still alive who were kicked out of the churches and forced underground in 1946.  You may think the UOC-MP keeping the churches taken in 1946 rectifies 1596 but it cannot because taking back the churches of the innocent ancestors of Brest cannot repair the damage done, a people once united in faith now divided no longer in communion with one another.  We cannot pertend the past has not been.  You don't trust the Latin and Greek Catholics, justifiably so.  But for what reason should the Greek Catholics have trusted the UOC-MP or a commission of Latin Catholics they knew to be more interested in appeasing the MP than protecting their rights and interests?  What reason did the UGCC have to trust that parish elections wouldn't be rigged by those who took the churches in the first place?  They too were justified.  Again that is the past.  What is done is done and I don't see either side hurting for churches at this point.

Fr Deacon Lance   
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
augustin717
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: The other ROC
Posts: 5,631



« Reply #63 on: December 12, 2009, 03:34:11 PM »

Typical for the relationship between Greek-Catholic and Orthodox in a village in Transylvania:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zIItLJp7FVU
Logged
podkarpatska
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,228


SS Cyril and Methodius Church, Mercer, PA


WWW
« Reply #64 on: December 12, 2009, 04:36:39 PM »

It's amazing how history is distorted and rewritten by those who use force and politics rather than theology as their chief weapon.

Orthodoc

You like to quote George Santayana: "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" (from "Life of Reason I").

We must remember the past but we cannot judge it out of context.  From the time of the schism through Councils of Lyons and Florence, and the Unions of Brest, Uzhorod, and Alba Julia both Catholic and Orthodox Churches were tied to politics and the the idea that the religion of the king should be the religion of the people.  We should not be surprised that during this time Emperors and Kings promoted and facilitated the movement of their populations from one church to the other.  From a theological and moral view this is inadmissable.  But as history shows from the time of St. Constantine till now politics unfortunately rise to the top.  We cannot, however, turn back the clock and pretend history did not happen.  Whether the formation of the Greek Catholic Churches was right or wrong, centuries have passed and they now exist full of people who don't want to be Orthodox and don't want to be Latin Catholic.  You have the right to think they are wrong for thinking that way but you don't have the right to tell them they can't be what they have been raised to be: Greek Catholic.  You also can't ask children to pay for the sins of their fathers.  The difference between 1596 and 1946 is that in 1990 people were still alive who were kicked out of the churches and forced underground in 1946.  You may think the UOC-MP keeping the churches taken in 1946 rectifies 1596 but it cannot because taking back the churches of the innocent ancestors of Brest cannot repair the damage done, a people once united in faith now divided no longer in communion with one another.  We cannot pertend the past has not been.  You don't trust the Latin and Greek Catholics, justifiably so.  But for what reason should the Greek Catholics have trusted the UOC-MP or a commission of Latin Catholics they knew to be more interested in appeasing the MP than protecting their rights and interests?  What reason did the UGCC have to trust that parish elections wouldn't be rigged by those who took the churches in the first place?  They too were justified.  Again that is the past.  What is done is done and I don't see either side hurting for churches at this point.

Fr Deacon Lance   

I agree with most of what Deacon Lance states. I have family on BOTH sides of this divide in America and in Europe although I canonly speak to the American experience. My father recently reposed at age 92 after a lifetime of service to the Church, having been ordained priest by + Bishop Orestes of thrice blessed memory. He bore witness to the indignities and excesses that BOTH sides were guilty of promulgating from the split within his and my mother's home parishes to each parish community where he served. Certainly that behavior was neither Christ-like, Orthodox or Roman Catholic. I do know that in community, by community across much of the Northeast that time has healed many wounds and we have prayerfully learned to respect the choices that our parents and grandparents each other made or was forced to make. In the early 90's he happened to be in Slovakia when the son of his first cousin was ordained priest in the Greek Catholic Cathedral in Presov. To his surprise he was invited to say a few words on behalf of the American relatives by the Greek Catholic Bishop - who knew full well that he was an Orthodox priest. The reception he received was in fact full of love and brotherhood. He never glossed over the fact that each side took a different path and as many Slavs say, 'it is what it is.' A child of another cousin was an Orthodox seminarian another is a Greek Catholic nun. History compells is to understand that the present is forged by the experiences of the past. Being alive compells us to work not to live in the past or repeat its errors.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
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: 37,453



« Reply #65 on: December 12, 2009, 06:12:15 PM »

It's amazing how history is distorted and rewritten by those who use force and politics rather than theology as their chief weapon.

Orthodoc

You like to quote George Santayana: "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" (from "Life of Reason I").

We must remember the past but we cannot judge it out of context.  From the time of the schism through Councils of Lyons and Florence, and the Unions of Brest, Uzhorod, and Alba Julia both Catholic and Orthodox Churches were tied to politics and the the idea that the religion of the king should be the religion of the people. 

LOL.  I'm sure that is what Pope Clement VII told Henry the VIII.

I believe that I have previously pointed out that the East has never accepted the idea of cuius regio, eius religio, as the Monothelite Heracleans, the Iconoclast emperors and those emperors who submitted to the Vatican in a deal for military aid, found out to their sorrow.  And that went on into modern times: the first Kings of Greece, Romania and Bulgaria, for instance, newly freed from the Ottomans, were communicants with the Vatican Shocked.  Despite that, they still appointed the Holy Governing Synods, and the state Church remained the Orthodox Faith of the masses of their subjects.

Caesaropapism is a projection of the West. It doesn't describe the symphonia of the East.

Quote
We should not be surprised that during this time Emperors and Kings promoted and facilitated the movement of their populations from one church to the other.  From a theological and moral view this is inadmissable.  But as history shows from the time of St. Constantine till now politics unfortunately rise to the top.  We cannot, however, turn back the clock and pretend history did not happen.  Whether the formation of the Greek Catholic Churches was right or wrong, centuries have passed and they now exist full of people who don't want to be Orthodox and don't want to be Latin Catholic.  You have the right to think they are wrong for thinking that way but you don't have the right to tell them they can't be what they have been raised to be: Greek Catholic. 

You mean the confused "Orthodox in communion with Rome?"

That is easy enough in theory.  But then, to follow up on the OP, you get claims of self-proclaimed patriarch Husar on see of Kiev.  Kiev has a canonical bishop, +Volodymyr, who continues the episcopal line unbroken from the time it was established in Kiev.


Quote
You also can't ask children to pay for the sins of their fathers.  The difference between 1596 and 1946 is that in 1990 people were still alive who were kicked out of the churches and forced underground in 1946. 

Saint Alexei Kabalyuk, who was kicked out of his churches and forced underground by the Austria-Hungarians, and many, many in his flock were still alive in 1946.

When my old priest's father came to the US, his bishop told him to go to the Orthodox bishop, and not the Latin one, in America.  "Here we have to be Katolik.  In Amerika you don't."  He was alive too.

And his wife, who watched the Polish police drag out priests in their vestment to dance like bears, was alive too when the Polish government went on a campaign of destroying and confiscating Orthdoox Churches, selling bonds to tear down what was the Metropolitan Cathedral of Poland.  She was alive too.

I know how you have been misled: the histories of Brest, Uzhhorod and Alba Iulia that the Vatican puts out portrays it as a popular rush to kiss the papal slipper.  The acts were signed and PRESTO! Greek Catholic masses.

The Truth lies elsewhere.

The Orthodox masses fought the "unions" as they had fought Florence, bringing home that although some bishops, even if the majority of bishops, wanted to wheel and deal, the Orthodox Church was not for sale.

In the case of Alba Iulia, for instance, you have the Austrians taking all the Church properties, and then a century later rampaging throughout the land, destroying the buildings the Orthodox had built to replace the stolen.  From 1596 to 1940, it was a continuous struggle that did not let up.  So you are right, the generation of 1596 were not alive in 1940.  But their descendants, physical and spiritual were. As they were in Galicia, Little Poland, Byelorussia, etc...

And given the declining life expectancy in Ukraine, we are not talking about a large number of "those who were still alive."

Btw, your source raised a question of how Orthodox the Faithful were in 1946.  I wonder how much in union they were in 1940 and before.


Quote
You may think the UOC-MP keeping the churches taken in 1946 rectifies 1596

I don't.

Quote
but it cannot because taking back the churches of the innocent ancestors of Brest cannot repair the damage done, a people once united in faith now divided no longer in communion with one another.  We cannot pertend the past has not been.  You don't trust the Latin and Greek Catholics, justifiably so.  But for what reason should the Greek Catholics have trusted the UOC-MP or a commission of Latin Catholics they knew to be more interested in appeasing the MP than protecting their rights and interests? 

Because you chose your supreme pontiff. Now obey him.  This is nothing new: the unions were always geared to extracting submission to the Vatican in exchange for lip service to rights and interests of the submitted.

Quote
What reason did the UGCC have to trust that parish elections wouldn't be rigged by those who took the churches in the first place? 

Is that the guilty conscience of the claim "the bishops petitioned for union" that I hear?


Quote
They too were justified.  Again that is the past.

Unlike 1946, there are plenty of people still alive....
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
ignatius
Baptacathadox
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic > Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA - Diocese of the South
Posts: 1,690


My Son Aidan... :-)


« Reply #66 on: February 06, 2010, 07:46:50 PM »

As a visible symbol of Catholic unity, it had been the custom to maintain Greek churches and monasteries in Rome and some of Latin Rite in Constantinople. In 1053, Michael Caerularius ordered all the Latin churches in the Byzantine capital to be closed, and the Latin monks to be expelled. As a dogmatic justification of this violent rupture with the past, he advanced the novel tenet that the unleavened oblation of the "Franks" was not a valid Mass; and one of his chaplains, Constantine by name, with a fanaticism worthy of a Calvinist, trod the consecrated Host under his feet. The proclamation of war with the pope and the West was drawn up by his chief lieutenant, Leo of Aehrida, Metropolitan of the Bulgarians. It was in the form of a letter addressed to John, Bishop of Trani, in Apulia, at the time subject to the Byzantine emperor, and by decree of Leo the Isaurian attached to the Eastern Patriarchate. John was commanded to have the letter translated into Latin and communicated to the pope and the Western bishops. This was done by the learned Benedictine, Cardinal Humbert, who happened to be present in Trani when the letter arrived. Baronius has preserved the Latin version; Cardinal Hergenrother was so fortunate as to discover the original Greek text (Cornelius Will, Acta et Scripta, 51 sqq.). It is a curious sample of Greek logic. "The love of God and a feeling of friendliness impelled the writers to admonish the Bishops, clergy, monks and laymen of the Franks, and the Most Reverend Pope himself, concerning their azyms and Sabbaths, which were unbecoming, as being Jewish observances and instituted by Moses. But our Pasch is Christ. The Lord, indeed, obeyed the law by first celebrating the legal pasch; but, as we learn from the Gospel, he subsequently instituted the new pasch.... He took bread, etc., that is, a thing full of life and spirit and heat. You call bread panis; we call it artos. This from airoel (airo) to raise, signifies a something elevated, lifted up, being raised and warmed by the ferment and salt; the azym, on the other hand, is as lifeless as a stone or baked clay, fit only to symbolize affliction and suffering. But our Pasch is replete with joy; it elevates us from the earth to heaven even as the leaven raises and warms the bread", etc. This etymological manipulation of artos from airo was about as valuable in deciding a theological controversy as Melanchthon's discovery that the Greek for "penance" is metanoia. The Latin divines found an abundance of passages in Scripture where unleavened bread is designated as artos. Cardinal Humbert remembered immediately the places where the unleavened loaves of proposition are called artoi. If the writers of the letter had been familiar with the Septuagint, they would have recalled the artous azymous of Ex., xxix, 2.
Logged

St Basil the Great (330-379 A.D.): “I think then that the one goal of all who are really and truly serving the Lord ought to be to bring back to union the churches who have at different times and in diverse manners divided from one another.”
John Larocque
Catholic
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox
Posts: 530


« Reply #67 on: February 06, 2010, 08:15:22 PM »

Ancient history aside, the main impediment to full and cordial relations with the RCC are the pastoral concerns of Orthodox deprived of their former temples in Western Ukraine, and I think some sort of guarantee that no more property will exchange hands. Hilarion said in a recent interview they were not interested in getting the property back and that they recognize that the temples used to be theirs (UGCC), but his main focus was on the needs of the now parish-less believers, and some sort of arrangement with UGCC to see their needs met. I should probably find a link.

http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2010/01/13/ukraine-dispute-blocks-vatican-russian-orthodox-meeting-hilarion/

here it is.

Quote
The Russian Orthodox Church does not demand the churches are returned but wants the Vatican to take “concrete measures” towards improving the situation, Hilarion said, such as helping Orthodox followers who have only Catholic churches nearby.

Again, these seem like reasonable measures.
« Last Edit: February 06, 2010, 08:19:12 PM by John Larocque » Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
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: 37,453



« Reply #68 on: February 06, 2010, 08:46:35 PM »

As a visible symbol of Catholic unity, it had been the custom to maintain Greek churches and monasteries in Rome and some of Latin Rite in Constantinople. In 1053, Michael Caerularius ordered all the Latin churches in the Byzantine capital to be closed, and the Latin monks to be expelled. As a dogmatic justification of this violent rupture with the past, he advanced the novel tenet that the unleavened oblation of the "Franks" was not a valid Mass; and one of his chaplains, Constantine by name, with a fanaticism worthy of a Calvinist, trod the consecrated Host under his feet. The proclamation of war with the pope and the West was drawn up by his chief lieutenant, Leo of Aehrida, Metropolitan of the Bulgarians. It was in the form of a letter addressed to John, Bishop of Trani, in Apulia, at the time subject to the Byzantine emperor, and by decree of Leo the Isaurian attached to the Eastern Patriarchate. John was commanded to have the letter translated into Latin and communicated to the pope and the Western bishops. This was done by the learned Benedictine, Cardinal Humbert, who happened to be present in Trani when the letter arrived. Baronius has preserved the Latin version; Cardinal Hergenrother was so fortunate as to discover the original Greek text (Cornelius Will, Acta et Scripta, 51 sqq.). It is a curious sample of Greek logic. "The love of God and a feeling of friendliness impelled the writers to admonish the Bishops, clergy, monks and laymen of the Franks, and the Most Reverend Pope himself, concerning their azyms and Sabbaths, which were unbecoming, as being Jewish observances and instituted by Moses. But our Pasch is Christ. The Lord, indeed, obeyed the law by first celebrating the legal pasch; but, as we learn from the Gospel, he subsequently instituted the new pasch.... He took bread, etc., that is, a thing full of life and spirit and heat. You call bread panis; we call it artos. This from airoel (airo) to raise, signifies a something elevated, lifted up, being raised and warmed by the ferment and salt; the azym, on the other hand, is as lifeless as a stone or baked clay, fit only to symbolize affliction and suffering. But our Pasch is replete with joy; it elevates us from the earth to heaven even as the leaven raises and warms the bread", etc. This etymological manipulation of artos from airo was about as valuable in deciding a theological controversy as Melanchthon's discovery that the Greek for "penance" is metanoia. The Latin divines found an abundance of passages in Scripture where unleavened bread is designated as artos. Cardinal Humbert remembered immediately the places where the unleavened loaves of proposition are called artoi. If the writers of the letter had been familiar with the Septuagint, they would have recalled the artous azymous of Ex., xxix, 2.
The word means loaves.  In Ex. xxix, 2 2 καὶ ἄρτους ἀζύμους πεφυραμένους ἐν ἐλαίῳ καὶ λάγανα ἄζυμα κεχρισμένα ἐν ἐλαίῳ σεμίδαλιν ἐκ πυρῶν ποιήσεις αὐτά, it means loaves of unleavened bread, just as John 6:9 ιν παιδάριον ὧδε ὃς ἔχει πέντε ἄρτους κριθίνους καὶ δύο ὀψάρια· ἀλλὰ ταῦτα τί ἐστιν εἰς τοσούτους;  tells fives loaves of barley bread.   ἄρτος by itself NEVER means unleavend mazza.  That's ἄζυμα.

Btw, your source
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02172a.htm
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
ignatius
Baptacathadox
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic > Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA - Diocese of the South
Posts: 1,690


My Son Aidan... :-)


« Reply #69 on: February 06, 2010, 09:06:17 PM »

As a visible symbol of Catholic unity, it had been the custom to maintain Greek churches and monasteries in Rome and some of Latin Rite in Constantinople. In 1053, Michael Caerularius ordered all the Latin churches in the Byzantine capital to be closed, and the Latin monks to be expelled. As a dogmatic justification of this violent rupture with the past, he advanced the novel tenet that the unleavened oblation of the "Franks" was not a valid Mass; and one of his chaplains, Constantine by name, with a fanaticism worthy of a Calvinist, trod the consecrated Host under his feet. The proclamation of war with the pope and the West was drawn up by his chief lieutenant, Leo of Aehrida, Metropolitan of the Bulgarians. It was in the form of a letter addressed to John, Bishop of Trani, in Apulia, at the time subject to the Byzantine emperor, and by decree of Leo the Isaurian attached to the Eastern Patriarchate. John was commanded to have the letter translated into Latin and communicated to the pope and the Western bishops. This was done by the learned Benedictine, Cardinal Humbert, who happened to be present in Trani when the letter arrived. Baronius has preserved the Latin version; Cardinal Hergenrother was so fortunate as to discover the original Greek text (Cornelius Will, Acta et Scripta, 51 sqq.). It is a curious sample of Greek logic. "The love of God and a feeling of friendliness impelled the writers to admonish the Bishops, clergy, monks and laymen of the Franks, and the Most Reverend Pope himself, concerning their azyms and Sabbaths, which were unbecoming, as being Jewish observances and instituted by Moses. But our Pasch is Christ. The Lord, indeed, obeyed the law by first celebrating the legal pasch; but, as we learn from the Gospel, he subsequently instituted the new pasch.... He took bread, etc., that is, a thing full of life and spirit and heat. You call bread panis; we call it artos. This from airoel (airo) to raise, signifies a something elevated, lifted up, being raised and warmed by the ferment and salt; the azym, on the other hand, is as lifeless as a stone or baked clay, fit only to symbolize affliction and suffering. But our Pasch is replete with joy; it elevates us from the earth to heaven even as the leaven raises and warms the bread", etc. This etymological manipulation of artos from airo was about as valuable in deciding a theological controversy as Melanchthon's discovery that the Greek for "penance" is metanoia. The Latin divines found an abundance of passages in Scripture where unleavened bread is designated as artos. Cardinal Humbert remembered immediately the places where the unleavened loaves of proposition are called artoi. If the writers of the letter had been familiar with the Septuagint, they would have recalled the artous azymous of Ex., xxix, 2.
The word means loaves.  In Ex. xxix, 2 2 καὶ ἄρτους ἀζύμους πεφυραμένους ἐν ἐλαίῳ καὶ λάγανα ἄζυμα κεχρισμένα ἐν ἐλαίῳ σεμίδαλιν ἐκ πυρῶν ποιήσεις αὐτά, it means loaves of unleavened bread, just as John 6:9 ιν παιδάριον ὧδε ὃς ἔχει πέντε ἄρτους κριθίνους καὶ δύο ὀψάρια· ἀλλὰ ταῦτα τί ἐστιν εἰς τοσούτους;  tells fives loaves of barley bread.   ἄρτος by itself NEVER means unleavend mazza.  That's ἄζυμα.

Btw, your source
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02172a.htm

The point is it was the 'East' who first started throwing Christians out of their Parishes.
Logged

St Basil the Great (330-379 A.D.): “I think then that the one goal of all who are really and truly serving the Lord ought to be to bring back to union the churches who have at different times and in diverse manners divided from one another.”
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
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: 37,453



« Reply #70 on: February 06, 2010, 09:22:12 PM »

As a visible symbol of Catholic unity, it had been the custom to maintain Greek churches and monasteries in Rome and some of Latin Rite in Constantinople. In 1053, Michael Caerularius ordered all the Latin churches in the Byzantine capital to be closed, and the Latin monks to be expelled. As a dogmatic justification of this violent rupture with the past, he advanced the novel tenet that the unleavened oblation of the "Franks" was not a valid Mass; and one of his chaplains, Constantine by name, with a fanaticism worthy of a Calvinist, trod the consecrated Host under his feet. The proclamation of war with the pope and the West was drawn up by his chief lieutenant, Leo of Aehrida, Metropolitan of the Bulgarians. It was in the form of a letter addressed to John, Bishop of Trani, in Apulia, at the time subject to the Byzantine emperor, and by decree of Leo the Isaurian attached to the Eastern Patriarchate. John was commanded to have the letter translated into Latin and communicated to the pope and the Western bishops. This was done by the learned Benedictine, Cardinal Humbert, who happened to be present in Trani when the letter arrived. Baronius has preserved the Latin version; Cardinal Hergenrother was so fortunate as to discover the original Greek text (Cornelius Will, Acta et Scripta, 51 sqq.). It is a curious sample of Greek logic. "The love of God and a feeling of friendliness impelled the writers to admonish the Bishops, clergy, monks and laymen of the Franks, and the Most Reverend Pope himself, concerning their azyms and Sabbaths, which were unbecoming, as being Jewish observances and instituted by Moses. But our Pasch is Christ. The Lord, indeed, obeyed the law by first celebrating the legal pasch; but, as we learn from the Gospel, he subsequently instituted the new pasch.... He took bread, etc., that is, a thing full of life and spirit and heat. You call bread panis; we call it artos. This from airoel (airo) to raise, signifies a something elevated, lifted up, being raised and warmed by the ferment and salt; the azym, on the other hand, is as lifeless as a stone or baked clay, fit only to symbolize affliction and suffering. But our Pasch is replete with joy; it elevates us from the earth to heaven even as the leaven raises and warms the bread", etc. This etymological manipulation of artos from airo was about as valuable in deciding a theological controversy as Melanchthon's discovery that the Greek for "penance" is metanoia. The Latin divines found an abundance of passages in Scripture where unleavened bread is designated as artos. Cardinal Humbert remembered immediately the places where the unleavened loaves of proposition are called artoi. If the writers of the letter had been familiar with the Septuagint, they would have recalled the artous azymous of Ex., xxix, 2.
The word means loaves.  In Ex. xxix, 2 2 καὶ ἄρτους ἀζύμους πεφυραμένους ἐν ἐλαίῳ καὶ λάγανα ἄζυμα κεχρισμένα ἐν ἐλαίῳ σεμίδαλιν ἐκ πυρῶν ποιήσεις αὐτά, it means loaves of unleavened bread, just as John 6:9 ιν παιδάριον ὧδε ὃς ἔχει πέντε ἄρτους κριθίνους καὶ δύο ὀψάρια· ἀλλὰ ταῦτα τί ἐστιν εἰς τοσούτους;  tells fives loaves of barley bread.   ἄρτος by itself NEVER means unleavend mazza.  That's ἄζυμα.

Btw, your source
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02172a.htm

The point is it was the 'East' who first started throwing Christians out of their Parishes.
Uh, you forgot to mention the suppression of Ortodox in Southern Italy.  That came first.
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
MLPB
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 68


« Reply #71 on: February 08, 2010, 06:23:09 PM »

It's amazing how history is distorted and rewritten by those who use force and politics rather than theology as their chief weapon.

Orthodoc

You like to quote George Santayana: "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" (from "Life of Reason I").

We must remember the past but we cannot judge it out of context.  From the time of the schism through Councils of Lyons and Florence, and the Unions of Brest, Uzhorod, and Alba Julia both Catholic and Orthodox Churches were tied to politics and the the idea that the religion of the king should be the religion of the people.  We should not be surprised that during this time Emperors and Kings promoted and facilitated the movement of their populations from one church to the other.  From a theological and moral view this is inadmissable.  But as history shows from the time of St. Constantine till now politics unfortunately rise to the top.  We cannot, however, turn back the clock and pretend history did not happen.  Whether the formation of the Greek Catholic Churches was right or wrong, centuries have passed and they now exist full of people who don't want to be Orthodox and don't want to be Latin Catholic.  You have the right to think they are wrong for thinking that way but you don't have the right to tell them they can't be what they have been raised to be: Greek Catholic.  You also can't ask children to pay for the sins of their fathers.  The difference between 1596 and 1946 is that in 1990 people were still alive who were kicked out of the churches and forced underground in 1946.  You may think the UOC-MP keeping the churches taken in 1946 rectifies 1596 but it cannot because taking back the churches of the innocent ancestors of Brest cannot repair the damage done, a people once united in faith now divided no longer in communion with one another.  We cannot pertend the past has not been.  You don't trust the Latin and Greek Catholics, justifiably so.  But for what reason should the Greek Catholics have trusted the UOC-MP or a commission of Latin Catholics they knew to be more interested in appeasing the MP than protecting their rights and interests?  What reason did the UGCC have to trust that parish elections wouldn't be rigged by those who took the churches in the first place?  They too were justified.  Again that is the past.  What is done is done and I don't see either side hurting for churches at this point.

Fr Deacon Lance   

I agree with most of what Deacon Lance states. I have family on BOTH sides of this divide in America and in Europe although I canonly speak to the American experience. My father recently reposed at age 92 after a lifetime of service to the Church, having been ordained priest by + Bishop Orestes of thrice blessed memory. He bore witness to the indignities and excesses that BOTH sides were guilty of promulgating from the split within his and my mother's home parishes to each parish community where he served. Certainly that behavior was neither Christ-like, Orthodox or Roman Catholic. I do know that in community, by community across much of the Northeast that time has healed many wounds and we have prayerfully learned to respect the choices that our parents and grandparents each other made or was forced to make. In the early 90's he happened to be in Slovakia when the son of his first cousin was ordained priest in the Greek Catholic Cathedral in Presov. To his surprise he was invited to say a few words on behalf of the American relatives by the Greek Catholic Bishop - who knew full well that he was an Orthodox priest. The reception he received was in fact full of love and brotherhood. He never glossed over the fact that each side took a different path and as many Slavs say, 'it is what it is.' A child of another cousin was an Orthodox seminarian another is a Greek Catholic nun. History compells is to understand that the present is forged by the experiences of the past. Being alive compells us to work not to live in the past or repeat its errors.
Wish I had seen this post earlier.  Wonderful post that really captures so much that I have seen personally.  When I read so many of the posts here I just shake my head and think how easy it is to hate in the name of Christ and how difficult to love in the name of Christ.  Beams, motes: maybe we should simply try to learn the past to figure out how to love in the present - and let all the historical hurts become a lesson of what not to do. 

Sorry, but I cannot accept that we need to act today like things that took place 400, 800 or 1000 years ago needs, or is even suitable for, current redress.  Sometimes I think we are no better than Moslems who are angry about the Crusades: the last one was 800 years ago and the Moslems won; and no one mentions Turks at Vienna in 1600 and Moors at Tours in 750.  I guess they just appeared there!

Crazy
Logged
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,182


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #72 on: February 08, 2010, 07:35:58 PM »

I can't find statistics for that, what I could find was the UOC-MP now has over 7700 chuches, the UGCC over 3400.  Again the Greek Catholics are here to stay and Rome isn't going to force them back to the Orthodox Church no matter how much Moscow might want it.  So lets get to the business of turning the other cheek, forgiving our brother 7 X 70 times, and figuring out how to work together in the face of increasing secularization and consumerism.

Which brings us back to the title of this folder.  Which means a better record on the part of the RCC on signing agreements AND ABIDING BY THEM as well  setting up meeting agenda's AND ABIDING BY THEM after they are annoucnced in the western news media. The RCC has a poor record when it comes to the sincerity of their words or agreements.  This not only involves the past the the present as well as the examples given show.



Orthodoc
Those involved in the agreement probably should never have made the agreement since its generally a bad one.

Bad for who and in what way?  What could be better than having the parishioners themselves determine what religion they want to be?  Once again, why do you sanction the use of force as justifiable only when it's to the advantage of the Roman Catholic Church?

By the way, regarding your comment in a previous reply -

"Well, they should all be RCC anyway."

Care to elaborate on that?  Does that mean that you consider them as Eastern Rite Roman Catholics?

Bob
 






I think its bad for the Catholic Church. First, if we Catholics really believe our Church is the Church founded by Jesus Christ, then we should be evangelizing the world and that includes EOs. Second, just because a particular parish of ECs decide they want to be EO (which is within their rights) does not mean that they should be able to keep the church in which they meet because it is a Catholic Church.

As for what I meant about everybody being RC: I was using the term RC to refer to the entire Catholic Communion, not just the latin rite. No, I don't think that Eastern Catholics should become latin Catholics.
Does that apply to Florence, Brest, Uzhhorod and Alba Iulia?


Of course not!  Since Papist as well as many RC's are only willing to go back as far as it takes to attempt to justify their claims.  In this case only going back to 1947 rather than 988 or a century before when these particular Orthodox Churches came into being.


It is my view that when the schism happened the EO chruches ceased to be Catholic and, thus, ceased to have a right to parish churches in which they met, icons, etc.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
Orthodoc
Supporter & Defender Of Orthodoxy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 2,526

Those who ignore history tend to repeat it.


« Reply #73 on: February 08, 2010, 07:49:47 PM »

Comment:  It is my view that when the schism happened the EO chruches ceased to be Catholic and, thus, ceased to have a right to parish churches in which they met, icons, etc.

Reply:  You,as well as anyone, are intitled to your opinion.  Care to back it up it historical facts on why you have such an opinion?  When, how, and where did the Orthodox leave the Catholic Church?   Why is it valid in one instance and not the other (creation of the Unia vs. the right to have each individual decide)?  Deacon Lance seems to claim to have some type of ESP when he states that IF the paishes voted to remain Orthodox they wouldn't have been given back.  

To those Orthodox Catholic who can't see the reason so many of us defend our right to identify ourselves by what we are (Orthodox Catholic), this is a perfect example why.  If we don't it  allows Rome to revise and rewrite history.

Perhaps Papist can start a new thread on this matter.  Though we have already discussed it so many times.

Orthodoc
« Last Edit: February 08, 2010, 07:55:50 PM by Orthodoc » Logged

Oh Lord, Save thy people and bless thine inheritance.
Grant victory to the Orthodox Christians over their adversaries.
And by virtue of thy Cross preserve thy habitation.
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,182


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #74 on: February 08, 2010, 07:53:04 PM »


Comment:  It is my view that when the schism happened the EO chruches ceased to be Catholic and, thus, ceased to have a right to parish churches in which they met, icons, etc.

Reply:  You,as well as anyone, are intitled to your opinion.  Care to back it up it historical facts on why you have such an opinion?  When, how, and where did the Orthodox leave the Catholic Church?  How does the schism give the papal church the right to use force or unvalidate their rights to be what they want to be as Father Deacon lance is claiming for those who identify themselves as Greek Catholics?  Why is is validate in one instance and not the other. 

To those Orthodox Catholic who can't see the reason so many of us defend our right to identify ourselves by what we are, this is a perfect example.  It allows Rome to revise and rewrite history.

Perhaps Papist can start a new thread on this matter.  Though we have already discussed it so many times.

Orthodoc
1054 AD
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
Orthodoc
Supporter & Defender Of Orthodoxy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 2,526

Those who ignore history tend to repeat it.


« Reply #75 on: February 08, 2010, 07:58:02 PM »


Comment:  It is my view that when the schism happened the EO chruches ceased to be Catholic and, thus, ceased to have a right to parish churches in which they met, icons, etc.

Reply:  You,as well as anyone, are intitled to your opinion.  Care to back it up it historical facts on why you have such an opinion?  When, how, and where did the Orthodox leave the Catholic Church?  How does the schism give the papal church the right to use force or unvalidate their rights to be what they want to be as Father Deacon lance is claiming for those who identify themselves as Greek Catholics?  Why is is validate in one instance and not the other.  

To those Orthodox Catholic who can't see the reason so many of us defend our right to identify ourselves by what we are, this is a perfect example.  It allows Rome to revise and rewrite history.

Perhaps Papist can start a new thread on this matter.  Though we have already discussed it so many times.

Orthodoc
1054 AD



You mean when Cardinal Humbert felt he had the right to excommuniate the EP from the Church?  Perhaps you can explain what gave him those rights?

Orthodoc
« Last Edit: February 08, 2010, 07:59:59 PM by Orthodoc » Logged

Oh Lord, Save thy people and bless thine inheritance.
Grant victory to the Orthodox Christians over their adversaries.
And by virtue of thy Cross preserve thy habitation.
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,182


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #76 on: February 08, 2010, 08:35:48 PM »


Comment:  It is my view that when the schism happened the EO chruches ceased to be Catholic and, thus, ceased to have a right to parish churches in which they met, icons, etc.

Reply:  You,as well as anyone, are intitled to your opinion.  Care to back it up it historical facts on why you have such an opinion?  When, how, and where did the Orthodox leave the Catholic Church?  How does the schism give the papal church the right to use force or unvalidate their rights to be what they want to be as Father Deacon lance is claiming for those who identify themselves as Greek Catholics?  Why is is validate in one instance and not the other.  

To those Orthodox Catholic who can't see the reason so many of us defend our right to identify ourselves by what we are, this is a perfect example.  It allows Rome to revise and rewrite history.

Perhaps Papist can start a new thread on this matter.  Though we have already discussed it so many times.

Orthodoc
1054 AD



You mean when Cardinal Humbert felt he had the right to excommuniate the EP from the Church?  Perhaps you can explain what gave him those rights?

Orthodoc
Look Orthodoc, everytime I meet you in these forums, it seems you are looking for a fight. My screen name was mentioned so I shared my view point. It was not for the reason of starting an internet battle. It was simply to illustrate that my thinking on this matter is at least consistent. I am not interested in taking on every single Orthodox Christian in this forum in a Papist vs. the world style battle; nor do I have any intention of converting you to my view point. I believe that there are good reasons to accept the Catholic Church as the Church established by Jesus just as you believe that there are good reason to accept the Eastern Orthodox Church. On the other side of this life, these things will be resolved and we will call eachother brother.
As for the cardinal excommunicating the EP, I don't think that he had that right, just as I don't think that the EP had the right to excommunicate the Pope.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
Orthodoc
Supporter & Defender Of Orthodoxy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 2,526

Those who ignore history tend to repeat it.


« Reply #77 on: February 08, 2010, 08:48:08 PM »



But the Pope's legate had the right and authority to excommunicate the EP?  Based on what?

Orthodoc
Logged

Oh Lord, Save thy people and bless thine inheritance.
Grant victory to the Orthodox Christians over their adversaries.
And by virtue of thy Cross preserve thy habitation.
John Larocque
Catholic
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox
Posts: 530


« Reply #78 on: February 08, 2010, 09:07:57 PM »

But the Pope's legate had the right and authority to excommunicate the EP?  Based on what?

Papist already said he didn't believe he had the right to do that. You might find some anti-ecumenist Catholics who will defend the validity of the excommunication, and who may even oppose the 1965 declaration that considered these excommunications null and void, but I'm not sure you'll find them here.
« Last Edit: February 08, 2010, 09:09:07 PM by John Larocque » Logged
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,182


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #79 on: February 09, 2010, 12:10:22 AM »



But the Pope's legate had the right and authority to excommunicate the EP?  Based on what?

Orthodoc

Are you not reading what I wrote or are you really just looking for a fight? I already said that I don't believe that the Papal legate had the authority to excommunicate the EP.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
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: 37,453



« Reply #80 on: February 09, 2010, 12:16:18 AM »



But the Pope's legate had the right and authority to excommunicate the EP?  Based on what?

Orthodoc

Are you not reading what I wrote or are you really just looking for a fight? I already said that I don't believe that the Papal legate had the authority to excommunicate the EP.
If the pope was still alive, then what say you?
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
Orthodoc
Supporter & Defender Of Orthodoxy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 2,526

Those who ignore history tend to repeat it.


« Reply #81 on: February 09, 2010, 12:17:44 AM »



But the Pope's legate had the right and authority to excommunicate the EP?  Based on what?

Orthodoc

Are you not reading what I wrote or are you really just looking for a fight? I already said that I don't believe that the Papal legate had the authority to excommunicate the EP.

Then why do you give 1054 a the date you think we Orthodox left what you identify as the Catholic Church?  Wasn't it a 'PAPAL BULL of EXCOMMUNICATION' the not so good Cardinal slapped on the Altar of Hagia Sophia?

Orthodoc

« Last Edit: February 09, 2010, 12:20:39 AM by Orthodoc » Logged

Oh Lord, Save thy people and bless thine inheritance.
Grant victory to the Orthodox Christians over their adversaries.
And by virtue of thy Cross preserve thy habitation.
Alveus Lacuna
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,860



« Reply #82 on: February 09, 2010, 02:18:36 AM »

If the pope was still alive, then what say you?

Not important.  The only thing that matters are the legal technicalities.  They have a contractual loophole here, so they are going to take it.
Logged
podkarpatska
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,228


SS Cyril and Methodius Church, Mercer, PA


WWW
« Reply #83 on: February 09, 2010, 08:56:28 AM »



But the Pope's legate had the right and authority to excommunicate the EP?  Based on what?

Orthodoc

Are you not reading what I wrote or are you really just looking for a fight? I already said that I don't believe that the Papal legate had the authority to excommunicate the EP.
If the pope was still alive, then what say you?

They are of course, long dead. We, the living, are left with to dead with the consequences of history and the choices that the dead made. We need to study and understand those choices, but what a dead person would have, could have or should have done seems less important than what choices we, the living, are charged to make on our journey through this world.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
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: 37,453



« Reply #84 on: February 09, 2010, 09:37:54 AM »



But the Pope's legate had the right and authority to excommunicate the EP?  Based on what?

Orthodoc

Are you not reading what I wrote or are you really just looking for a fight? I already said that I don't believe that the Papal legate had the authority to excommunicate the EP.
If the pope was still alive, then what say you?

They are of course, long dead. We, the living, are left with to dead with the consequences of history and the choices that the dead made. We need to study and understand those choices, but what a dead person would have, could have or should have done seems less important than what choices we, the living, are charged to make on our journey through this world.

The point is what if a live pope gave authority to a live legate to excommunicate a live EP?  That issue unfortunately is not dead.
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
Orthodoc
Supporter & Defender Of Orthodoxy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 2,526

Those who ignore history tend to repeat it.


« Reply #85 on: February 09, 2010, 10:13:02 AM »



But the Pope's legate had the right and authority to excommunicate the EP?  Based on what?

Orthodoc

Are you not reading what I wrote or are you really just looking for a fight? I already said that I don't believe that the Papal legate had the authority to excommunicate the EP.
If the pope was still alive, then what say you?

They are of course, long dead. We, the living, are left with to dead with the consequences of history and the choices that the dead made. We need to study and understand those choices, but what a dead person would have, could have or should have done seems less important than what choices we, the living, are charged to make on our journey through this world.

The point is what if a live pope gave authority to a live legate to excommunicate a live EP?  That issue unfortunately is not dead.

Exactly my point!  It certainly shows who initiated, and is therefore responsible, for the schism of 1054.  And it certainly wasn't the Orthodox Catholic Church.  And the very fact that the Cardinal had the PAPAL BULL in his possession when he arrived indicated a live Pope issued it and gave him the authority to execute. 
Orthodoc
Logged

Oh Lord, Save thy people and bless thine inheritance.
Grant victory to the Orthodox Christians over their adversaries.
And by virtue of thy Cross preserve thy habitation.
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,182


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #86 on: February 09, 2010, 10:32:41 AM »



But the Pope's legate had the right and authority to excommunicate the EP?  Based on what?

Orthodoc

Are you not reading what I wrote or are you really just looking for a fight? I already said that I don't believe that the Papal legate had the authority to excommunicate the EP.
If the pope was still alive, then what say you?
Good question. I absolutely believe that the Pope has the authority to excommunicate any member of the Church. I wonder if it is proper to say that his legate has the same authority. I will have to look into this.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,182


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #87 on: February 09, 2010, 10:33:51 AM »



But the Pope's legate had the right and authority to excommunicate the EP?  Based on what?

Orthodoc

Are you not reading what I wrote or are you really just looking for a fight? I already said that I don't believe that the Papal legate had the authority to excommunicate the EP.

Then why do you give 1054 a the date you think we Orthodox left what you identify as the Catholic Church?  Wasn't it a 'PAPAL BULL of EXCOMMUNICATION' the not so good Cardinal slapped on the Altar of Hagia Sophia?

Orthodoc


I believe that when the EP had the audacity to "excommunicate" the Pope, he effectively removed himself from the Church.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
Orthodoc
Supporter & Defender Of Orthodoxy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 2,526

Those who ignore history tend to repeat it.


« Reply #88 on: February 09, 2010, 10:43:11 AM »



But the Pope's legate had the right and authority to excommunicate the EP?  Based on what?

Orthodoc

Are you not reading what I wrote or are you really just looking for a fight? I already said that I don't believe that the Papal legate had the authority to excommunicate the EP.

Then why do you give 1054 a the date you think we Orthodox left what you identify as the Catholic Church?  Wasn't it a 'PAPAL BULL of EXCOMMUNICATION' the not so good Cardinal slapped on the Altar of Hagia Sophia?

Orthodoc


I believe that when the EP had the audacity to "excommunicate" the Pope, he effectively removed himself from the Church.

What about the audacity of the Pope to even issue a papal bull to execommunicate another Patriarch without the consent or approval of the other Patriarchates? 

Orthodoc
Logged

Oh Lord, Save thy people and bless thine inheritance.
Grant victory to the Orthodox Christians over their adversaries.
And by virtue of thy Cross preserve thy habitation.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
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: 37,453



« Reply #89 on: February 09, 2010, 10:53:15 AM »



But the Pope's legate had the right and authority to excommunicate the EP?  Based on what?

Orthodoc

Are you not reading what I wrote or are you really just looking for a fight? I already said that I don't believe that the Papal legate had the authority to excommunicate the EP.
If the pope was still alive, then what say you?

They are of course, long dead. We, the living, are left with to dead with the consequences of history and the choices that the dead made. We need to study and understand those choices, but what a dead person would have, could have or should have done seems less important than what choices we, the living, are charged to make on our journey through this world.

The point is what if a live pope gave authority to a live legate to excommunicate a live EP?  That issue unfortunately is not dead.

Exactly my point!  It certainly shows who initiated, and is therefore responsible, for the schism of 1054.  And it certainly wasn't the Orthodox Catholic Church.  And the very fact that the Cardinal had the PAPAL BULL in his possession when he arrived indicated a live Pope issued it and gave him the authority to execute.  Orthodoc

LOL.  Like counterfeit money, worthless.
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
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,182


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #90 on: February 09, 2010, 12:09:58 PM »



But the Pope's legate had the right and authority to excommunicate the EP?  Based on what?

Orthodoc

Are you not reading what I wrote or are you really just looking for a fight? I already said that I don't believe that the Papal legate had the authority to excommunicate the EP.

Then why do you give 1054 a the date you think we Orthodox left what you identify as the Catholic Church?  Wasn't it a 'PAPAL BULL of EXCOMMUNICATION' the not so good Cardinal slapped on the Altar of Hagia Sophia?

Orthodoc


I believe that when the EP had the audacity to "excommunicate" the Pope, he effectively removed himself from the Church.

What about the audacity of the Pope to even issue a papal bull to execommunicate another Patriarch without the consent or approval of the other Patriarchates? 

Orthodoc
Considering my reading of the Father if the Pope chose to excommunicate a Patriarch there would be no audacity invovled.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
Orthodoc
Supporter & Defender Of Orthodoxy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 2,526

Those who ignore history tend to repeat it.


« Reply #91 on: February 09, 2010, 12:19:25 PM »



But the Pope's legate had the right and authority to excommunicate the EP?  Based on what?

Orthodoc

Are you not reading what I wrote or are you really just looking for a fight? I already said that I don't believe that the Papal legate had the authority to excommunicate the EP.

Then why do you give 1054 a the date you think we Orthodox left what you identify as the Catholic Church?  Wasn't it a 'PAPAL BULL of EXCOMMUNICATION' the not so good Cardinal slapped on the Altar of Hagia Sophia?

Orthodoc


I believe that when the EP had the audacity to "excommunicate" the Pope, he effectively removed himself from the Church.

What about the audacity of the Pope to even issue a papal bull to execommunicate another Patriarch without the consent or approval of the other Patriarchates? 

Orthodoc
Considering my reading of the Father if the Pope chose to excommunicate a Patriarch there would be no audacity invovled.

Which is the reason you were challenged.  This is an Orthodox Catholic website so you expect to be called on the carpet when you come in and expound on false doctrine such as Papal Supremacy, and Infallibilly.  You are entitled to your opinion as I am mine.  But expect to be challenged whenever you proclaim what we Orthodox Catholics believe as false doctrine.

Orthodoc

Logged

Oh Lord, Save thy people and bless thine inheritance.
Grant victory to the Orthodox Christians over their adversaries.
And by virtue of thy Cross preserve thy habitation.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
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: 37,453



« Reply #92 on: February 09, 2010, 12:25:43 PM »



But the Pope's legate had the right and authority to excommunicate the EP?  Based on what?

Orthodoc

Are you not reading what I wrote or are you really just looking for a fight? I already said that I don't believe that the Papal legate had the authority to excommunicate the EP.

Then why do you give 1054 a the date you think we Orthodox left what you identify as the Catholic Church?  Wasn't it a 'PAPAL BULL of EXCOMMUNICATION' the not so good Cardinal slapped on the Altar of Hagia Sophia?

Orthodoc


I believe that when the EP had the audacity to "excommunicate" the Pope, he effectively removed himself from the Church.

What about the audacity of the Pope to even issue a papal bull to execommunicate another Patriarch without the consent or approval of the other Patriarchates? 

Orthodoc
Considering my reading of the Father if the Pope chose to excommunicate a Patriarch there would be no audacity invovled.

LOL.  Pope St. Victor, stinging from the rebuke of "the entire Church," found out otherwise.
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
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,182


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #93 on: February 09, 2010, 01:51:20 PM »



But the Pope's legate had the right and authority to excommunicate the EP?  Based on what?

Orthodoc

Are you not reading what I wrote or are you really just looking for a fight? I already said that I don't believe that the Papal legate had the authority to excommunicate the EP.

Then why do you give 1054 a the date you think we Orthodox left what you identify as the Catholic Church?  Wasn't it a 'PAPAL BULL of EXCOMMUNICATION' the not so good Cardinal slapped on the Altar of Hagia Sophia?

Orthodoc


I believe that when the EP had the audacity to "excommunicate" the Pope, he effectively removed himself from the Church.

What about the audacity of the Pope to even issue a papal bull to execommunicate another Patriarch without the consent or approval of the other Patriarchates? 

Orthodoc
Considering my reading of the Father if the Pope chose to excommunicate a Patriarch there would be no audacity invovled.

LOL.  Pope St. Victor, stinging from the rebuke of "the entire Church," found out otherwise.
I didn't say that it was always prudent for a pope to excommunicate a particular person.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
Tags:
Pages: 1 2 3 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 0.379 seconds with 120 queries.