OrthodoxChristianity.net
September 02, 2014, 06:14:50 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 »  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Papal deeds speak louder  (Read 9041 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Nigula Qian Zishi
Administrator Emeritus, Retired Deacon, Inactive Poster, Active Orthodox Christian, Father, and Husband
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America
Posts: 1,836


我美丽的妻子和我。

nstanosheck
WWW
« on: November 14, 2002, 01:12:04 PM »

Papal deeds speak louder

By JOHN L. ALLEN JR.
Rome

It’s the nature of the office that a pope has to watch what he says.

Ironically, the 1870 declaration of infallibility at the First Vatican Council has probably inhibited papal freedom of speech more than any king or emperor ever could. Since even his “ordinary magisterium,” or regular teaching expressed in audiences and letters, is considered to enjoy a divine seal of approval, popes feel compelled to sweat over every phrase. Once it drops from his lips, it passes into tradition, and hence it must be “just so.”

That’s inevitably a prescription for caution. Popes rarely speak off the cuff, and when they do, pulse rates in Vatican offices head for the sky.

Gestures, on the other hand, are by definition far more ambiguous. A pope can be himself in his actions in a way he never can be with his words. For that reason, often what a pope does is a better indicator of where his heart is than what he says. The pontificate of John Paul II illustrates the point.

Consider, for example, the December 1996 visit of the Archbishop of Canterbury, then George Carey, and several of his brother Anglican bishops to Rome. On the occasion, John Paul II gave Carey a gold pectoral cross, the same gift he offers to Catholic archbishops on their ad limina visits. He offered silver pectoral crosses to the other Anglicans.

It was a kind gesture with just one glitch: According to Catholic theology, Anglican bishops aren’t the real deal, and hence have no business sporting the symbols of the bishop’s office. Most recently, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith made this point in a commentary on the 1998 document Ad Tuendam Fidem. It pointed to the invalidity of Anglican ordinations as an example of not-yet-declared infallible church teaching.

Notre Dame theologian Fr. Richard McBrien has argued that this leaves two possibilities. Either the pope holds a different view about the validity of Anglican ordinations, or he is guilty of the canonical offense of falsifying the sacrament of holy orders by complicity in the fiction that the Anglicans really are bishops.

Most observers believe John Paul was trying to encourage unity between Catholics and Anglicans, whose dialogue since the Second Vatican Council (1962-65) has been a model of civility, even ahead of an ability to spell out quite yet the theological basis for that unity.

Other examples of actions speaking louder than words might include the pope’s respectful, prayerful visit to the Grand Omayyad Mosque in Damascus in May 2001, not long after the Vatican document Dominus Iesus had asserted that non-Catholics are in a “gravely deficient situation”; or his March 2000 visit to the Western Wall in Jerusalem amid acrimonious debates between Jews and Catholics.

Recent weeks in Rome have offered two more examples of the pope’s “watch what I do, not always what I say” style.

On Oct. 4, in conjunction with an international conference marking the 700th anniversary of the birth of St. Bridget of Sweden, John Paul II took part in a gala vespers service in St. Peter’s Basilica.

Present for the occasion were 13 Roman Catholic bishops, plus nine Lutheran bishops from Sweden, Norway and Denmark, one other Lutheran clergyman, and three non-Catholic prelates (two Orthodox, one Anglican). There were, in other words, an equal number on both sides.

The two sets of prelates were dressed in liturgical vestments, and they processed in and sat down with equal dignity. It was difficult to avoid the impression that the pope was recognizing some kind of brotherhood in holy orders for the Lutheran and Anglican prelates that official Catholic theology would struggle to explain. Privately, several of the Lutherans said that they experienced the event as an unofficial form of papal recognition.

John Paul’s public comments on the occasion were not so daring. “In a spirit of brotherhood and friendship I greet the distinguished representatives of the Lutheran churches,” he said. “Your presence at this prayer is a cause of deep joy. I express the hope that our meeting together in the Lord’s name will help to further our ecumenical dialogue and quicken the journey towards full Christian unity.”

At the level of symbolism, however, the pope seemed to be saying more.

Two days later, Patriarch Teoctist of the Romanian Orthodox church arrived in Rome for the start of a weeklong visit, reciprocating the pope’s May 7-9, 1999, visit to Bucharest. John Paul welcomed Teoctist to the public Mass of thanksgiving for the canonization of Opus Dei founder Josemaria Escriva Oct. 6, standing to embrace him in brotherly fashion before a crowd of 200,000, then ensuring that Teoctist was seated in an exact duplicate of the papal throne.

It was not the behavior of someone worried about underscoring his own primacy.

In fact, all the week’s choreography seemed designed to make the two prelates seem like equally eminent heads of churches. The high point came with the signing of a joint declaration between John Paul and Teoctist on Saturday, Oct. 12.

The text of the declaration was itself interesting. “Our aim and our ardent desire is full communion, which is not absorption, but communion in love. It is an irreversible path that has no alternative: It is the way of the church,” the declaration reads.

It gets down to brass tacks, calling for a relaunch of the international Catholic-Orthodox dialogue, currently in a deep freeze after a disastrous session in Baltimore in July 2000. Those talks were paralyzed by accusations of proselytism against Catholics in Orthodox nations, debates over Eastern churches in communion with Rome, and most notoriously, differing views of the limits of papal power.

More important than the wording, however, may be the way the declaration was issued. The pope’s repeated gestures of humility and fraternity, always careful to treat Teoctist like an ecclesiastical equal, were designed to assuage Orthodox fears about a Roman “imperial papacy.” In that sense, John Paul’s conduct reflected a reformed papacy that Catholic theological language is not yet able to describe.

To understand what the pope is trying to communicate, therefore, sometimes it’s a good idea to keep the pictures but turn down the sound.

John L. Allen Jr. is NCR Rome correspondent. His e-mail address is jallen@natcath.org

National Catholic Reporter, November 08, 2002
Logged

在基督         My Original Blog
尼古拉         My Facebook Profile
前执事         My Twitter Page
The young fogey
Moderated
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,646


I'm an alpaca, actually


WWW
« Reply #1 on: November 14, 2002, 01:18:38 PM »

One can chalk these gestures up to mistakes in prudential judgement or well-meant charity to born Protestants, and in the case of Patriarch Teoctist, mollifying without promising or retracting anything.
« Last Edit: November 14, 2002, 01:32:54 PM by Serge » 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 #2 on: November 14, 2002, 01:42:10 PM »

[The text of the declaration was itself interesting. “Our aim and our ardent desire is full communion, which is not absorption, but communion in love. It is an irreversible path that has no alternative: It is the way of the church,” the declaration reads.]

Those same words were uttered in 1596.  And history proves that words and deeds are not always the same.

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.
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,444


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #3 on: November 14, 2002, 05:09:04 PM »

One point about the visit to the mosque.  Everyone makes that a big deal. They forget that St. John the Baptist's tomb is there.

In Christ,

anastasios
Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Disclaimer: Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodo
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 #4 on: November 14, 2002, 05:21:29 PM »

[Everyone makes that a big deal. They forget that St. John the Baptist's tomb is there.]

The big deal was that he kissed (venerated) the Koran when it was presented to him.  A book that not only contains heresy but instructions to  convert Christians by force and even states it is okay to kill them if they refuse.

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.
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

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


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #5 on: November 14, 2002, 05:23:29 PM »

Thank you, Captain Obvious.  

Did you have fun removing the plank from your own eye?
Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
The young fogey
Moderated
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,646


I'm an alpaca, actually


WWW
« Reply #6 on: November 14, 2002, 05:44:39 PM »

Yes, if that indeed was the Koran and not a book of the Gospels as some have suggested, and if the Pope knew it was the Koran, he goofed — big time. And Catholicism teaches Popes can make big goofs like that.

But I wonder why people are scrutinizing the Pope of Rome’s every move on a forum ostensibly about Eastern and Oriental Orthodoxy?Huh

Could it be just because almost all of us are Westerners?

I mean, there is a shot at an 80+-year-old split in Russian Orthodoxy ending, if clear heads prevail.

But what is getting more attention here?
Logged

Hypo-Ortho
Guest
« Reply #7 on: November 14, 2002, 05:47:37 PM »

One can chalk these gestures up to mistakes in prudential judgement or well-meant charity to born Protestants, and in the case of Patriarch Teoctist, mollifying without promising or retracting anything.

That's the way I see it too, Serge.   Gee, we're agreeing on something again.  

As regards the Anglicans, not only the Orthodox Church requires their ministers be re-ordained into Holy Orders if they wish to continue in ordained ministry upon conversion--the Roman Catholic Church does too.  Now how does this apply in the case of an Anglican/Episcopalian "priestess"?  How would the Pope address this touchy subject in a gesture?  Laying-on-of-hands, perhaps?   Wink  What a message that would send!

Hypo-Ortho

Logged
The young fogey
Moderated
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,646


I'm an alpaca, actually


WWW
« Reply #8 on: November 14, 2002, 05:52:31 PM »

It has happened - there is a link to one such story on my News Archive page. Women Episcopal ministers have become Catholic. And no, they aren't ordained as Catholic priests or deacons!
Logged

Nigula Qian Zishi
Administrator Emeritus, Retired Deacon, Inactive Poster, Active Orthodox Christian, Father, and Husband
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America
Posts: 1,836


我美丽的妻子和我。

nstanosheck
WWW
« Reply #9 on: November 14, 2002, 06:40:04 PM »

Actually I posted it since it showed the Pope in how he relates to Orthodoxy among others, I didn't post it just because it was abnout the Pope.

I would be willing to bet that the ROCOR MP situation doesn't get cleared up until the repose of Patrioarch Alexy II - at least that's hoow I see it. Alexy's KGB past is just too hot of an issue for members of ROCOR that come from Russia and were hurt by the KGB. God Bless!
Logged

在基督         My Original Blog
尼古拉         My Facebook Profile
前执事         My Twitter Page
JoeS
(aka StMarkEofE)
Site Supporter
OC.net guru
*****
Offline Offline

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


Global Warming Enthusiast.


« Reply #10 on: November 14, 2002, 08:23:32 PM »

Do you actually think that the Mufta would be offering the Pope a bible to kiss.  Come now, lets get real.  Is the Vatican that stupid?

Joes



Yes, if that indeed was the Koran and not a book of the Gospels as some have suggested, and if the Pope knew it was the Koran, he goofed — big time. And Catholicism teaches Popes can make big goofs like that.

But I wonder why people are scrutinizing the Pope of Rome’s every move on a forum ostensibly about Eastern and Oriental Orthodoxy?Huh

Could it be just because almost all of us are Westerners?

I mean, there is a shot at an 80+-year-old split in Russian Orthodoxy ending, if clear heads prevail.

But what is getting more attention here?
Logged
Νεκτάριος
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,437



« Reply #11 on: November 15, 2002, 12:19:40 AM »

Quote
[The text of the declaration was itself interesting. “Our aim and our ardent desire is full communion, which is not absorption, but communion in love. It is an irreversible path that has no alternative: It is the way of the church,” the declaration reads.]

Those same words were uttered in 1596.  And history proves that words and deeds are not always the same.

What event is being referenced by 1596?  (sorry for the question, I'm new to this)

Catechumen Derek
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 #12 on: November 15, 2002, 12:54:35 AM »

[What event is being referenced by 1596?  (sorry for the question, I'm new to this)]

The Union of Brest/Litovsk which created the Ukrainian Catholic Church.

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.
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,444


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #13 on: November 17, 2002, 02:19:30 PM »

Dear Orthodoc,

I was NOT talking about kissing the Koran, but ONLY the fact of the visit to the mosque itself.

People say visiting the mosque = approving Islam. I say no, he visited the mosque because St. John the Baptist's tomb is there.

Kissing the Koran is a separate issue, and I would agree with you that it is was wrong.

In Christ,

anastasios
Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Disclaimer: Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodo
Hypo-Ortho
Guest
« Reply #14 on: November 17, 2002, 03:14:17 PM »

<snip>
Kissing the Koran is a separate issue, and I would agree with you that it is was wrong.

Wrong BIG TIME!  Symbolic religious syncretism to the max!

Hypo-Ortho
Logged
The young fogey
Moderated
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,646


I'm an alpaca, actually


WWW
« Reply #15 on: November 17, 2002, 04:23:05 PM »

How is anastasios wrong? Visiting the building where St John the Baptist is buried is a separate issue from kissing the Koran, and he agrees the latter was a mistake.
Logged

Hypo-Ortho
Guest
« Reply #16 on: November 17, 2002, 04:34:45 PM »

How is anastasios wrong? Visiting the building where St John the Baptist is buried is a separate issue from kissing the Koran, and he agrees the latter was a mistake.

I don't think I said anything different than Anastasios did, Serge.  I simply *emphasized* the fact that the kissing of the Koran by the Pope, no less, was no "little" mistake.  It was as much of a mistake as if I had kissed, just to be PC, a statue of the Buddha or of Krishna (which I emphatically haven't!)--we Christians (and I would think that the Pope especially) are supposed to know better.  The symbolism of the Pope's action, like it or not, appeared to me to be nothing less than "religious syncretism TO THE MAX!"

Hypo-Ortho
« Last Edit: November 17, 2002, 05:07:42 PM by Hypo-Ortho » Logged
The young fogey
Moderated
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,646


I'm an alpaca, actually


WWW
« Reply #17 on: November 17, 2002, 04:57:05 PM »

Hypo-Ortho,

OK, I misunderstood you. You were agreeing that the Pope was wrong, big time, for kissing the Koran (and he was), not that anastasios was wrong in what he wrote.
Logged

Hypo-Ortho
Guest
« Reply #18 on: November 17, 2002, 05:14:46 PM »

Hypo-Ortho,

OK, I misunderstood you. You were agreeing that the Pope was wrong, big time, for kissing the Koran (and he was), not that anastasios was wrong in what he wrote.


No problem, Serge.

What kind of message does the Pope's action send, especially to his most devoted constituents?  Does this mean that Mother Angelica of EWTN fame can now kiss the Koran in imitation of her infallible hero too?   Wink

Hypo-Ortho
Logged
The young fogey
Moderated
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,646


I'm an alpaca, actually


WWW
« Reply #19 on: November 17, 2002, 05:18:49 PM »

To be fair, the Catholic teaching isn't that the Pope personally can't make mistakes. There are good Catholics who will tell you the Koran incident was. It teaches that his office can't.
Logged

Hypo-Ortho
Guest
« Reply #20 on: November 17, 2002, 05:24:36 PM »

To be fair, the Catholic teaching isn't that the Pope personally can't make mistakes. There are good Catholics who will tell you the Koran incident was. It teaches that his office can't.

Try telling that to the Ultra-Montanists, who count Mother Angelica among their numbers!   Grin
Logged
Hypo-Ortho
Guest
« Reply #21 on: November 17, 2002, 05:52:47 PM »

Hypo-Ortho,

OK, I misunderstood you. You were agreeing that the Pope was wrong, big time, for kissing the Koran (and he was), not that anastasios was wrong in what he wrote.

A thought occurred to me, Serge and Anastasios.  *What if* the shoe were put "on the other foot," so to speak, and the Ecumenical Patriarch (or *ANY* fallible Eastern or Oriental Orthodox bishop for that matter) went to the *same* mosque as that visited by the Pope of Rome--ostensibly to venerate the tomb of the Holy Glorious Prophet and Forerunner of Christ, John the Baptizer-- and just happened publicly, as did the Pope, to kiss the Koran that was presented to him while at the mosque: In this scenario, how do you think the flock (and brother bishops) of such an hierarch would react to his "mistaken" action?  How *should* they react in this imaginary scenario?

Hypo-Ortho
Logged
OrthodoxyOrDeath
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 71


I'm a llama!


« Reply #22 on: November 18, 2002, 10:17:11 AM »

I thought I would point out a discrepency, in the facts...

The Pope kissed the Qu'ran after speaking before a Muslim audience on a visit to Iraq in 1999. Ithad nothing to do with his visit to the mosque which I beleive was in 2001.

The Iraqis video taped the event and it was broadcast many times throughout the Arab world. Iraqi Television stated the "pope has a great respect for Islam".

"... On May 14th I was received by the Pope, together with a delegation composed of the Shiite imam of Khadum mosque and the Sunni President of the council of administration of the Iraqi Islamic Bank. There was also a representative of the Iraqi ministry of religion.....At the end of the audience the Pope bowed to the Muslim holy book the Koran presented to him by the delegation and he kissed it as a sign of respect." - Raphael I Bidawid, "Patriarch" of Babylon of the Chaldeans in an interview with the FIDES News Service

Logged
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

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


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #23 on: November 18, 2002, 11:44:10 AM »

Of course, we should believe everything that is broadcast on Iraqi television.

And OoD, I have to ask you, since the Patriarch of Babylon of the Chaldeans is such a heretic, why are you quoting him?  Or does his error not matter to you when you can use his quotes?  Your quote would be like a black man quoting Hitler on Judaism.
Logged

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

Posts: 450



WWW
« Reply #24 on: November 18, 2002, 12:58:11 PM »

Schulz,

Quote
Of course, we should believe everything that is broadcast on Iraqi television.

I don't think we should believe "everything" any news media broadcasts, no matter where in the world we happen to live (save those bastions of un-politicized, stoically objective news journalism at CNN) Smiley

Quote
And OoD, I have to ask you, since the Patriarch of Babylon of the Chaldeans is such a heretic, why are you quoting him?

I don't see what being a heretic has to do with one's ability to relay the facts of a particular situation.  It sounds to me like you're just annoyed with OoD.  I don't agree with some of what he writes either, but that shouldn't give one reason to get all catty.

Quote
Or does his error not matter to you when you can use his quotes?

It shouldn't matter.  It's not like he's quoting the Chaldean patriarch as an authority on religion.

Seraphim
Logged

Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

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


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #25 on: November 18, 2002, 01:13:56 PM »

Seraphim,

My point is that OoD seems to discredit much what, say, Serge says because of his "heterodoxy", but then uses another "heterodox" (or "heretic"..take your pick, I can't keep up with extremist's categories) to prove a point.  Plus I'm sure the Patriarc has his own agenda.

I don't know, maybe I just don't believe anything is "objective" in this world anymore because everyone has his or her own agenda, including our heirarchs, be they Roman Catholic, Orthodox, or Non-Chalcedonian.  I do love reading OoD's posts, but sometimes they get to be full of too much rhetoric and I react.  

I think I'm going to follow my own advice and go pray now.  I apologize for any offense I caused anyone.  This Catholic needs to learn to keep his mouth shut again! Smiley
Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
Hypo-Ortho
Guest
« Reply #26 on: November 18, 2002, 02:52:46 PM »

Of course, we should believe everything that is broadcast on Iraqi television.

And OoD, I have to ask you, since the Patriarch of Babylon of the Chaldeans is such a heretic, why are you quoting him?  Or does his error not matter to you when you can use his quotes?  Your quote would be like a black man quoting Hitler on Judaism.

Schultz, the "Patriarch of Babylon(ia) of the Chaldeans" is an Eastern Catholic prelate in communion with the Pope, i.e., he is head of the Catholic Church's Chaldean Rite, so I don't think he has a particular axe to grind in his reporting of the Pope's kissing the Quran.  But he does live in Iraq and for the sake of survival or "modus viviendi" of his rite, he tries to stay on the good side of Saddam Hussein.  The Chaldean Rite is the Eastern Catholic ritual equivalent of the Assyrian Church of the East, also based mainly in Iraq.

Hypo-Ortho
Logged
Hypo-Ortho
Guest
« Reply #27 on: November 18, 2002, 02:56:05 PM »

I thought I would point out a discrepency, in the facts...

The Pope kissed the Qu'ran after speaking before a Muslim audience on a visit to Iraq in 1999. Ithad nothing to do with his visit to the mosque which I beleive was in 2001.

The Iraqis video taped the event and it was broadcast many times throughout the Arab world. Iraqi Television stated the "pope has a great respect for Islam".

"... On May 14th I was received by the Pope, together with a delegation composed of the Shiite imam of Khadum mosque and the Sunni President of the council of administration of the Iraqi Islamic Bank. There was also a representative of the Iraqi ministry of religion.....At the end of the audience the Pope bowed to the Muslim holy book the Koran presented to him by the delegation and he kissed it as a sign of respect." - Raphael I Bidawid, "Patriarch" of Babylon of the Chaldeans in an interview with the FIDES News Service

OoD,

Thank you for this clarification.

Hypo-Ortho
Logged
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

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


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #28 on: November 18, 2002, 03:10:01 PM »

Schultz, the "Patriarch of Babylon(ia) of the Chaldeans" is an Eastern Catholic prelate in communion with the Pope, i.e., he is head of the Catholic Church's Chaldean Rite, so I don't think he has a particular axe to grind in his reporting of the Pope's kissing the Quran.  But he does live in Iraq and for the sake of survival or "modus viviendi" of his rite, he tries to stay on the good side of Saddam Hussein.  The Chaldean Rite is the Eastern Catholic ritual equivalent of the Assyrian Church of the East, also based mainly in Iraq.

Hypo-Ortho


Hypo,

Yes, I'm aware of that.  That's my point.  I'm suspect of any media these days other than statements from the proverbial horse's mouth itself.  

OoD,
What is the print source of the Patriarch's statement?
Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
emmaus
Guest
« Reply #29 on: November 18, 2002, 03:15:28 PM »

...and then there are those Muslims who are "convinced" the Pope will soon convert to Islam, as well as Muslim converts to Christ who are insulted by the Pope's veneration of the Quran...and there are those who would interpret the Pope's gesture through the scriptural prism of St. Paul's visit to the Areopagus. (Ac 17:19-34.) A weak analogy I would say...very weak.
Logged
moronikos
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: ...and they were first called Christians in Antioch
Posts: 150


I'm trying to think, but nothing happens!


WWW
« Reply #30 on: November 18, 2002, 04:48:55 PM »

Well, the event was reported by Fides, so it is authentic.

Of course, this action is defended: http://ic.net/~erasmus/RAZ394.HTM

I'm more likely to call it a rationalization.  Obviously, I don't buy it, but you can see that if a certain hierarch of a certain religious organization passed gas, his defenders would say it smells like roses.
Logged
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

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


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #31 on: November 18, 2002, 05:10:08 PM »

Dave Armstrong would defend a geocentric view of the universe if some Roman heirarch told him that was the "true" teaching.  Tongue
Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
Hypo-Ortho
Guest
« Reply #32 on: November 18, 2002, 06:26:19 PM »

Hypo-Ortho,

OK, I misunderstood you. You were agreeing that the Pope was wrong, big time, for kissing the Koran (and he was), not that anastasios was wrong in what he wrote.

A thought occurred to me, Serge and Anastasios.  *What if* the shoe were put "on the other foot," so to speak, and the Ecumenical Patriarch (or *ANY* fallible Eastern or Oriental Orthodox bishop for that matter) went to the *same* mosque as that visited by the Pope of Rome--ostensibly to venerate the tomb of the Holy Glorious Prophet and Forerunner of Christ, John the Baptizer-- and just happened publicly, as did the Pope, to kiss the Koran that was presented to him while at the mosque: In this scenario, how do you think the flock (and brother bishops) of such an hierarch would react to his "mistaken" action?  How *should* they react in this imaginary scenario?

Hypo-Ortho  

Serge and Anastasios (and anyone else on this forum who'd like to contribute), I haven't heard from you about the hypothetical scenario of what would happen if the Ecumenical Patriarch (or ANY *fallible* Eastern Orthodox or Oriental Orthodox bishop for that matter) publicly kissed a Koran if it were presented to him, irrespective of the surrounding circumstances, i.e., inside or outside a mosque, or inside or outside of Iraq.  How do you think the flock (and brother bishops) of such an hierarch would react to his "mistaken" action?  How *should* they react in such a hypothetical scenario?  Would it be looked upon as a mere simple "mistake" on the part of an Orthodox hierarch, do you think?

Hypo-Ortho
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 #33 on: November 18, 2002, 06:57:44 PM »

[Serge and Anastasios (and anyone else on this forum who'd like to contribute), I haven't heard from you about the hypothetical scenario of what would happen if the Ecumenical Patriarch (or ANY *fallible* Eastern Orthodox or Oriental Orthodox bishop for that matter) publicly kissed a Koran if it were presented to him, irrespective of the surrounding circumstances, i.e., inside or outside a mosque, or inside or outside of Iraq. ]

Though nothing the EP says or does these days surprises me, I'm sure this one would be a definite no no for him.  Considering the fact that he comes from a country where Orthodox Catholics have been severely persecuted for centuries under Moslem rule, he would probably be signing is own demise if he did.  

The whole question is like comparing apples and oranges because, like the EP, the vast majority of Orthodox Catholic Patriarchates have suffered severely under Moslem  rule.  It would be unthinkable for any Orthodox Clergy from any rank to do this unless he was forced.

Orthodoc
« Last Edit: November 18, 2002, 07:00:42 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.
Hypo-Ortho
Guest
« Reply #34 on: November 18, 2002, 07:09:48 PM »

[Serge and Anastasios (and anyone else on this forum who'd like to contribute), I haven't heard from you about the hypothetical scenario of what would happen if the Ecumenical Patriarch (or ANY *fallible* Eastern Orthodox or Oriental Orthodox bishop for that matter) publicly kissed a Koran if it were presented to him, irrespective of the surrounding circumstances, i.e., inside or outside a mosque, or inside or outside of Iraq. ]

The whole question is like comparing apples and oranges because, like the EP, the vast majority of Orthodox Catholic Patriarchates have suffered severely under Moslem  rule.  It would be unthinkable for any Orthodox Clergy from any rank to do this unless he was forced.

Orthodoc

Orthodoc, are you saying that an action such as kissing the Koran by a member of the Orthodox clergy of any rank is unthinkable only because the Eastern (and Oriental) Orthodox Patriarchates "have suffered severely under Moslem rule," or is it something more?  Might it not be seen as incompatible with and a betrayal of the Orthodox Christian Faith?  

Hypo-Ortho
« Last Edit: November 18, 2002, 07:42:26 PM by Hypo-Ortho » Logged
Hypo-Ortho
Guest
« Reply #35 on: November 18, 2002, 07:33:36 PM »

Dave Armstrong would defend a geocentric view of the universe if some Roman heirarch told him that was the "true" teaching.  Tongue

Hey, Schultz, I thought youse guys had rehabilitated Galileo!  Grin
Now, how about MY favorite, Canon Mikolaj Kopernik (Copernicus).  Has HE been rehabilitated too?

Hypo-Ortho
Logged
OrthodoxyOrDeath
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 71


I'm a llama!


« Reply #36 on: November 18, 2002, 07:34:41 PM »

Bobby,

I would hate to scandalize any of the "pillars" myself so let me just say, now that I wiped the smile from my face, that we should pray for them and thier victims.
Logged
Mexican
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Church of Alexandria
Posts: 489


« Reply #37 on: November 18, 2002, 07:46:13 PM »

I have been reading Jim Likoudis, I don0't think he isn0't bad but I think his grievances would be more legitimate if he had remained a member of the Eastern Church (in spite of his conversion to Catholicism). It seems that he wants to be more Latin than the Latins and I think it's quite bad.

But I disagree with you. I think that these persons cannot be seen as terrible hetherodox or reprensible herethics only because they are Roman Catholics. If you want to put some pillars of heterodoxy I would put Mr Luther, Mr Calvin, and Mr Pat Robertson.

I think it's dangerous to be in a permanent attack toward catholicism because we would be joining an imitating the American Protestant culture and its natural prejuidces against Catholics. Don't let that culture and its prejuidces to polute our Church.
Logged
Hypo-Ortho
Guest
« Reply #38 on: November 18, 2002, 07:54:35 PM »

I have been reading Jim Likoudis, I don0't think he isn0't bad but I think his grievances would be more legitimate if he had remained a member of the Eastern Church (in spite of his conversion to Catholicism). It seems that he wants to be more Latin than the Latins and I think it's quite bad.
<snip>

Remie, from what I know of Mr. Likoudis, he is a former member of the Greek Orthodox Church who has converted to ECism (I think he usually attends a Melkite Byzantine Catholic church now).  Since his conversion, he has turned into an Ultra-Montanist Latinophile who has taken every opportunity to bash and betray his mother, the Holy Eastern Orthodox Church.

Hypo-Ortho
« Last Edit: November 18, 2002, 08:22:20 PM by Hypo-Ortho » Logged
Nigula Qian Zishi
Administrator Emeritus, Retired Deacon, Inactive Poster, Active Orthodox Christian, Father, and Husband
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America
Posts: 1,836


我美丽的妻子和我。

nstanosheck
WWW
« Reply #39 on: November 18, 2002, 07:55:48 PM »

I cannot speak for Bobby, buit I think he chose them because they are all very anti-Orthodox (and often even anti-Eastern Catholic)  in addition to their "the Pope can do no wrong" neo-Catholic attitudes. God Bless.
Logged

在基督         My Original Blog
尼古拉         My Facebook Profile
前执事         My Twitter Page
Robert
"Amazing"
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,442



« Reply #40 on: November 18, 2002, 08:39:07 PM »

I have been reading Jim Likoudis, I don0't think he isn0't bad but I think his grievances would be more legitimate if he had remained a member of the Eastern Church (in spite of his conversion to Catholicism). It seems that he wants to be more Latin than the Latins and I think it's quite bad.

But I disagree with you. I think that these persons cannot be seen as terrible hetherodox or reprensible herethics only because they are Roman Catholics. If you want to put some pillars of heterodoxy I would put Mr Luther, Mr Calvin, and Mr Pat Robertson.

I think it's dangerous to be in a permanent attack toward catholicism because we would be joining an imitating the American Protestant culture and its natural prejuidces against Catholics. Don't let that culture and its prejuidces to polute our Church.

I agree entirely with your above statement, as engaging in permanent attack towards catholicism is much more detrimental.

Sometimes humour is the only way to cure the frustration that I, along with others, experience with their ultra-montane anti-Orthodox rhetoric.

If you have ever read Dave Armstrongs statements on Eastern Catholicism(I don't have a link handy) he concludes that eastern catholics are no better than Orthodox. At least that was the gist I got from his statements. It is under his 'Eastern Orthodoxy' section, and might be worth a perusal, as he doesnt seem to even stand up to the definition that the Pope holds to when they talk about church. So in essence, it would seem Mr. Armstrong is being disobedient to the Roman Hierarchy.

Hugs,
Bobby
Logged
Robert
"Amazing"
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,442



« Reply #41 on: November 18, 2002, 08:43:31 PM »

Already I get emails from people who peruse our board saying that I am an anti-catholic bigot, and this site is nothing more than a catholic bashing site!

If I haven't said already, its a joke, lighten up!


Bobby
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 #42 on: November 18, 2002, 09:21:21 PM »

[Orthodoc, are you saying that an action such as kissing the Koran by a member of the Orthodox clergy of any rank is unthinkable only because the Eastern (and Oriental) Orthodox Patriarchates "have suffered severely under Moslem rule," or is it something more?  Might it not be seen as incompatible with and a betrayal of the Orthodox Christian Faith? ]

You are right my friend.  As you say, IT IS MUCH MORE THAN JUST THE SUFERING.

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: 2,891


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #43 on: November 18, 2002, 10:19:52 PM »

Bobby,

It doesn't matter if it was a joke.  I think the point is the post was immature and in bad taste and certainly will give people the idea this site is anti-Catholic.  One could imagine the indignation if the same post appeared elsewhere but with 3 Orthodox apologetic writer's pictures.

However, I think the post is a further disservice because it portrays the men unfarily in my estimation.  Now, I am no fan of any of them but they are simply trying to be good Latin Catholic apologists defending their tradition.  You can disagree, but to lower yourself to name calling is unworthy.  Furthermore, after reading some of Dave Armstrong's website he is ceratinly more charitable and irenic to the Orthodox than places like orthodoxinfo.com are to Catholics.

In Christ,
Lance
« Last Edit: November 18, 2002, 11:05:42 PM by Bobby » Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Robert
"Amazing"
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,442



« Reply #44 on: November 18, 2002, 11:06:29 PM »

Apologies, I hit the wrong button on your post Lance.

I tend to disagree, Lance. Dave Armstrong shows little respect for his opponents. He often jumps the gun, and leaves little time or room for his opponent to defend themselves.

It's not this site that creates a bad name for them, it's they that create a bad name for themselves with their ultra-montane predispositions. Until the Roman Catholics can lose their neo-conservative papal supremecist attitude, reunion will never occur.

In addition, I have not seen any Orthodox 'apologists' who contort history to fit their own demands, much like the infamous EWTN's Dr. Carroll. While it is much to long to elaborate on, the Photian debates along with his other misconceptions about the east can be found on the EWTN archives to further prove the point.

Regardless, I have removed the image, as the troparion and kondakion were a tad obscene.


Bobby
« Last Edit: November 18, 2002, 11:09:44 PM by Bobby » Logged
Tags: Pope Papal Infallibility 
Pages: 1 2 »  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 0.127 seconds with 72 queries.