OrthodoxChristianity.net
October 02, 2014, 03:15:12 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 »  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Peter the Rock  (Read 31052 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Byzantino
Me Ortodox
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 353


Orthodox Christian


« Reply #135 on: January 24, 2004, 02:28:50 AM »

Well it wasn't the Pope (Leo IX) who issued the excommunication, it was Cardinal Humbert. It's well acknowledged that he exceeded his powers so the bull was null and void. Also the Pope had died at that point. Most importantly, the Church of Constantinople itself wasn't excommunicated, but Patriarch Michael and his followers. One of Humbert's letter actually praised the See and her flock for being orthodox. The major grievances occurred after the attack on Constantinople in 1204, and 1453 became the final nail in the coffin.
Logged
Stavro
Warned
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox
Posts: 1,190



« Reply #136 on: January 24, 2004, 02:53:49 AM »

Byzantino,

could you shed some light on how 1204 and 1453 remains a problem between EO and RC ? 1453 is a distaster for the whole Christian World, a very sad occasion in which Prince of Darkness triumphed. But how did the RC church contribute to that ? I ordered some books which you guys recommended, but could you briefly say what you meant by that.
Do you demand an apology for what happened in 1204 and the barbaric invasion by the West and the role of the Roman Church in this ( Sorry if this is not accurate) or is it more the theological differences which are the issue?

Peace,
Stavro
Logged

In that day there will be an altar to the LORD in the heart of Egypt, and a monument to the LORD at its border. (Isaiah 19:19)

" God forbid I should see the face of Judah or listen to his blasphemy" (Gerontius, Archmanidrite of the monastery of St. Melania)
Byzantino
Me Ortodox
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 353


Orthodox Christian


« Reply #137 on: January 24, 2004, 04:57:58 AM »

Stavro,

What i was getting at was this: those two dates represent a more decisive turning point in East-West relations. There was full communion enjoyed between East and West after the anathemas of 1054, but after the sack of Constantinople by the Crusaders things drastically took a turn for the worst with widespread hatred for the Latins among the Easterns. I wasn't blaming the RCC for the fall of the Empire, nor do i demand the RCC apologize for 1204 - the apology would be a symbolic gesture, the ceremonial expression of sentiments that the RCC already has in its heart. It would necessarily come in due course voluntarily by a renewed and repentant Rome. The ecclesiological issue is at the top of the list, but a lot of hearts need to be touched by Grace before we truly start making profound leaps.

40 years ago these developments would've been unthinkable eh?

God Bless,

Byz
Logged
Byzantino
Me Ortodox
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 353


Orthodox Christian


« Reply #138 on: January 24, 2004, 05:04:32 AM »

Quote
Thanks for the names of the countries but it still fails the mark for being "world-wide" which would mean it's happening in every country the world over.

CR

Ok, not literally totally world-wide.
Logged
Father Peter
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: British Orthodox Church within the Coptic Orthodox Patriarchate
Posts: 2,651



WWW
« Reply #139 on: January 24, 2004, 06:36:55 AM »

I note that the truecatholic site cites the failure of Pope John Paul II to confess the filioque as one of his 101 heresies.

Ut Unum Sint: 24

"... how could I ever forget taking part in the Eucharistic Liturgy in the Church of Saint George at the Ecumenical Patriarchate (30 November 1979), and the service held in Saint Peter's Basilica during the visit to Rome of my Venerable Brother, Patriarch Dimitrios I (6 December 1987)? On that occasion, at the Altar of the Confession, we recited together the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed according to its original Greek text."

I would suggest that this suggests that JP II does not consider the filioque to define a theological difference between East and West but rather to be a terminological difference. On that basis I will certainly try to read more about the subject from modern RC writers.

But I have much greater problems with papal supremacy, universal jurisdiction and papal infallibility.

The other matters can all be understood as divergent terminologies and emphases.

PT
Logged

Lord have mercy upon me a sinner
http://www.orthodoxmedway.org

My blog - http://anorthodoxpriest.blogspot.co.uk

The poster formerly known as peterfarrington
Dan Lauffer
Athanasios
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 188



« Reply #140 on: January 24, 2004, 09:54:09 AM »

I agree here, but pride on whose part remains a question.

Stavro,

I've tried to make it clear that the sin is equally shared.  

Moronikos,

I love your avatar.  

A regrettable experience.  There should be no more "bi-ritual" priests. They are a scurge (sp?) upon the Church.  I do not blame you and your friends for making the decisions you did.  However, I think I'm asking a much more fundamental question than historical development.  I'm suggesting that by going to the basics everything else is negotiable.  I don't think anyone would look at the development of the "filioque", temporal power for Pope's or in the East, temporal power ruling religious authorities, and the acceptance of divorce in the East as good things.  I certainly don't.  Yet, when the basics are clearly the same I cannot find any reason to not sit down together until we have reached, not a compromise, but a synthesis.  (ah yes, an Hegelian lurks his head).

Let's discuss the basics, which I hope I've laid out, and see if at least in theory we can't sit down together.  Anything less seems to blaspheme Christ.

Dan L
Logged
Dan Lauffer
Athanasios
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 188



« Reply #141 on: January 24, 2004, 01:26:24 PM »

Friends,

Later today I hope to have more time.  But I want to offer an apology for something I said in an earlier post.  In my frustration with a poster here I made a dirogatory remark about this forum.  I am sorry.  I do believe that most of the posters here are Godly people who are authentic in the commitment to the Faith once delivered to the saints.

More later.
Dan Lauffer
Logged
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 17,415


The Pope Emeritus reading OCNet


WWW
« Reply #142 on: January 24, 2004, 01:52:21 PM »

In general, I find myself in agreement with Byzantino's points regarding this issue.  

One thing I've noticed about some of the Eastern Catholics I know in real life is that they see doctrinal issues, formulations, etc., as secondary issues when it comes to working for unity (and, in certain cases, when it's not a doctrinal difference, but a difference in emphasis, I agree).  For instance, if I look at the substance of post-schism RC faith, and compare it with the substance of Orthodox faith, I find a lot of similarities, and at least 90% is commonly believed by all, and that is something to rejoice in.  But when I spoke about the 10% or so that doctrinally divides our respective communions, one told me that the Orthodox are always focusing on doctrine and "what it says" rather than on more important issues.  I must admit being surprised at this attitude.  Yes, there is so much that we hold in common, and little that divides us (in my opinion, anyway), but that little is also very serious stuff, and I don't think that's something to dismiss lightly as secondary.  And I don't think that's ego either, although ego is certainly involved in this issue in its own way.  I don't think it's too much to insist that we all believe the same things before we enter into communion again.  I don't think I'm being too proud and turf-conscious in insisting on that, nor do I think Rome is being like that in insisting that we believe the same things.  Sure, I may disagree with the RC Church when it says this or that is a part of the true faith, but at least it is honest dialogue.  Honest dialogue is the only thing that will help this situation; anything less is only going to make it worse.
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


"Mor is a jerk." - kelly
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #143 on: January 24, 2004, 02:06:17 PM »


  Precisely, and i think we need to get our heads down to resolving the issue of the papacy before anything else; that's the stumbling block. Not who's the Rock, but how the Petrine ministry should be exercised. ...

Pardon my posting this comment so late in this thread, but I was under the impression that this 'negotiation' of the nature of the Papacy was EXACTLY what the Pope JPII offered when he visited Greece (and was embarrassingly abused while there.) We Orthodox (Greeks at least) did squander a genuine opportunity based on a sincere offer and not on some weak platitudes. Sad, another millinnieum of schism awaits until another enlightened pope comes to the Throne of Peter.
Demetri
Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 3,186


"Look At Me! Look At Me Now! " - Bono


« Reply #144 on: January 24, 2004, 02:24:16 PM »

Pardon my posting this comment so late in this thread, but I was under the impression that this 'negotiation' of the nature of the Papacy was EXACTLY what the Pope JPII offered when he visited Greece (and was embarrassingly abused while there.) We Orthodox (Greeks at least) did squander a genuine opportunity based on a sincere offer and not on some weak platitudes. Sad, another millinnieum of schism awaits until another enlightened pope comes to the Throne of Peter.
Demetri

The hatred of the RCC runs deep in the Greeks because of the sacking of Constantinople during the Crusades. Even today many Cathedrals in Europe consist of whole parts of architecture ripped from Orthodox churches during the Crusade.
Logged
carpo-rusyn
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 383



« Reply #145 on: January 24, 2004, 02:31:07 PM »

[The hatred of the RCC runs deep in the Greeks because of the sacking of Constantinople during the Crusades. Even today many Cathedrals in Europe consist of whole parts of architecture ripped from Orthodox churches during the Crusade]

You know alot of people say this but I'd like to know the names of these cathedrals.  Yes St Mark's in Venice has the bronze horses from the Hippodrome but where else.  And if more cathedrals are identified who should the items be restored to?  Sent back to New Rome now Istanbul and given to the Turk or what?

Carpo-Rusyn
Logged
Father Peter
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: British Orthodox Church within the Coptic Orthodox Patriarchate
Posts: 2,651



WWW
« Reply #146 on: January 24, 2004, 02:35:06 PM »

The hatred of the RCC runs deep in the Greeks because of the sacking of Constantinople during the Crusades. Even today many Cathedrals in Europe consist of whole parts of architecture ripped from Orthodox churches during the Crusade.

Surely it is shameful for any christian to hate, let alone exhibit an almost ethnic hatred which refuses to deal with people as they are now. If we all insist on living in the past then we are doomed to repeat it. No Roman Catholic now is responsible for what happened 600 years ago, just as no EO is responsible for the deaths of OO in the persecutions of the 6th-7th centuries.

We meet with each other as we are, or we will fail to meet with each other at all.
Logged

Lord have mercy upon me a sinner
http://www.orthodoxmedway.org

My blog - http://anorthodoxpriest.blogspot.co.uk

The poster formerly known as peterfarrington
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #147 on: January 24, 2004, 03:24:07 PM »

[The hatred of the RCC runs deep in the Greeks because of the sacking of Constantinople during the Crusades. Even today many Cathedrals in Europe consist of whole parts of architecture ripped from Orthodox churches during the Crusade]

You know alot of people say this but I'd like to know the names of these cathedrals.  Yes St Mark's in Venice has the bronze horses from the Hippodrome but where else.  And if more cathedrals are identified who should the items be restored to?  Sent back to New Rome now Istanbul and given to the Turk or what?

Carpo-Rusyn

C-R,
While I understand TomΣ's response and your retort, neither refutes the lost opportunity. I am not well known on this or any other board as an "ecumenist", but I saw with personal dismay a window of dialogue missed.
JPII DID apologize for the outcome of the Fourth Crusade. And then he went further (and I am certain that even the Curia quaked at his ideas/offers). But the opportunity was missed nonetheless. :'(

Demetri
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
carpo-rusyn
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 383



« Reply #148 on: January 24, 2004, 07:08:53 PM »

What gets me Demetri is that people go around spouting off these generalities that have no basis in fact.  I understand neither refutes the lost opportunity but maybe the opportunity was lost because people were too busy fixated on these misinformed generalities.

CR
Logged
TomS
Banned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 3,186


"Look At Me! Look At Me Now! " - Bono


« Reply #149 on: January 24, 2004, 07:12:32 PM »

Surely it is shameful for any christian to hate, let alone exhibit an almost ethnic hatred which refuses to deal with people as they are now. If we all insist on living in the past then we are doomed to repeat it.

Well, of course this is true. But you are thinking like a Westener. What you have seen in Bosnia and other ethnic areas of "old" europe is the reality over there. Memories run deep.
Logged
TomS
Banned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 3,186


"Look At Me! Look At Me Now! " - Bono


« Reply #150 on: January 24, 2004, 07:17:09 PM »

What gets me Demetri is that people go around spouting off these generalities that have no basis in fact.

It most certainly is fact C-P. The Fourth Crusade murdered 100,000 Orthodox Christians and they destroyed and ransacked the city and took everything of value with them. This act weakened Byzantium enough to enable the Turks to conquer it.

Here's a little history.

The treachery of the Fourth Crusade was so despicable that even its Pope, Innocent III, was horrified unequivocally denouncing the conquest and pillaging of Constantinople in a famous Papal letter. The contemporary Byzantine historian Nicetas tells us these crusaders "respected nothing, neither the churches, nor the sacred images of Christ and his Saints. They committed atrocities upon men, respectable women, virgins, and young girls."

After desecrating Hagia Sophia, ransacking its priceless cultural treasures and smashing its sacred altars for the marble, gold and silver, the crusaders enthroned a common whore on the Patriarchal chair. Characterized by historian Ernle Bradford as "one of the most despicable acts in history", the participants of the Fourth Crusade well knew that the atrocities committed against their co-religionists in the name of Christianity were immoral, and thus many collected holy relics from ransacked Orthodox churches in the hope of achieving absolution and avoiding excommunication.



Will you be denying Smyrna next? or the slaughter of the Armenians?

« Last Edit: January 24, 2004, 07:36:53 PM by Tom+ú » Logged
Father Peter
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: British Orthodox Church within the Coptic Orthodox Patriarchate
Posts: 2,651



WWW
« Reply #151 on: January 24, 2004, 07:20:27 PM »

I hope I am thinking like a Christian. The UK has as many ancient enmities it could dredge up if it wished, but the mark of a Christian is not to be bound by them. I see no place whatsoever for any Orthodox christian hating anyone, let alone for something that happened 600 years ago.
Logged

Lord have mercy upon me a sinner
http://www.orthodoxmedway.org

My blog - http://anorthodoxpriest.blogspot.co.uk

The poster formerly known as peterfarrington
carpo-rusyn
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 383



« Reply #152 on: January 24, 2004, 07:36:37 PM »

[It most certainly is fact C-P. Will you be denying Smyrna next? or the slaughter of the Armenians? ]

Then Tom come up with the names of these "cathedrals built with the architecture loot of Byzantium".  Why would I deny the Armenian genocide?  There's plenty of documentation on this.  Also Symrna and the destruction of the Greek community there and the martyrdom of Abp Chyrstomosos.  These are modern events for which there is ample evidence why there are even people still living who remember Symrna and the genocide in Armenia.  My comments aren't an anti-Greek thing but rather just wanting to stick to the facts.

CR
Logged
TomS
Banned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 3,186


"Look At Me! Look At Me Now! " - Bono


« Reply #153 on: January 24, 2004, 07:40:05 PM »

My comments aren't an anti-Greek thing but rather just wanting to stick to the facts.

Hey, it's okay if they are - I'm not Greek, I just married one.  Grin

I have read articles on this in the past and will try to come up with some more data for you.

BTW - I did edit my post above with some descriptions of what I am talking about.

« Last Edit: January 24, 2004, 07:42:27 PM by Tom+ú » Logged
carpo-rusyn
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 383



« Reply #154 on: January 24, 2004, 07:44:52 PM »

Tom

[It most certainly is fact C-P. The Fourth Crusade murdered 100,000 Orthodox Christians and they destroyed and ransacked the city and took everything of value with them. This act weakened Byzantium enough to enable the Turks to conquer it. ]

It was a reprehensible act which is why the Pope excommunicated those who took part.  I know that the crusaders committed many atrocities but I think SbDn Peter is right, how long do you go before forgiving someone?  Tom are you of Greek ethnicity?  Where is your family from in Greece?  Did you have an ancestor at New Rome in 1204.  I'm not being flip it's a serious question.  My own family is from Ireland and survived the Potato Famine, the Penal Days, the Cromwellian Conquest, the Elizabethan Conquest, etc.  All these perpetrated by England.  Do you see me going after SbDn Peter for these atrocities?  No.

CR
Logged
TomS
Banned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 3,186


"Look At Me! Look At Me Now! " - Bono


« Reply #155 on: January 24, 2004, 07:53:02 PM »

See my post above yours concerning my "Greekness"

I was not saying that the Greeks are RIGHT in how they acted, I was just stating the fact that there are deep-seated emotions that are still present in the Greek psyche.
Logged
Linus7
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,780



« Reply #156 on: January 24, 2004, 08:04:52 PM »

Wasn't there an Eastern hand in the whole 1204 sack of Constantinople thing?

Didn't Alexius, the nephew of the Byzantine Emperor Alexius III, go to Venice in 1202 to recruit the Venetians and Crusaders to vanquish his uncle and put him on the throne?

I'm not excusing the Crusaders' actions, but the whole tragedy was hardly the responsibility of the RCC.
Logged

The first condition of salvation is to keep the norm of the true faith and in no way to deviate from the established doctrine of the Fathers.
- Pope St. Hormisdas
TomS
Banned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 3,186


"Look At Me! Look At Me Now! " - Bono


« Reply #157 on: January 24, 2004, 08:14:43 PM »

There is some truth to that Linus. Below is the beginning of a good article on the 4th Crusade.

Background of the Fourth Crusade

In the years from 1201 to 1202 the Fourth Crusade, sanctioned by pope Innocent III, was readying itself to set out to conquer Egypt, which was by then the center of Islamic power.

After initial problems, finally Boniface, the Marquis of Monferrat was decided as the leader of the campaign. But right from the beginning the Crusade was beset by fundamental problems. The main problem was that of transport. To carry a crusading army of tens of thousands to Egypt a substantial fleet was required. And as the Crusaders were all from western Europe, a western port would be required for them to embark from.

Hence the ideal choice for the Crusaders seemed to be the city of Venice. A rising power in the trade across the Mediterranean, Venice appeared to be the place where enough ships could be built in order to carry the army on its way.

Agreements were made with the leader of the city of Venice, the so-called Doge, Enrico Dandolo, that the Venetian fleet would transport the army at the cost of 5 marks per horse and 2 marks per man......
http://www.roman-empire.net/constant/1203-1204.html

Logged
jbc1949
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 194


St. Adeodatus--Given by God


« Reply #158 on: January 25, 2004, 01:28:14 AM »

Moronikos writes:

My friends were recently received into a Serbian Orthodox parish where they live now.  They got a new priest, RC bi-ritual, who added the filioque to the creed and wasn't allowing the babies to commune anymore.  They tried being Orthodox in communion with Rome, but after the new priest, they were just in communion with Rome.  They decided that Orthodoxy was more important than "communion with Rome".



Responsio:

A point of clarification please.  The bi-ritual RC priest who denied the infant Holy Communion had probably violated canon law of the EC Church.  Was the Church in which the priest served part of the Ruthenian Metropolia? I ask this because a number of years ago I heard of this happening in some parish of the Metropolia.

In my (RC) Church one Sunday about 3 years ago an EC couple came to Holy Communion and tried to have their young daughter (about 3 years old) communicated.  The extraordinary minister of the Eucharist (EME) refused initially but the parents persisted to the point that the priest (also administering the Holy Eucharist) had to intervene and the little girl was communicated.  No doubt on the EME part it was pure ignorance (not surprising nowadays).

I would not presume to analyze or judge the personal reasons why some person converts to one denomination or the other.  I would have hoped, however, at least in this case, that the parents of that infant would have SCREAMED BLOODY MURDER to their bishop over that RC priest's actions.

Jim C.
Logged
ByzantineSerb
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 171


OC.net


« Reply #159 on: January 25, 2004, 01:40:26 AM »

  Correct me if I am wrong, but did not (His Holiness) Innocent III excommunicate the Crusaders for their barbarous trechery against the Greeks?

  That is what I have heard and read.
Logged

If we live as people of God, there will be room for all nations in the Balkans and in the world. If we liken ourselves to Cain who killed his brother Abel, then the entire earth will be too small even for two people. The Lord Jesus Christ teaches us to be
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 #160 on: January 25, 2004, 02:13:49 AM »

There should be no more "bi-ritual" priests. They are a scurge (sp?) upon the Church.

My friends had a bad experience with one of these priests.  The only one I personally know is a blessing to the EC parish he ministers to.  He took a black marker and marked out the filioque in the creed in the liturgy books.  If it wasn't for him there would not be an EC community in Tulsa.  OTOH, that might be a better thing for those who truly wanted to be Orthodox.  Many EC communities would die out if not for folks like him.
Logged
Byzantino
Me Ortodox
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 353


Orthodox Christian


« Reply #161 on: January 25, 2004, 07:14:10 AM »

Quote
Pardon my posting this comment so late in this thread, but I was under the impression that this 'negotiation' of the nature of the Papacy was EXACTLY what the Pope JPII offered when he visited Greece (and was embarrassingly abused while there.) We Orthodox (Greeks at least) did squander a genuine opportunity based on a sincere offer and not on some weak platitudes. Sad, another millinnieum of schism awaits until another enlightened pope comes to the Throne of Peter.
Demetri

Actually Demetri, the Pope's appeal to the Orthodox world to help him re-examine the Petrine ministry didn't fall on deaf ears. One work which i keep mentioning on this matter is Olivier Clement's "You Are Peter," which i found to be the most forthright, cordial and objective piece ever written on the papacy from an Orthodox perspective, despite its short length. Just how many heeded his call i don't know.
 
Also, interestingly, after the Pope's visit to Greece, a Greek newspaper conducted a poll which revealed almost 60% in favour of reunion with Rome. If i remember correctly, around 25% were opposed and the rest didn't give a darn.
 
I believe the key to future progress in healing the schism will depend on how soon the decrees of Vatican II take full root in the life of the RCC, for, as many RCs are quick to point out, it can often take decades before a council's decrees are fully adapted. I remain very optimistic precisely because of Vatican II, which did what everybody thought was impossible after the definitions of Vatican I -  define ecclesiology using collegial principles and almost totally eschewing the characteristic authoritarianism and juridical language. This was the seed whose planting made any rapproachment between Rome and Orthodoxy possible, a seed so congenial and palatable with Orthodoxy it can grow into a healthy tree, albeit one that still needs some pruning.  The baton of all the hard work of the post-Vatican II popes is sure to be handed on to future popes who will strive to reach the finish line; God appointed a miraculous pope to revolutionize the RCC with Vatican II, and no doubt He'll do the same to bring about the revolution we all yearn for to unite the Church.
« Last Edit: January 25, 2004, 07:15:05 AM by Byzantino » Logged
Father Peter
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: British Orthodox Church within the Coptic Orthodox Patriarchate
Posts: 2,651



WWW
« Reply #162 on: January 25, 2004, 06:09:22 PM »

I'll try to get hold of Olivier Clement's work as soon as possible and study it. Are there also works that can be recommended by RC authors who present the RC position to an Orthodox audience?
Logged

Lord have mercy upon me a sinner
http://www.orthodoxmedway.org

My blog - http://anorthodoxpriest.blogspot.co.uk

The poster formerly known as peterfarrington
ByzantineSerb
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 171


OC.net


« Reply #163 on: January 25, 2004, 06:49:24 PM »

   There is a seemingly well-educated Catholic author named James Likoudis wrote a book titled "The Divine Primacy of the Bishop of Rome and Modern Eastern Orthodoxy: Letters to a Greek Orthodox on the Unity of the Church".

   Only one I could find.
Logged

If we live as people of God, there will be room for all nations in the Balkans and in the world. If we liken ourselves to Cain who killed his brother Abel, then the entire earth will be too small even for two people. The Lord Jesus Christ teaches us to be
Byzantino
Me Ortodox
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 353


Orthodox Christian


« Reply #164 on: January 25, 2004, 07:17:54 PM »

Quote
There is a seemingly well-educated Catholic author named James Likoudis wrote a book titled "The Divine Primacy of the Bishop of Rome and Modern Eastern Orthodoxy: Letters to a Greek Orthodox on the Unity of the Church".


By all means check out the book and his website. In my opinion, his writings aren't all that much different to the other RC internet apologists; the only difference is they're from a former-Orthodox perspective. I recall being struck by his downplaying of the forged documents and his denigration of one of the greatest historians in the history of the Church, Johanne Ignaz von Dollinger, because he (and his historian colleagues) had the gall to oppose papal infallibility  Shocked  If the website is any indication of what to expect from the book then i'd rather read something else. I'd stick to RC scholars (eg. Johanne Quasten; Philip Hughes has a good 3 volume church history set.)
Logged
carpo-rusyn
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 383



« Reply #165 on: January 25, 2004, 08:42:40 PM »

[one of the greatest historians in the history of the Church, Johanne Ignaz von Dollinger, because he (and his historian colleagues) had the gall to oppose papal infallibility]

Dollinger later had a hand in founding one of the Old Catholic churches which now ordains women didn't he?  So perhaps a case could be made that Dollinger was gradually losing his grip on tradition when he questioned papal infallibility.  Also what do you base the "one of the greatest historians in the history of the Church" on?  Have you read Dollinger?  What about Baronius, Eusebius, Newman, etc.  Are you accounting him one of the "greatest historians of the Church" because he supports your own views on the papacy?

Carpo-Rusyn
Logged
Byzantino
Me Ortodox
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 353


Orthodox Christian


« Reply #166 on: January 25, 2004, 09:23:39 PM »

Quote
Dollinger later had a hand in founding one of the Old Catholic churches which now ordains women didn't he?
 

Ad hominem arguments like this won't convince me i'm afraid.

Quote
So perhaps a case could be made that Dollinger was gradually losing his grip on tradition when he questioned papal infallibility.
 

Maybe Karl Hefele and John Henry Newman were losing their grips when they expressed similar sentiments of the inconsistency of papal infallibility with history and logic. Do you expect somebody with 50 yrs of church history to his name to slavishly comply with a doctrine he knew was only a theological opinion even in his own day and age? What happened to St. Vincent Lerin's criterion, quod ubique, quod semper, quad ab obnibus creditum est (what has been believed everywhere, always, by all.) To the leading historians of the time papal infallibility had nothing to do with Tradition and history. It's no secret that some of the Ultramontanes at the Vatican council purposely rejected the witness of history in order to justify their position, such as Cardinal Henry Edward "dogma has conquered history" Manning.

Quote
Also what do you base the "one of the greatest historians in the history of the Church" on?  Have you read Dollinger?  


hmm...reputation, scholarship, fame...i get the impression that RCs have to resort to impugning a historian's credibility if they disagree with a dogma of the RCC. J.N.D. Kelly was an Oxford Church historian who also finds no evidence for the modern RC papal claims in the early church, yet he doesn't suffer the same fate.

Quote
What about Baronius, Eusebius, Newman, etc.
 

What about them?

Quote
Are you accounting him one of the "greatest historians of the Church" because he supports your own views on the papacy?

The same could be asked of you: are you dismissing Dollinger's credibility because he doesn't support your view of the papacy? Johanne Quasten is another brilliant (RC) historical mind who's frankness about the denial of any papal universal jurisdiction in St. Cyprian doesn't prevent RC apologists from citing him as a great historian.

Must run.
Logged
carpo-rusyn
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 383



« Reply #167 on: January 25, 2004, 10:04:10 PM »

[The same could be asked of you: are you dismissing Dollinger's credibility because he doesn't support your view of the papacy]

I'm dismissing Dollinger because he ran off and helped found a church which has now drifted off into modernism.

Have you actually read Dollinger though?

[ John Henry Newman were losing their grips when they expressed similar sentiments of the inconsistency of papal infallibility with]

Perhaps you can explain why he submitted to the idea of papal infallibility?

Carpo-Rusyn
Logged
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #168 on: January 25, 2004, 11:00:23 PM »

 Correct me if I am wrong, but did not (His Holiness) Innocent III excommunicate the Crusaders for their barbarous trechery against the Greeks?

  That is what I have heard and read.

I think you are correct here; but the excommunications themselves did not last long as the Pope was molified by the resulting forced re-union.
And the reunion didn't last long either -these actions actually were like throwing gasoline on smoldering embers. Fire still burns today.

Demetri
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
Dan Lauffer
Athanasios
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 188



« Reply #169 on: January 26, 2004, 12:01:38 AM »

Gentlemen,

I.e., Carpo-Rusyn and Byzantino,  please don't be cross with each other.  After years of study myself (I really am an old goat) I've discovered that academic pedigree "don't necessarily mean a thing".  I tend to believe that "infallibility" is one claim best left unclaimed.  But if we get bogged down in which scholar claims what about infallibility we will never get any closer to the truth let alone closer to recommunion.  The West has always tended to be good "definers" but sometimes "definitions" should best be left "undefined".   I think VC I did a disservice to the Church and will of necessity have to be revisited if there is any hope of recommunion. I hope my opinion does not excommunicate me from Rome.  

BTW I think the East needs the West.  Sometimes the East is to dogmatic without being very reasonable.  

Dan L

Logged
TomS
Banned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 3,186


"Look At Me! Look At Me Now! " - Bono


« Reply #170 on: January 26, 2004, 12:04:14 AM »

BTW I think the East needs the West.

Yes. based upon what I have seen predicting the birth rate of Musilims and speed of the growth of the Muslim "faith", we definitely need each other!
Logged
Byzantino
Me Ortodox
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 353


Orthodox Christian


« Reply #171 on: January 26, 2004, 02:22:17 AM »

I'm dismissing Dollinger because he ran off and helped found a church which has now drifted off into modernism.

But how are the actions (100 years later) of a church he helped found related to his scholarship and the points i raised? It doesn't - which is why the argument is fallacious.

Quote
Have you actually read Dollinger though?

I've read a decent portion of his writings cited by numerous secondary sources. Anything by Dollinger is rare and worth over $300 Australian, which i can't afford right now. I haven't read much of Dante's works either but i know he's a literary giant.

Quote
After years of study myself (I really am an old goat) I've discovered that academic pedigree "don't necessarily mean a thing".  I tend to believe that "infallibility" is one claim best left unclaimed.  But if we get bogged down in which scholar claims what about infallibility we will never get any closer to the truth let alone closer to recommunion.  The West has always tended to be good "definers" but sometimes "definitions" should best be left "undefined".  I think VC I did a disservice to the Church and will of necessity have to be revisited if there is any hope of recommunion. I hope my opinion does not excommunicate me from Rome.  


Well ultimately we have to rely on some kind of historical authority and data to evaluate the issue. I value the evidence of Fathers Dollinger and Hefele because of their credentials and their first-hand witness to the matter at hand as historians. There is such a thing as an appeal to reliable authority, and i believe the evidence against papal infallibility on that basis is overwhelmingly against it; we have evidence of medieval popes, canonists and theologians attributing doctrinal error to popes and interpreting Matt 16:18 in a collegial sense. Is it any wonder why someone like Cardinal Manning would exclaim "dogma has conquered history"? The overwhelming majority at the Vatican council was made up of clergy embued in the Ultramontanist mindset; funnily enough Ultramontanism is condemned as a heresy today. But i think you're absolutely right about Vatican I, Dan. The council was a source of scandal for me too. I'd like to know what good the dogma of papal infallibility has done for the RCC and for better relations between Orthodoxy, the RCC being a Church whose laity 100+ years later is no longer ignorant or constrained by the inaccessibility of information. It surprises me how the sentiment of the majority at Vatican I represented that of the minority at Vatican II. Woud there have been a definition of papal infallibility if the Bishops of Vatican II were present en masse at Vatican I?
Logged
Byzantino
Me Ortodox
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 353


Orthodox Christian


« Reply #172 on: January 26, 2004, 02:47:17 AM »

Here's some insight into Cardinal Newman's thought at the time:

"Is this the proper work of an oecumenical Council? as to myself personally, pleae God, I do not expect trial at all; but I cannot help suffering with the various souls which are suffering, and I look with anxiety at the prospect of having to defend decisions which may not be difficult to my private judgement, but may be most difficult to maintain logically in the face of historical facts. What have we done to be treated as the faithful never were treated before? When has a definition of a doctrine de Fide been a luxury of devotion and not a stern practical necessity? Why should an aggressive, insolent faction be allowed to "make the heart of the just mourn"...? Why can't we be let alone, when we have pursued peace and thought no evil?" (Robert McClory, Power and the Papacy: the People and Politics Behind the Doctrine of Papal Infallibility, Liguori, 1997, p. 88.)  

Newman, to be fair, believed in a version of infallibility consistent with his theology of collegiality, which laid the foundations for Vatican II. Why he ended up assenting to the dogma is not for me to judge, nonetheless we can catch a glimpse of the trepidations facing those who found the new dogma too hard to swallow:

'As a historian, [Hefele] could find no justification for papal infallibility in past ages, and unlike de Las Casas, he could not affirm today what he denied yesterday. "i'm sitting on a volcano," he wrote a few months after returning to his diocese in Austria....Nor, he believed, could the Church bear the scandal of a possible schism over his convictions. That, he reasoned would be a disaster even worse than the doctrine. So Hefele, more than a year after the declaration of the dogma, sent in his written submission, burned all the papers he had written on the council, and asked his friends to return his letters so he could burn them as well. He called it a "sacrifice of the intellect."' (Ibid, p. 131.)
Logged
Dan Lauffer
Athanasios
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 188



« Reply #173 on: January 26, 2004, 08:02:39 AM »

byzantino,

Newman is a primary source of information.  I think my former criticism of "scholars" was not well written by me.   My comment was directed against too great a reliance upon secondary sources.

I agree with Cardinal Newman's trepidation.  I don't know what good this doctrine has done the RCC and I can't imagine that VCII would have developed it if given the chance.  I do believe that it will eventually be overthrown...er...reinterpreted.  It will be a wrenching move because it will necessarily fly in the face of the claimed authority of dogmatic pronouncements.  I think the RCC has some rough days ahead but eventually they will all be for the good.  My prayer is that Orthodoxy will press the issue and not simply go off in the corner and point fingers.   In this matter the West desperately needs the East.

May I copy and paste your note to the Catholic Convert forum when it comes back on line?

Dan L
Logged
The Caffeinator
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 433



« Reply #174 on: January 26, 2004, 09:55:47 AM »

I think Vat I sums up pretty well what we have always known in the west. I wouldn't call it a "new" dogma to be "over-turned," or "reinterpreted."

It was promulgated, not invented. (Papal infalliblity is also a powerful weapon against modernism.)
Logged
Dan Lauffer
Athanasios
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 188



« Reply #175 on: January 26, 2004, 10:17:31 AM »

Cafeinator,

"It was promulgated, not invented. (Papal infalliblity is also a powerful weapon against modernism.)"

In theory, and if we are all puppets, you are correct.  In practice that's another story.  Have you been keeping up with the American RCC?  For much of it it is difficult to tell the difference between it and liberal protestantism.  If Papal infallibility were a good weapon why hasn't it been used?  Or on the other hand, if it has been used it doesn't seem to work.

Perhaps you have a better slant.  Could you elaborate?

Dan L


Logged
The Caffeinator
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 433



« Reply #176 on: January 26, 2004, 01:18:54 PM »

Well, as far as the American RCC goes, it is a question of obedience. Much of the liberal american hierarchy has fallen into heresy. Heretical bishops are nothing new, for east or west. What would be new is if the Roman Catholic Church as a whole does not recover from the current crisis. But restoration will happen (and is happening) on God's time, and not ours. The Church moves very slowly, but from what I have seen, is recovering from the crisis.

The weapon I have spoken of has been used, to good effect. We have not seen the entrenched liberal hierarchy overturned, of course. But Catholics can still learn what Catholicism is, and in that respect, the attempted revision failed. Catholic doctrine has been reiterated by successive popes.

One should look to Rome for examples of the indefectible, infallible Church...not the American bishops.
Logged
sdcheung
it's as if..Saint Photios and Saint Mark Ephesus, has come back
Banned
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,325


...even though Romania Falls, another will Rise...


« Reply #177 on: January 26, 2004, 01:21:16 PM »

I hope I am thinking like a Christian. The UK has as many ancient enmities it could dredge up if it wished, but the mark of a Christian is not to be bound by them. I see no place whatsoever for any Orthodox christian hating anyone, let alone for something that happened 600 years ago.

How protestant and er Roman Catholic to think like that.
People in the East have lonnnnnnng memories. And it's hard to set aside enmity for ppl who did you harm.

Logged


Keep Breed Mixing, and this Maine Coon Cat will be the last of it's kind. /\
No profanities in your sig line if you're going to post in the public forum.
sdcheung
it's as if..Saint Photios and Saint Mark Ephesus, has come back
Banned
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,325


...even though Romania Falls, another will Rise...


« Reply #178 on: January 26, 2004, 01:28:53 PM »

I believe true Orthodoxy is expressed in what Patriarch Bartholomew has done.  It is not expressed in what a couple of the posters here have stated.  

Dan lauffer

Wrong.
He's singlehandedly destroying Orthodoxy.
I will not follow this Bishop blindly into The Pan-Heresy of Ecumenism. But I will remain in Canonical Orthodoxy and fight, I will not "wall myself off".

I hope he gets replaced.
Logged


Keep Breed Mixing, and this Maine Coon Cat will be the last of it's kind. /\
No profanities in your sig line if you're going to post in the public forum.
sdcheung
it's as if..Saint Photios and Saint Mark Ephesus, has come back
Banned
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,325


...even though Romania Falls, another will Rise...


« Reply #179 on: January 26, 2004, 01:32:48 PM »

BTW. I know a Good Replacement for Bartholomew..
Archbishop Christodoulos of the Church of Greece.
Logged


Keep Breed Mixing, and this Maine Coon Cat will be the last of it's kind. /\
No profanities in your sig line if you're going to post in the public forum.
Tags: papal primacy 
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 »  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 0.132 seconds with 72 queries.