OrthodoxChristianity.net
July 23, 2014, 09:31:05 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: FUNDAMENTAL DOGMATIC DIFFERENCES BETWEEN CATHOLICISM AND ORTHODOXY  (Read 27705 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Ben
Unabashedly Pro-Life
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,260



« on: April 22, 2004, 01:00:05 AM »

Demetri......thanks for the link!

I have a question....well more of a complaint...and it would be nice if a lot of people would reply. I am sure this question is for the Catholic and Orthodox discussion forum, but it is in regard to "Which Councils are Ecumenical?" By Francis Dvornik, so I thought I'd post it here.

After reading just a few lines into this article I found this:

"Many Catholic leaders think that a dialogue with the Eastern Orthodox Churches should begin as early as possible and hope for positive results since there are no fundamental dogmatic differences between the Roman and Orthodox Churches."

It is amazing how many Catholics I've heard this from. I am truly shocked that so many Catholics, and some Orthodox, think there really are no fundamental dogmatic difference betwen Catholicism and Orthodoxy. If this is the opinion of Dvornik or not, is not the point. I am just really amazed to see this opinion, clearly influenced by the post Vat-II ecumenism, so comon amoung devout Roman Catholics.

To me, it really seems like an ignorant thing to say. Maybe I'm crazy, but it took me 2 hours, when I first began to explore Orthodoxy, to realize there were in fact, serious and fundamental dogmatic differences between Catholicism and Orthodoxy.

So many want to explain everything away with ecumenist lies and fables, the truth seems so simple.

Papal Supremacy, Papal Infallibilty, the Filioque, the Agustian view of Original Sin, the Immaculate Conception, Purgatory....all articles of the Catholic faith. All dogmas, all deemed nessicary for salvation by Rome. All of which Orthodoxy rejects. One can go on and on about how we all believe the same thing, but in different words, or expressed differently due to our environments. But when you come down to it Catholicism and Orthodoxy do have fundamental dogmatic differences.

I think it is unfair to both Orthodoxy and Catholicism, to dismiss the differences as mere technical difficulties.

I am sure many will disgaree with me, but I think only a fool is so obsessed with unity to ignore such fundamental differences, no matter how good the intentions are.

I'm sure I must be crazy....... but it seems too absurd to deny what seems to be so basic and simple...

THERE ARE FUNDAMENTAL DOGMATIC DIFFERENCES BETWEEN CATHOLICISM AND ORTHODOXY!

Sorry....had to get that off my chest.....
« Last Edit: April 22, 2004, 01:06:18 AM by Ben » Logged

"I prefer to be accused unjustly, for then I have nothing to reproach myself with, and joyfully offer this to the good Lord. Then I humble myself at the thought that I am indeed capable of doing the thing of which I have been accused. " - Saint
prodromos
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 1,463

Sydney, Australia


« Reply #1 on: April 22, 2004, 03:03:52 AM »

Christos Anesti!  Christ is Risen!

Dear Ben,

you have just described what frustrates me most about dialogue with our Catholic brethren. It honestly leaves me wanting to bash my head against the keyboard at times Sad.

John.
Logged
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #2 on: April 22, 2004, 04:37:33 AM »


I'm sure I must be crazy....... but it seems too absurd to deny what seems to be so basic and simple...

THERE ARE FUNDAMENTAL DOGMATIC DIFFERENCES BETWEEN CATHOLICISM AND ORTHODOXY!

Sorry....had to get that off my chest.....

And I am so glad that you did so!
Most of us Orthodox are aware of the real differences that have separated the church in the west from Orthodoxy. But we do NOT revel in superiority, but lament that it is so difficult to even discuss what we know to be error. I was criticized by 'romanbyzantium' for stating that the Orthodox should have done more to prevent the loss of the Church of Rome. But my feelings are real - centuries of glossing over a creeping divergence in the Faith in the west from the unchanging Faith in the east ALLOWED the schism to occur in the first place. Ignoring differences, especially the basic, fundamental ones, in the quest (or back then, to prolong) unity is what made separation possible - inevitable - and subsequent dialogue difficult.
Our respective hierarchs, coming from an apostolic level or plane and with the heavy charges their offices entail which we cannot really imagine, often send us confusing signals ("two-lungs", "Sister Churches"). In reality, we and they know the divide is wide and deep... and sad.
It is not so simple a task as to hold a council and patch things up to '1052' standards of communion.
I imagine that Ben now understands why most Orthodox go into emotional apoplexy at the phrase "Orthodox in communion with Rome" Shocked...sorry, I had to get that off my chest.  :-

Demetri
Logged

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

Posts: 1,260



« Reply #3 on: April 22, 2004, 12:15:48 PM »

Christos Anesti!  Christ is Risen!

Dear Ben,

you have just described what frustrates me most about dialogue with our Catholic brethren. It honestly leaves me wanting to bash my head against the keyboard at times Sad.

John.

I was starting to think I was the only one who was frequently tempted to bang my head into something when fed this ecumenist "we all believe the same thing" or "there are no dogmatic differences between east and west" crap.
Logged

"I prefer to be accused unjustly, for then I have nothing to reproach myself with, and joyfully offer this to the good Lord. Then I humble myself at the thought that I am indeed capable of doing the thing of which I have been accused. " - Saint
Ben
Unabashedly Pro-Life
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,260



« Reply #4 on: April 22, 2004, 12:17:20 PM »

I imagine that Ben now understands why most Orthodox go into emotional apoplexy at the phrase "Orthodox in communion with Rome"

I sure do.......
Logged

"I prefer to be accused unjustly, for then I have nothing to reproach myself with, and joyfully offer this to the good Lord. Then I humble myself at the thought that I am indeed capable of doing the thing of which I have been accused. " - Saint
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,878


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #5 on: April 22, 2004, 03:24:14 PM »

"Papal Supremacy, Papal Infallibilty, the Filioque, the Agustian view of Original Sin, the Immaculate Conception, Purgatory....all articles of the Catholic faith. All dogmas, all deemed nessicary for salvation by Rome. All of which Orthodoxy rejects. One can go on and on about how we all believe the same thing, but in different words, or expressed differently due to our environments. But when you come down to it Catholicism and Orthodoxy do have fundamental dogmatic differences."

Papal Infallibility is a true dogamtic difference.  Papal Primacy is not so much the issue as the way it is exercised.  The rest I feel can be worked out and are being worked.  Only hardliners on both sides insist they constitute insurmountable differences of dogma.  For the West held all them long before the Great Schism, so until Papal Primacy got in the way the others were accepted by the East.  For example, the Spanish Church had been reciting the Filioque long before the Schism yet the East did not feel it was an issue worthy of schism until after the Photian/1054 schisms.

Fr. Deacon Lance
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Twenty Nine
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Ukrainian Orthodox Church of America
Posts: 187



« Reply #6 on: April 22, 2004, 04:14:02 PM »

IMO, it goes far beyond "dogmatic" differences.

Say for the sake of argument, both Orthodox and Catholics came to some kind of reconciliation concerning these "dogmatic" differences. Lets say there would be no more discussion on the IC, Original sin, indulgences, etc.

Now, what are we left with? After all the paperwork is done, will the Catholic Church live the life of Orthodoxy? That is what is ultimately important...not "official agreements", but rather a oneness of mind, a oneness of liturgical piety, a oneness in the struggle of fasting and prayer.

It is not that I am not hopeful. But it is a more realistic hope. The Catholic Church is too big for a fruitful reunion. It needs to start with each Catholic, then each Catholic parish, etc.

It is all or nothing and it is not realistic that the Catholic Church can handle this. You can't expect Roman Catholics to start living an Orthodox life if they have not had a personal encounter with Orthodoxy. You can't flip a switch and say you are Orthodox. Orthodoxy is the pearl of great price. It takes lots of struggle, prayer, yearning, obedience and love in order to obtain it.
Logged

Finally, brethren, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is gracious, if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things. - Philippians 4:8
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #7 on: April 22, 2004, 04:31:56 PM »

"Papal Supremacy, Papal Infallibilty, the Filioque, the Agustian view of Original Sin, the Immaculate Conception, Purgatory....all articles of the Catholic faith. All dogmas, all deemed nessicary for salvation by Rome. All of which Orthodoxy rejects. One can go on and on about how we all believe the same thing, but in different words, or expressed differently due to our environments. But when you come down to it Catholicism and Orthodoxy do have fundamental dogmatic differences."

Papal Infallibility is a true dogamtic difference.  Papal Primacy is not so much the issue as the way it is exercised.  The rest I feel can be worked out and are being worked.  Only hardliners on both sides insist they constitute insurmountable differences of dogma.  For the West held all them long before the Great Schism, so until Papal Primacy got in the way the others were accepted by the East.  For example, the Spanish Church had been reciting the Filioque long before the Schism yet the East did not feel it was an issue worthy of schism until after the Photian/1054 schisms.

Fr. Deacon Lance

Deacon Lance,
Thank you for proving our point.
No we do not believe in the "same thing". Definitions of original sin and salvation are about as fundamental to the faith as possible. And we widely differ on those to start with.
The filoque may have been (wrongly) used in parts of the west for a long time, but did not become a problem until your pope gave in to the pressures, ceased HIS opposition to it, and accepted it. A slight but important nuance in versions of history, no?
There had been growing discomfort with the ever-growing demands of the bishops of Rome to increase their authority. This increase in authority was even looked at sceptically in the west at times. Papal "infallibility" is merely the culmination of the pope "winning" (in the west, after the Reformation tore the church there yet again over the same issue in part).
Of the two dozen other changes or innovations introduced in the west, true, some are more easily dealt with than others, but  many of those 'others' are large as well.
Again, the Vatican communion is a different church from the Orthodox Catholic Church.

Demetri
« Last Edit: April 22, 2004, 04:32:47 PM by +æ-ü+¦-â-ä+++¦+++«-é » Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
Frobie
Quasi Vero Monaco
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 633


Rublev's Trinity


WWW
« Reply #8 on: April 22, 2004, 04:38:14 PM »

As a Catholic, I'd like to think we could all be together again, but to quote something Mor Ephrem told me (though he had a much more articulate argument), "Nobody is going anywhere." That is to say, Catholics won't change PI and the IC (among other things), and Orthodox won't accept either. The side of the fence I fall on right now is the Catholic one, but you never know what might happen Smiley.
« Last Edit: April 22, 2004, 04:39:55 PM by Frobie » Logged
Ben
Unabashedly Pro-Life
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,260



« Reply #9 on: April 23, 2004, 12:50:53 AM »

Quote
Papal Infallibility is a true dogamtic difference.
 

I think Papal Infallibility is truly a dogmatic difference, but it isn't the only one. It isn't the only Roman Catholic Dogma that the Orthodox Church regects.

Quote
Papal Primacy is not so much
the issue as the way it is exercised.


I am talking about Papal supremacy here. I do not think Orthodoxy denies Papal Primacy. The Pope, according to Orthodoxy, is the first amoung equals, therefore holds a primacy of honour. However, Catholicism gives the Pope supremacy, total jurisdiction over the entire Church, a primacy of jurisdiction one might say, that rapidly grew into a supremacy in the 12th and 13th centuries. So here we have a serious difference, that turns into a dogmatic one with the declarations of Vatican I.

Quote
The rest I feel can be worked out and are being worked.  Only hardliners on both sides insist they constitute insurmountable differences of dogma.
 

It is sad, and in a way, funny, that those on both sides who adhere to the basic teachings of their Churches are considered hardliners. Catholicism and Orthodoxy both claim they are the true Church, and the other is in schism. There is no room for compromise here. I am sorry, but this is the truth. When you have two Churches, both claiming to be the true Church, you can't have compormise, one must repent and unite with the other, or there really can't be true union, without the West giving up on some of it's dogmas, and the East embracing some of the dogmas they've regected for centuries.

No matter what Vatican II may have said, or what those who desire union above anything else may say, it is still offical Catholic teaching and dogma, that Catholicism is the truth, and there is no salvation outside of the Catholic Church. But if I, as a Catholic, go around saying "Catholicism is the truth, all else is heresy, repent, for there is no salvation outside of the Catholic Church!" I would be labled as a hardliner and a nut, even though such a statment would be a simple expression of official Catholic teaching.

Quote
For example, the Spanish Church had been reciting the Filioque long before the Schism yet the East did not feel it was an issue worthy of schism until after the Photian/1054 schisms.

This is a good point but the problem now is that the Filioque is offical Catholic dogma. For the RCC to give up the filioque, it would have to admitt it is not the true Church, for the Catholic Church declared the filioque a dogma. There has been no rejection of this dogma and the anathema against those who don't believe in the filioque has never been refuted by Rome. You can't work around this. The Catholic Church holds the Filioque as a dogma, nessicary for salavation, but the East totally rejects it. So we have a problem here, for either side to compromise would be unthinkable, for both sides officialy teach they are the true Church, and the other is in schism/heresy.
Logged

"I prefer to be accused unjustly, for then I have nothing to reproach myself with, and joyfully offer this to the good Lord. Then I humble myself at the thought that I am indeed capable of doing the thing of which I have been accused. " - Saint
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,878


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #10 on: April 23, 2004, 09:24:23 AM »

Ben,

You state:

"No matter what Vatican II may have said, or what those who desire union above anything else may say, it is still offical Catholic teaching and dogma, that Catholicism is the truth, and there is no salvation outside of the Catholic Church. But if I, as a Catholic, go around saying "Catholicism is the truth, all else is heresy, repent, for there is no salvation outside of the Catholic Church!" I would be labled as a hardliner and a nut, even though such a statment would be a simple expression of official Catholic teaching. "

You have presented the schismatic traditionalist line which the Catholic Church rejects.  No matter what Vatican II said?  Vatican II is an authoritative council of the Catholic Church.  Read its documents and those of Pope John Paul II.  Read Dominus Iesus.  Put down the SSPX material.

As to the Filioque, please read The Father as the Source of the Whole Trinity:
http://www.catholicculture.org/docs/doc_view.cfm?recnum=1176

Fr. Deacon Lance

Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
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 #11 on: April 23, 2004, 10:07:50 AM »

Deacon Lance:

[As to the Filioque, please read The Father as the Source of the Whole Trinity:
www.catholicculture.org/docs/d...cfm?recnum=1176]


For an Orthodox Guide To The Filioque access -

http://www.geocities.com/trvalentine/orthodox/workinprog_filioque.html

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: 2,878


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #12 on: April 23, 2004, 10:35:14 AM »

Orthodoc,

I believe the document I cited answers most of the criticism of the site you provide.  However, could you provide an official statement by a canonical Orthodox Church or Hierarch that states that the Filioque is an insurmountable obstacle to reunion?  The document I site is an official document of the Catholic Church, the site you reference is just another unofficial anti-Catholic Orthodox polemics site.

Fr. Deacon Lance
Logged

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

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


« Reply #13 on: April 23, 2004, 10:51:06 AM »

Orthodoc,

I believe the document I cited answers most of the criticism of the site you provide.  However, could you provide an official statement by a canonical Orthodox Church or Hierarch that states that the Filioque is an insurmountable obstacle to reunion?  The document I site is an official document of the Catholic Church, the site you reference is just another unofficial anti-Catholic Orthodox polemics site.

Fr. Deacon Lance

Not exactly what you asked for, but your answer nevertheless:

Fourth Ecumenical Council in Constantinople - Eighth Ecumenical (Imperial) Council 879-880 AD
Resolved scandals between East and West regarding Bulgaria. Expelled those who did not recognise Nicaea II as Seventh Ecumenical Council. Outlawed and repudiated local councils of Rome and Constantinople against Saint Photius. Established that the Symbol of Faith from Constantinople I (the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed) was to be forever 'un-innovated' and 'immutable'.


Pretty clear to me.

Demetri
Logged

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

Posts: 1,278

Pray for me an unworthy sinner


WWW
« Reply #14 on: April 23, 2004, 11:39:07 AM »

I think TwentyNine summed it up pretty nicely.  It is possible, and some might even say likely, that some individual roman parishes or roman monastic institutions might convert, but the likelyhood that Rome itself would convert with all its attached faithful is utterly preposterous.  Only a great miracle could cause rome to submit and repent of its errors.

The people from Rome in the ecumenical dialogues realize this, and that is why for all their talk of ecumenism and trying to work out the differences, all they are doing is trying to make the Orthodox Church so many more uniates.  Actually what they would really like is for not only the Orthodox but the existing uniates (along with tradlats) is to give up their petty liturgics and all just go Novus Ordo.  No thank you.

Joe Zollars
« Last Edit: April 23, 2004, 11:40:05 AM by JoeZollars » Logged

These posts no longer represent my beliefs and I in no way endorse their contents.
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,878


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #15 on: April 23, 2004, 12:05:38 PM »

Demetri,

Past condemnations are meaningless when they condemn what they think the other side believes instead of what they actually believe.  This is the case with the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox (and Catholics and Oriental Orthodox as well).  I believe it will turn out to be the case as concerns the Filioque.

Fr. Deacon Lance
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
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 #16 on: April 23, 2004, 12:24:03 PM »

[Past condemnations are meaningless when they condemn what they think the other side believes instead of what they actually believe. ]

Does this mean that we are to go through another round of Roman Catholic word games like....'When we say [AND} we really mean [THROUGH].  But we are not going to change so we will continue to use 'AND'.  When we do you all can interprete as 'THROUGH'?

From the latest (Roman) Catholic/ Orthodox (Catholic) discussions -


http://goarch.org/en/news/releases/articles/release8676.asp

Excerpt:

And finally, in view of the fact that the Vatican has affirmed the "normative and irrevocable dogmatic value of the Creed of 381" in its original Greek version, the Consultation recommends that the Catholic Church use the same text (without the Filioque) "in making translations of that Creed for catechetical and liturgical use," and declare that the anathema pronounced by the Second Council of Lyons against those who deny that the Spirit proceeds eternally from the Father and the Son is no longer applicable.
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: 2,878


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #17 on: April 23, 2004, 12:45:02 PM »

Excerpt:

"In a final section, the Consultation makes eight recommendations to the members and bishops of the two churches. It recommends that they "enter into a new and earnest dialogue concerning the origin and person of the Holy Spirit." It also proposes that in the future both Catholics and Orthodox "refrain from labeling as heretical the traditions of the other side" on this subject, and that the theologians of both traditions make a clearer distinction between the divinity of the Spirit, and the manner of the Spirit’s origin, "which still awaits full and final ecumenical resolution." The text also urges theologians to distinguish, as far as possible, the theological issues concerning the origin of the Holy Spirit from ecclesiological issues, and suggests that attention be paid in the future to the status of councils of both our churches that took place after the seven ecumenical councils of the first millennium."


The real issue is not the use of "and" or "through" but what the Greeks and Latins meant by proceed which is two different things.  The Greek word ekpouresis means to take origin, the Latin word procedit means to be sent from.  The Latin procedit is a poor translation for the Greek ekpouresis which is the root of the problem.

Fr. Deacon Lance
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #18 on: April 23, 2004, 02:35:55 PM »

I think TwentyNine summed it up pretty nicely.  It is possible, and some might even say likely, that some individual roman parishes or roman monastic institutions might convert, but the likelyhood that Rome itself would convert with all its attached faithful is utterly preposterous.  Only a great miracle could cause rome to submit and repent of its errors.

The people from Rome in the ecumenical dialogues realize this, and that is why for all their talk of ecumenism and trying to work out the differences, all they are doing is trying to make the Orthodox Church so many more uniates.  Actually what they would really like is for not only the Orthodox but the existing uniates (along with tradlats) is to give up their petty liturgics and all just go Novus Ordo.  No thank you.

Joe Zollars

Uniates to you. orthodox to the orthodox who are uniting with the west. Your last statement is just yor imagination cause the pope and canon law makes it clear that everyone is to retain their cultural and liturgical traditions. This is unlike of what your church requires of those converting to your church. Look for example at Bishop Kalisto Ware. Do I need to say anymore. Are we required to be orthodox clones? I wonder if Bishop ware could have remain western in appearance.

The uniates as you call them remain what they are. be that russian, ukrainianm, etc. Their cultural roots are intact and required to be intact.  Did the good Bishop approach orthodoxy or was he approached by the orthodox?



« Last Edit: April 23, 2004, 03:03:24 PM by romanbyzantium » Logged
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #19 on: April 23, 2004, 02:38:38 PM »

[Past condemnations are meaningless when they condemn what they think the other side believes instead of what they actually believe. ]

Does this mean that we are to go through another round of Roman Catholic word games like....'When we say [AND} we really mean [THROUGH].  But we are not going to change so we will continue to use 'AND'.  When we do you all can interprete as 'THROUGH'?

From the latest (Roman) Catholic/ Orthodox (Catholic) discussions -


http://goarch.org/en/news/releases/articles/release8676.asp

Excerpt:

And finally, in view of the fact that the Vatican has affirmed the "normative and irrevocable dogmatic value of the Creed of 381" in its original Greek version, the Consultation recommends that the Catholic Church use the same text (without the Filioque) "in making translations of that Creed for catechetical and liturgical use," and declare that the anathema pronounced by the Second Council of Lyons against those who deny that the Spirit proceeds eternally from the Father and the Son is no longer applicable.


yes orthodoc, you know how those cunning Jesuits are! .Rome is hatching up a huge conspiracy to get the east to rejoin again.
Logged
JoeZollars
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,278

Pray for me an unworthy sinner


WWW
« Reply #20 on: April 23, 2004, 04:11:40 PM »

witness Archbishop John Ireland and/or St. Alexis Toth. and then there are the uniates who end up in areas without a uniate church.  Yes of couse uniates get to keep their culture......and little green men from Mars will soon be taking over the federal government of the US.

And I notice your statement "orthodox to the orthodox who are uniting with the west."  This statement prooves my point.  Rome doesn't care about the theological position of the Orthodox, all it cares about are more sheep paying their anual peter's pence.

Joe Zollars
Logged

These posts no longer represent my beliefs and I in no way endorse their contents.
JoeZollars
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,278

Pray for me an unworthy sinner


WWW
« Reply #21 on: April 23, 2004, 04:12:58 PM »

yes orthodoc, you know how those cunning Jesuits are! .Rome is hatching up a huge conspiracy to get the east to rejoin again.

What have you been smoking man and more importantly where can I get some? Grin

Seriously where on earth in Orthodoc's post did it say anything about Jesuits, conspiracy, etc.?

Joe Zollars
Logged

These posts no longer represent my beliefs and I in no way endorse their contents.
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #22 on: April 23, 2004, 04:18:29 PM »

witness Archbishop John Ireland and/or St. Alexis Toth. and then there are the uniates who end up in areas without a uniate church.  Yes of couse uniates get to keep their culture......and little green men from Mars will soon be taking over the federal government of the US.

And I notice your statement "orthodox to the orthodox who are uniting with the west."  This statement prooves my point.  Rome doesn't care about the theological position of the Orthodox, all it cares about are more sheep paying their anual peter's pence.

Joe Zollars

Not true because those orthodox that united with rome have kept their theological distinctiveness. We have respected their theological traditions. Nor are they required to get rid of them. So, your statement does not hold water.
« Last Edit: April 23, 2004, 04:21:03 PM by romanbyzantium » Logged
JoeZollars
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,278

Pray for me an unworthy sinner


WWW
« Reply #23 on: April 23, 2004, 04:24:41 PM »

umm, no.  By submitting to Rome they have to believe all that Rome teaches dogmatically is true.  Therefore they are submitting to Papal Infalability, Immaculate conception, augustinian worldview, Aquinian world view, and lets not forget the f word (filioque).  There are a few parishes that actually have amazingly maintained Orthodox practice even without Orthodox belief (witness ST. Elias in Brompton) but the vast majority are little more than Romans with a byzantine-like liturgical cycle and a few Icons.

Joe Zollars
Logged

These posts no longer represent my beliefs and I in no way endorse their contents.
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #24 on: April 23, 2004, 04:32:47 PM »

umm, no.  By submitting to Rome they have to believe all that Rome teaches dogmatically is true.  Therefore they are submitting to Papal Infalability, Immaculate conception, augustinian worldview, Aquinian world view, and lets not forget the f word (filioque).  There are a few parishes that actually have amazingly maintained Orthodox practice even without Orthodox belief (witness ST. Elias in Brompton) but the vast majority are little more than Romans with a byzantine-like liturgical cycle and a few Icons.

Joe Zollars

No, It is called diversity. Don't be a hater. Wink

We accept your theological distinctiveness and those views that orthodoxy holds so dearly.

Have you been to the majority of the uniates churches to make such a blanket statement?
Logged
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,461


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #25 on: April 23, 2004, 04:39:20 PM »

Not true because those orthodox that united with rome have kept their theological distinctiveness. We have respected their theological traditions. Nor are they required to get rid of them. So, your statement does not hold water.


Oh, so all those Latinizations we've had to put up with were respect for our theological traditions?

Your statement holds no water at all.
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: 2,878


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #26 on: April 23, 2004, 04:40:21 PM »

"but the vast majority are little more than Romans with a byzantine-like liturgical cycle and a few Icons."

How anyone who has church hopped as much as you have in the short amount of time you have done so can make such statements with zero first-hand experience with the vast majority of Byzantine Catholics is amazing.  Walk with us a mile before you disparage us.

Fr. Deacon Lance
Logged

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

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,878


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #27 on: April 23, 2004, 04:43:34 PM »

Schultz,

Except for mandatory celibacy in America, every Latinization we have we adopted out of our own desire to distance ourselves from our Orthodox brethren, Rome had nothing to do with it and infact asked us not to do it and continually asks us to stop doing it.

Fr. Deacon Lance
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
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: April 23, 2004, 04:43:53 PM »

No, It is called diversity. Don't be a hater.

We accept your theological distinctiveness and those views that orthodoxy holds so dearly.

Have you been to the majority of the uniates churches to make such a blanket statement?

=======

No, it sounds more like a form of Protestantism to me.  Where everyone gets to pick and choose what they believe as long as they accept the Pope as the final earthly authority.

A belief where there can be deversity in ones faith (dogma) as long as it is centered around papal allegiance.

Orthodoc (who came from such a background)
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.
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #29 on: April 23, 2004, 04:48:31 PM »

Not true because those orthodox that united with rome have kept their theological distinctiveness. We have respected their theological traditions. Nor are they required to get rid of them. So, your statement does not hold water.


Oh, so all those Latinizations we've had to put up with were respect for our theological traditions?

Your statement holds no water at all.

Diversity!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

can you give me examples?
Logged
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #30 on: April 23, 2004, 04:53:07 PM »

No, It is called diversity. Don't be a hater.

We accept your theological distinctiveness and those views that orthodoxy holds so dearly.

Have you been to the majority of the uniates churches to make such a blanket statement?

=======

No, it sounds more like a form of Protestantism to me.  Where everyone gets to pick and choose what they believe as long as they accept the Pope as the final earthly authority.

A belief where there can be deversity in ones faith (dogma) as long as it is centered around papal allegiance.

Orthodoc (who came from such a background)

« Last Edit: April 23, 2004, 04:56:43 PM by romanbyzantium » 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 #31 on: April 23, 2004, 04:58:48 PM »

[Not true because those orthodox that united with rome have kept their theological distinctiveness. We have respected their theological traditions. Nor are they required to get rid of them. So, your statement does not hold water.]

So, why then, did the good Bishop Elko flee to Rome in the 50's where he was protected by the Pope & the Vatican until he returned 14 years later as a Latin Rite Bishop?

So much for respect for  ones theological distinctiveness and traditions.

Perhaps Father Deacon Lance can provide you with more information on the Byzantine Catholic Bishop who was famous for claiming that he would not rest until..."All the stink was squeezed from the Onion Domes and all the grease from the greasy Greeks'!
As he was taking down the Cupolas, 3 bar Crosses,  Iconstasis.  And replacing them with statues and Latin Altars imported from Italy.

Orthodoc (who saw it with his own eyes and had neighbors and relatives who lived through it)
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.
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #32 on: April 23, 2004, 05:01:14 PM »

[Not true because those orthodox that united with rome have kept their theological distinctiveness. We have respected their theological traditions. Nor are they required to get rid of them. So, your statement does not hold water.]

So, why then, did the good Bishop Elko flee to Rome in the 50's where he was protected by the Pope & the Vatican until he returned 14 years later as a Latin Rite Bishop?

So much for respect for  ones theological distinctiveness and traditions.

Perhaps Father Deacon Lance can provide you with more information on the Byzantine Catholic Bishop who was famous for claiming that he would not rest until..."All the stink was squeezed from the Onion Domes and all the grease from the greasy Greeks'!
As he was taking down the Cupolas, 3 bar Crosses,  Iconstasis.  And replacing them with statues and Latin Altars imported from Italy.

Orthodoc (who saw it with his own eyes and had neighbors and relatives who lived through it)

Why did he flee to rome? what did orthodoxy do to him?
Logged
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,461


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #33 on: April 23, 2004, 05:02:35 PM »

Father Deacon,

Rome may have told us to stop, but that didn't stop local Latin church leaders from "encouraging" such Latinizations.

Basilians anyone?

Romanbyzantium,

The aforementioned mandatory celibacy in the Americas, for one.  The Filioque for another.  "First Holy Communion" and chrismation separated from baptism.  

I'm too busy to go on for now.  Let's just start with those, shall we?
Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,461


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #34 on: April 23, 2004, 05:06:14 PM »

Quote
Why did he flee to rome? what did orthodoxy do to him?

Orthodoxy did nothing to him, romanbyzantium.  Bishop Elko was the Metropolitan of the Ruthenian Catholic Church in the 50s and started a campaign to remove Eastern Christian traditions from his church, such as those Orthodoc outlined.  His own flock became so incensed with his "ethnic cleansing" that he had to flee to Rome.  He basically tried to turn the Ruthenian Catholic Church into a Latin one.
« Last Edit: April 23, 2004, 05:07:22 PM by Schultz » Logged

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

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #35 on: April 23, 2004, 05:15:25 PM »

Orthodoxy did nothing to him, romanbyzantium.  Bishop Elko was the Metropolitan of the Ruthenian Catholic Church in the 50s and started a campaign to remove Eastern Christian traditions from his church, such as those Orthodoc outlined.  His own flock became so incensed with his "ethnic cleansing" that he had to flee to Rome.  He basically tried to turn the Ruthenian Catholic Church into a Latin one.

Why did he want to latinized his church? what were the reasons? something must have occurred for him to say the things he said. what was his ethnic background?

Nevertheless, the pope and canon law says that cultural and theological traditions should be maintained.  that includes a married priesthood, no filioque,etc...
Logged
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,461


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #36 on: April 23, 2004, 05:19:01 PM »

I don't presume to know what was going on in Bishop Elko's head.  

And there is no reason to do such a thing, only excuses.
Logged

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

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #37 on: April 23, 2004, 05:25:28 PM »

I don't presume to know what was going on in Bishop Elko's head.  

And there is no reason to do such a thing, only excuses.

People don't do such acts without a motivational factor involved. Something must have been occurred that would have prompted him to do such things which, are against church teachings.

Do you his ethnic background?
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 #38 on: April 23, 2004, 06:15:46 PM »

People don't do such acts without a motivational factor involved. Something must have been occurred that would have prompted him to do such things which, are against church teachings.

Do you his ethnic background?

=======

He was an American born Byzantine Catholic that identified himself a 'Ruthenian' -

----------

Date Age Event Title
14 Dec 1909  Born Donora, PA
30 Sep 1934 24.8 Ordained Priest Priest
5 Feb 1955 45.1 Appointed Bishop of United States of America, Faithful of the Oriental Rite (Ruthenian), Pennsylvania
5 Feb 1955 45.1 Appointed Titular Bishop of Apollonias
6 Mar 1955 45.2 Ordained Bishop Titular Bishop of Apollonias
6 Jul 1963 53.6 Appointed Bishop of Pittsburgh (Ruthenian), Pennsylvania, USA
22 Dec 1967 58.0 Resigned Bishop of Pittsburgh (Ruthenian), Pennsylvania, USA
22 Dec 1967 58.0 Appointed Titular Archbishop of Dara
10 Aug 1971 61.7 Appointed Archbishop (Personal Title), Auxiliary of Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
16 Apr 1985 75.3 Retired Auxiliary Bishop of Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
18 May 1991 81.4 Died Bishop Emeritus of Pittsburgh (Ruthenian), Pennsylvania, USA



The question is -

1)  If Rome was so protective of the 'Byzantine traditions & theology' as is being claimed...Then why didn't they step in when he started the 'ethnic cleansing'?  Instead, he ran to them and they saved and protected him and brought him back home as a Latin Bishop.

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.
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #39 on: April 23, 2004, 06:35:36 PM »

People don't do such acts without a motivational factor involved. Something must have been occurred that would have prompted him to do such things which, are against church teachings.

Do you his ethnic background?

=======

He was an American born Byzantine Catholic that identified himself a 'Ruthenian' -

----------

Date Age Event Title
14 Dec 1909  Born Donora, PA
30 Sep 1934 24.8 Ordained Priest Priest
5 Feb 1955 45.1 Appointed Bishop of United States of America, Faithful of the Oriental Rite (Ruthenian), Pennsylvania
5 Feb 1955 45.1 Appointed Titular Bishop of Apollonias
6 Mar 1955 45.2 Ordained Bishop Titular Bishop of Apollonias
6 Jul 1963 53.6 Appointed Bishop of Pittsburgh (Ruthenian), Pennsylvania, USA
22 Dec 1967 58.0 Resigned Bishop of Pittsburgh (Ruthenian), Pennsylvania, USA
22 Dec 1967 58.0 Appointed Titular Archbishop of Dara
10 Aug 1971 61.7 Appointed Archbishop (Personal Title), Auxiliary of Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
16 Apr 1985 75.3 Retired Auxiliary Bishop of Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
18 May 1991 81.4 Died Bishop Emeritus of Pittsburgh (Ruthenian), Pennsylvania, USA



The question is -

1)  If Rome was so protective of the 'Byzantine traditions & theology' as is being claimed...Then why didn't they step in when he started the 'ethnic cleansing'?  Instead, he ran to them and they saved and protected him and brought him back home as a Latin Bishop.

Orthodoc

1. I asked for his ethnicity not where he was born?
2. ethnic cleansing............. whom did he killed?
3. read the encyclical of various popes concerning the eastern tradition, especially the current one.
4. there are things that you are not telling me. you are telling the end ( supposedly)of the story. why don't you tell me the beginning of it. why did he want to " ethnic cleanse" his church?
5. did they make him a latin bishop without his concsent ( show me where it says that he was ordained as a latin Bishop) or did he choose to be a latin bishop?

I have been looking on the net for info. on him and the story told about him here and nothing yet. will keep trying thought.

« Last Edit: April 23, 2004, 06:39:40 PM by romanbyzantium » 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 #40 on: April 23, 2004, 08:49:47 PM »

 1. I asked for his ethnicity not where he was born?


And I answered your question by stating he classified himself as 'Ruthenian'.  Some people would say 'Carpatho-Russian or Carpatho-Rusyn'.

2. ethnic cleansing............. whom did he killed?


Can you show me where 'ethnic cleansing' specifically means killing?

3. read the encyclical of various popes concerning the eastern tradition, especially the current one.


Words and actions do not always go hand in hand.  Especially where the Roman Catholic Church is concerned.  We Orthodox are well aware that what the RCC says and does are two different things.

4. there are things that you are not telling me. you are telling the end ( supposedly)of the story. why don't you tell me the beginning of it. why did he want to " ethnic cleanse" his church?


I'm not a Byzantine Catholic.  Ask them.  Perhaps Father Deacon Lance can tell you why he had such a hatred for anything that looked or sounded too 'Orthodox'.  Apparently he looked upon himself as a second class (papal) Catholic being of the Byzantine Rite.

5. did they make him a latin bishop without his concsent ( show me where it says that he was ordained as a latin Bishop) or did he choose to be a latin bishop?

Ask those Byzantine Catholics who post here.  Read the history I provided and look up the statistics for the Hierachs in the Ohio RC diocese.  Bishop Elko was not a very nice man.  Most Byzantine Catholics, with good reason, would rather forget he existed.

From your last few responses to myself and others it seems like you are not really interested in discussion.  You just want to troll.  Especially if you don't like or do not agree with what is said.

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.
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #41 on: April 23, 2004, 08:58:56 PM »

1. I asked for his ethnicity not where he was born?


And I answered your question by stating he classified himself as 'Ruthenian'.  Some people would say 'Carpatho-Russian or Carpatho-Rusyn'.

2. ethnic cleansing............. whom did he killed?


Can you show me where 'ethnic cleansing' specifically means killing?

3. read the encyclical of various popes concerning the eastern tradition, especially the current one.


Words and actions do not always go hand in hand.  Especially where the Roman Catholic Church is concerned.  We Orthodox are well aware that what the RCC says and does are two different things.

4. there are things that you are not telling me. you are telling the end ( supposedly)of the story. why don't you tell me the beginning of it. why did he want to " ethnic cleanse" his church?


I'm not a Byzantine Catholic.  Ask them.  Perhaps Father Deacon Lance can tell you why he had such a hatred for anything that looked or sounded too 'Orthodox'.  Apparently he looked upon himself as a second class (papal) Catholic being of the Byzantine Rite.

5. did they make him a latin bishop without his concsent ( show me where it says that he was ordained as a latin Bishop) or did he choose to be a latin bishop?

Ask those Byzantine Catholics who post here.  Read the history I provided and look up the statistics for the Hierachs in the Ohio RC diocese.  Bishop Elko was not a very nice man.  Most Byzantine Catholics, with good reason, would rather forget he existed.

From your last few responses to myself and others it seems like you are not really interested in discussion.  You just want to troll.  Especially if you don't like or do not agree with what is said.

Orthodoc  


1. eth-+nic cleans-+ing
 
noun  
 
violent elimination of an ethnic group: the violent elimination or removal from an area of people attacked because of their ethnic backgrounds, by means of genocide or forced expulsion
 

2. you brought him up and it is up to you to provide the information that I am asking for.

3. The catholic church does exactly what she says. Can you give me an example of what you are talking about?

4. your second class comment is useless in that church teaching is clear that all rites are equal as taught by popes and canon law.
Logged
JoeZollars
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,278

Pray for me an unworthy sinner


WWW
« Reply #42 on: April 23, 2004, 09:04:41 PM »

Nevertheless, the pope and canon law says that cultural and theological traditions should be maintained.  that includes a married priesthood, no filioque,etc...

Are you forgetting that Rome mandated that there be no married priests in America. Abp. John Ireland, St. Alexis Toth, etc.?

Joe Zollars
Logged

These posts no longer represent my beliefs and I in no way endorse their contents.
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #43 on: April 23, 2004, 09:10:19 PM »

Are you forgetting that Rome mandated that there be no married priests in America. Abp. John Ireland, St. Alexis Toth, etc.?

Joe Zollars

It was superceded in 1990 when Pope John Paul II promulgated the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches. The new code abrogated the ban of 1929. There are married latin priest that converted from protestanism. and there have been ( present time) byzantine priests ordained that are married.

Logged
JoeZollars
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,278

Pray for me an unworthy sinner


WWW
« Reply #44 on: April 23, 2004, 09:13:25 PM »

as true as that may be, it doesn't change the fact that the 1929 ban existed.

Joe Zollars
Logged

These posts no longer represent my beliefs and I in no way endorse their contents.
Tags: Immaculate Conception 
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 0.137 seconds with 72 queries.