OrthodoxChristianity.net
November 22, 2014, 05:45:56 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 »  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Catholics, what is your opinion of this?  (Read 12721 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Monk Vasyl
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: UOC of USA
Posts: 623


Monk Vasyl
WWW
« Reply #45 on: February 23, 2011, 05:29:34 PM »

So if I understand you correctly, you’re stating that you converted from Catholicism to Orthodoxy and the impetus for you doing so was that the Catholic priests you encountered displayed a spirit of rebellion against the Catholic Church.

Have I rightly described what happened?  UniversalistGuy


That was a strong part in my push to Orthodoxy, but also when I was studying for the priesthood at St. John's Seminary, in Boston, in one of our classes they came out and said that one could not change the Creed without an Ecumencial Council.  When I asked him why we did, he had no answer.
Logged

The unworthy hierodeacon, Vasyl
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #46 on: February 23, 2011, 05:31:35 PM »

There are nearly half a million priests and 1.2 billion Catholics. The Holy See can only do so much.
Then it shouldn't claim it can do more.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
UniversalistGuy
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Inquirer
Posts: 90


« Reply #47 on: February 23, 2011, 07:57:55 PM »

There are nearly half a million priests and 1.2 billion Catholics. The Holy See can only do so much.
Then it shouldn't claim it can do more.

I understand there are some 350 million Orthodox Christians, which is no small number.  Does the Orthodox Church also have difficulties with rebellious priests or is this solely a Catholic problem?
Logged
wynd
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 501


Transfiguration


« Reply #48 on: February 23, 2011, 07:58:34 PM »

Then it shouldn't claim it can do more.

What's the point of having universal ordinary jurisdiction if it's not used when it's needed?
Logged
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,073


"My god is greater."


« Reply #49 on: February 23, 2011, 08:10:12 PM »

There are nearly half a million priests and 1.2 billion Catholics. The Holy See can only do so much.
Then it shouldn't claim it can do more.

I understand there are some 350 million Orthodox Christians, which is no small number.  Does the Orthodox Church also have difficulties with rebellious priests or is this solely a Catholic problem?

Of course we have such problems, but they are not nearly so overt, systemic, and widespread as with the Roman Catholics. The problem is, you can't really call the priests rebellious if the bishops are indifferent to or complicit in their behaviour.
« Last Edit: February 23, 2011, 08:11:14 PM by Iconodule » Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,073


"My god is greater."


« Reply #50 on: February 23, 2011, 08:12:07 PM »

Then it shouldn't claim it can do more.

What's the point of having universal ordinary jurisdiction if it's not used when it's needed?

Exactly. These aren't just isolated abuses, but symptoms of a systemic problem.
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
UniversalistGuy
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Inquirer
Posts: 90


« Reply #51 on: February 23, 2011, 08:12:27 PM »

Then it shouldn't claim it can do more.

What's the point of having universal ordinary jurisdiction if it's not used when it's needed?

What does universal ordinary jurisdiction entail?
Logged
wynd
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 501


Transfiguration


« Reply #52 on: February 23, 2011, 10:23:04 PM »

What does universal ordinary jurisdiction entail?

Jurisdictional rights and prerogatives of the pope
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #53 on: February 24, 2011, 12:39:45 AM »

Then it shouldn't claim it can do more.

What's the point of having universal ordinary jurisdiction if it's not used when it's needed?

What does universal ordinary jurisdiction entail?
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #54 on: February 24, 2011, 12:46:30 AM »

There are nearly half a million priests and 1.2 billion Catholics. The Holy See can only do so much.
Then it shouldn't claim it can do more.

I understand there are some 350 million Orthodox Christians, which is no small number.  Does the Orthodox Church also have difficulties with rebellious priests?
Not for long we don't.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #55 on: February 24, 2011, 12:51:07 AM »

just looking at the first one
Quote
(1) As the supreme teacher of the Church, whose it is to prescribe what is to be believed by all the faithful, and to take measures for the preservation and the propagation of the faith, the following are the rights which pertain to the pope:

it is his to set forth creeds, and to determine when and by whom an explicit profession of faith shall be made (cf. Council of Trent, Sess. 24, cc. 1 and 12);
the facts of the Second Ecumenical Council setting its seal on the Creed of the Catholic Faith must be an embarrassment to explain away for the Vatican. Or a problem to assert what the CE asserts with a straight face.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
LBK
No Reporting Allowed
Warned
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 11,441


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #56 on: February 24, 2011, 12:54:57 AM »

There are nearly half a million priests and 1.2 billion Catholics. The Holy See can only do so much.
Then it shouldn't claim it can do more.

I understand there are some 350 million Orthodox Christians, which is no small number.  Does the Orthodox Church also have difficulties with rebellious priests?
Not for long we don't.

Yup. Never underestimate that bulwark which is the babushka brigade (or yiayies, etc). Mess with these ladies at your peril.
Logged
Frank J
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Russian Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: ROCOR
Posts: 16


« Reply #57 on: February 24, 2011, 01:25:16 AM »

Hello

I use to RC and that the reason for my leaving... Hey "Spirit of Vatican II"..... Roll Eyes
Logged
UniversalistGuy
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Inquirer
Posts: 90


« Reply #58 on: February 24, 2011, 09:06:40 AM »

The Catholic Church has a pope and every Catholic apologist I come across, whether amateur or professional, uses the papacy as a foundational argument for the truth of Catholicism yet it appears that the Catholic Church is in a big mess.  What’s the use of having an infallible papacy if Catholic priests do whatever they want regardless of what the Catholic Church tells them to do?  What’s the use of having an infallible papacy if Catholic bishops let Catholic priests lead Catholic faithful astray?  What’s the use of having an infallible papacy if the incumbent finds himself stuck in the same position as the old woman who lived in a shoe and had so many children she didn’t know what to do?  It has to be tough on ordinary Catholics seeking after God to see their faith community heavily burdened with inept leadership and enmeshed in chaos and confusion.
Logged
UniversalistGuy
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Inquirer
Posts: 90


« Reply #59 on: February 24, 2011, 09:10:22 AM »

Then it shouldn't claim it can do more.

What's the point of having universal ordinary jurisdiction if it's not used when it's needed?

What does universal ordinary jurisdiction entail?


A picture is worth a thousand words.
Logged
Aindriú
Faster! Funnier!
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Cynical
Jurisdiction: Vestibule of Hell
Posts: 3,918



WWW
« Reply #60 on: February 24, 2011, 09:36:38 AM »

Then it shouldn't claim it can do more.

What's the point of having universal ordinary jurisdiction if it's not used when it's needed?

What does universal ordinary jurisdiction entail?


A picture is worth a thousand words.

This picture is one of Isa's favorites. It is from the early 16th century by Lucas Cranach der Ältere, a German painter and engraver. Cranach was popular among the German princes (Lutheran) and many Protestant reformation leaders, including being a close friend of Martin Luther. This print is intended to be derogatory against Roman Catholicism and the Papacy exemplifying the Protestant position as well as maintaining the Pope as the anti-Christ.

On the tradition of kissing, e.g kissing hands, icons, cloaks, feet... , etc., there is a support article from New Advent.
Quote
Kissing of the feet

The veneration shown in the kissing of a person's hand or the hem of his garment is accentuated in the kissing of the feet. This is probably implied by the phrase of Isaias (49:23): "Kings...shall lick up the dust of Thy feet." Under the influence, no doubt, of the ceremonial of king-worship, as manifested in the cultus of the Roman emperors, this particular mark of veneration came to prevail at an early date among the usages of the papal court (see Lattey, "Ancient King-Worship", Lond., 1909 C. T. S. pamhlet). We read of it in the first "Ordo Romanus" belonging to the seventh century, but even earlier than this the "Liber Pontificalis" attests that the Emperor Justin paid this mark of respect to Pope John I (523-26), as later on Justinian II also did to Pope Constantine. At the election of Leo IV (847) the custom of so kissing the pope's foot was spoken of as an ancient one. It is not, therefore, wonderful that a practice supported by so early a tradition should still be observed. It is observed liturgically in a solemn papal Mass by the Latin and Greek subdeacons, and quasi-liturgically in the "adoration" of the pope by the cardinals after his election. It is also the normal salutation which papal etiquette prescribes for those of the faithful who are presented to the pope in a private audience. In his "De altaris mysterio" (VI, 6) Innocent III explains that this ceremony indicates "the very great reverence due to the Supreme Pontiff as the Vicar of Him whose feet" were kissed by the woman who was a sinner.
Logged


I'm going to need this.
UniversalistGuy
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Inquirer
Posts: 90


« Reply #61 on: February 24, 2011, 10:23:21 AM »

Then it shouldn't claim it can do more.

What's the point of having universal ordinary jurisdiction if it's not used when it's needed?

What does universal ordinary jurisdiction entail?


A picture is worth a thousand words.

This picture is one of Isa's favorites. It is from the early 16th century by Lucas Cranach der Ältere, a German painter and engraver. Cranach was popular among the German princes (Lutheran) and many Protestant reformation leaders, including being a close friend of Martin Luther. This print is intended to be derogatory against Roman Catholicism and the Papacy exemplifying the Protestant position as well as maintaining the Pope as the anti-Christ.

It’s extremely clever because the notion that it is derogatory has to be inferred since it is apparently no more than a visual reminder of what actually happens in real life.
Logged
UniversalistGuy
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Inquirer
Posts: 90


« Reply #62 on: February 24, 2011, 10:29:58 AM »

On the tradition of kissing, e.g kissing hands, icons, cloaks, feet... , etc., there is a support article from New Advent.
Quote
Kissing of the feet

The veneration shown in the kissing of a person's hand or the hem of his garment is accentuated in the kissing of the feet. This is probably implied by the phrase of Isaias (49:23): "Kings...shall lick up the dust of Thy feet." Under the influence, no doubt, of the ceremonial of king-worship, as manifested in the cultus of the Roman emperors, this particular mark of veneration came to prevail at an early date among the usages of the papal court (see Lattey, "Ancient King-Worship", Lond., 1909 C. T. S. pamhlet). We read of it in the first "Ordo Romanus" belonging to the seventh century, but even earlier than this the "Liber Pontificalis" attests that the Emperor Justin paid this mark of respect to Pope John I (523-26), as later on Justinian II also did to Pope Constantine. At the election of Leo IV (847) the custom of so kissing the pope's foot was spoken of as an ancient one. It is not, therefore, wonderful that a practice supported by so early a tradition should still be observed. It is observed liturgically in a solemn papal Mass by the Latin and Greek subdeacons, and quasi-liturgically in the "adoration" of the pope by the cardinals after his election. It is also the normal salutation which papal etiquette prescribes for those of the faithful who are presented to the pope in a private audience. In his "De altaris mysterio" (VI, 6) Innocent III explains that this ceremony indicates "the very great reverence due to the Supreme Pontiff as the Vicar of Him whose feet" were kissed by the woman who was a sinner.

By way of contrast, a story involving the first pope:

Quote
Jesus knew that the Father had put all things under his power, and that he had come from God and was returning to God; so he got up from the meal, took off his outer clothing, and wrapped a towel around his waist.  After that, he poured water into a basin and began to wash his disciples' feet, drying them with the towel that was wrapped around him.  He came to Simon Peter, who said to him, "Lord, are you going to wash my feet?"  Jesus replied, "You do not realize now what I am doing, but later you will understand."  "No," said Peter, "you shall never wash my feet." Jesus answered, "Unless I wash you, you have no part with me."  "Then, Lord," Simon Peter replied, "not just my feet but my hands and my head as well!"  Jesus answered, "A person who has had a bath needs only to wash his feet; his whole body is clean. And you are clean, though not every one of you."  For he knew who was going to betray him, and that was why he said not every one was clean.  When he had finished washing their feet, he put on his clothes and returned to his place. "Do you understand what I have done for you?" he asked them.  "You call me 'Teacher' and 'Lord,' and rightly so, for that is what I am.  Now that I, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also should wash one another's feet.  I have set you an example that you should do as I have done for you.  I tell you the truth, no servant is greater than his master, nor is a messenger greater than the one who sent him.  Now that you know these things, you will be blessed if you do them.
Logged
Aindriú
Faster! Funnier!
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Cynical
Jurisdiction: Vestibule of Hell
Posts: 3,918



WWW
« Reply #63 on: February 24, 2011, 10:39:18 AM »

Then it shouldn't claim it can do more.

What's the point of having universal ordinary jurisdiction if it's not used when it's needed?

What does universal ordinary jurisdiction entail?


A picture is worth a thousand words.

This picture is one of Isa's favorites. It is from the early 16th century by Lucas Cranach der Ältere, a German painter and engraver. Cranach was popular among the German princes (Lutheran) and many Protestant reformation leaders, including being a close friend of Martin Luther. This print is intended to be derogatory against Roman Catholicism and the Papacy exemplifying the Protestant position as well as maintaining the Pope as the anti-Christ.

It’s extremely clever because the notion that it is derogatory has to be inferred since it is apparently no more than a visual reminder of what actually happens in real life.

Not true. The posture of the "Pope" is arrogant, the congregation look like skeletons (appear dead), the bishops in the back are grinning and whispering, etc. The piece (titled "Antichrist") was produced and is obviously satirical propaganda to produce an emotional reaction against the act.
Logged


I'm going to need this.
Aindriú
Faster! Funnier!
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Cynical
Jurisdiction: Vestibule of Hell
Posts: 3,918



WWW
« Reply #64 on: February 24, 2011, 10:42:21 AM »

On the tradition of kissing, e.g kissing hands, icons, cloaks, feet... , etc., there is a support article from New Advent.
Quote
Kissing of the feet

The veneration shown in the kissing of a person's hand or the hem of his garment is accentuated in the kissing of the feet. This is probably implied by the phrase of Isaias (49:23): "Kings...shall lick up the dust of Thy feet." Under the influence, no doubt, of the ceremonial of king-worship, as manifested in the cultus of the Roman emperors, this particular mark of veneration came to prevail at an early date among the usages of the papal court (see Lattey, "Ancient King-Worship", Lond., 1909 C. T. S. pamhlet). We read of it in the first "Ordo Romanus" belonging to the seventh century, but even earlier than this the "Liber Pontificalis" attests that the Emperor Justin paid this mark of respect to Pope John I (523-26), as later on Justinian II also did to Pope Constantine. At the election of Leo IV (847) the custom of so kissing the pope's foot was spoken of as an ancient one. It is not, therefore, wonderful that a practice supported by so early a tradition should still be observed. It is observed liturgically in a solemn papal Mass by the Latin and Greek subdeacons, and quasi-liturgically in the "adoration" of the pope by the cardinals after his election. It is also the normal salutation which papal etiquette prescribes for those of the faithful who are presented to the pope in a private audience. In his "De altaris mysterio" (VI, 6) Innocent III explains that this ceremony indicates "the very great reverence due to the Supreme Pontiff as the Vicar of Him whose feet" were kissed by the woman who was a sinner.

By way of contrast, a story involving the first pope:

Quote
Jesus knew that the Father had put all things under his power, and that he had come from God and was returning to God; so he got up from the meal, took off his outer clothing, and wrapped a towel around his waist.  After that, he poured water into a basin and began to wash his disciples' feet, drying them with the towel that was wrapped around him.  He came to Simon Peter, who said to him, "Lord, are you going to wash my feet?"  Jesus replied, "You do not realize now what I am doing, but later you will understand."  "No," said Peter, "you shall never wash my feet." Jesus answered, "Unless I wash you, you have no part with me."  "Then, Lord," Simon Peter replied, "not just my feet but my hands and my head as well!"  Jesus answered, "A person who has had a bath needs only to wash his feet; his whole body is clean. And you are clean, though not every one of you."  For he knew who was going to betray him, and that was why he said not every one was clean.  When he had finished washing their feet, he put on his clothes and returned to his place. "Do you understand what I have done for you?" he asked them.  "You call me 'Teacher' and 'Lord,' and rightly so, for that is what I am.  Now that I, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also should wash one another's feet.  I have set you an example that you should do as I have done for you.  I tell you the truth, no servant is greater than his master, nor is a messenger greater than the one who sent him.  Now that you know these things, you will be blessed if you do them.


How is this contrast? Do you not show Jesus respect? When you pray do you, at the minimum, not also bow your head? The eastern churches include, themselves, kissing, prostrations and other acts of submission to priests, bishops, icons, and relics. The only conclusion that can be made is, acts of submission to the Pope is wrong, not because you're being submissive, but because it's Roman Catholic, and Roman Catholics are evil.
Logged


I'm going to need this.
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,359


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #65 on: February 24, 2011, 11:22:50 AM »

Then it shouldn't claim it can do more.

What's the point of having universal ordinary jurisdiction if it's not used when it's needed?

What does universal ordinary jurisdiction entail?

This is Izzy's favorite picture. He drags it out when ever he wants to bash Catholics. For some reason, it appears that he has higher regard for the Pope than most traditionalist Catholics.
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,359


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #66 on: February 24, 2011, 11:24:59 AM »

Then it shouldn't claim it can do more.

What's the point of having universal ordinary jurisdiction if it's not used when it's needed?

What does universal ordinary jurisdiction entail?


A picture is worth a thousand words.
Only for intellectual adolescents.
« Last Edit: February 24, 2011, 11:25:15 AM by Papist » Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,359


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #67 on: February 24, 2011, 11:26:47 AM »

On the tradition of kissing, e.g kissing hands, icons, cloaks, feet... , etc., there is a support article from New Advent.
Quote
Kissing of the feet

The veneration shown in the kissing of a person's hand or the hem of his garment is accentuated in the kissing of the feet. This is probably implied by the phrase of Isaias (49:23): "Kings...shall lick up the dust of Thy feet." Under the influence, no doubt, of the ceremonial of king-worship, as manifested in the cultus of the Roman emperors, this particular mark of veneration came to prevail at an early date among the usages of the papal court (see Lattey, "Ancient King-Worship", Lond., 1909 C. T. S. pamhlet). We read of it in the first "Ordo Romanus" belonging to the seventh century, but even earlier than this the "Liber Pontificalis" attests that the Emperor Justin paid this mark of respect to Pope John I (523-26), as later on Justinian II also did to Pope Constantine. At the election of Leo IV (847) the custom of so kissing the pope's foot was spoken of as an ancient one. It is not, therefore, wonderful that a practice supported by so early a tradition should still be observed. It is observed liturgically in a solemn papal Mass by the Latin and Greek subdeacons, and quasi-liturgically in the "adoration" of the pope by the cardinals after his election. It is also the normal salutation which papal etiquette prescribes for those of the faithful who are presented to the pope in a private audience. In his "De altaris mysterio" (VI, 6) Innocent III explains that this ceremony indicates "the very great reverence due to the Supreme Pontiff as the Vicar of Him whose feet" were kissed by the woman who was a sinner.

By way of contrast, a story involving the first pope:

Quote
Jesus knew that the Father had put all things under his power, and that he had come from God and was returning to God; so he got up from the meal, took off his outer clothing, and wrapped a towel around his waist.  After that, he poured water into a basin and began to wash his disciples' feet, drying them with the towel that was wrapped around him.  He came to Simon Peter, who said to him, "Lord, are you going to wash my feet?"  Jesus replied, "You do not realize now what I am doing, but later you will understand."  "No," said Peter, "you shall never wash my feet." Jesus answered, "Unless I wash you, you have no part with me."  "Then, Lord," Simon Peter replied, "not just my feet but my hands and my head as well!"  Jesus answered, "A person who has had a bath needs only to wash his feet; his whole body is clean. And you are clean, though not every one of you."  For he knew who was going to betray him, and that was why he said not every one was clean.  When he had finished washing their feet, he put on his clothes and returned to his place. "Do you understand what I have done for you?" he asked them.  "You call me 'Teacher' and 'Lord,' and rightly so, for that is what I am.  Now that I, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also should wash one another's feet.  I have set you an example that you should do as I have done for you.  I tell you the truth, no servant is greater than his master, nor is a messenger greater than the one who sent him.  Now that you know these things, you will be blessed if you do them.


How is this contrast? Do you not show Jesus respect? When you pray do you, at the minimum, not also bow your head? The eastern churches include, themselves, kissing, prostrations and other acts of submission to priests, bishops, icons, and relics. The only conclusion that can be made is, acts of submission to the Pope is wrong, not because you're being submissive, but because it's Roman Catholic, and Roman Catholics are evil.

The foundational doctrine of Eastern Orthodoxy. They have more in common with protestants than they would like to admit.
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
UniversalistGuy
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Inquirer
Posts: 90


« Reply #68 on: February 24, 2011, 11:54:10 AM »

Then it shouldn't claim it can do more.

What's the point of having universal ordinary jurisdiction if it's not used when it's needed?

What does universal ordinary jurisdiction entail?


A picture is worth a thousand words.

This picture is one of Isa's favorites. It is from the early 16th century by Lucas Cranach der Ältere, a German painter and engraver. Cranach was popular among the German princes (Lutheran) and many Protestant reformation leaders, including being a close friend of Martin Luther. This print is intended to be derogatory against Roman Catholicism and the Papacy exemplifying the Protestant position as well as maintaining the Pope as the anti-Christ.

It’s extremely clever because the notion that it is derogatory has to be inferred since it is apparently no more than a visual reminder of what actually happens in real life.

Not true. The posture of the "Pope" is arrogant, the congregation look like skeletons (appear dead), the bishops in the back are grinning and whispering, etc. The piece (titled "Antichrist") was produced and is obviously satirical propaganda to produce an emotional reaction against the act.

I see. I wasn’t aware that it was titled “Antichrist” and I didn’t observe those things that you’ve pointed out.  I accept, then, that it is satirical and that as such it constitutes a dig at the Catholic Church.  I guess in light of this new information it’s appropriate to withdraw my comment that it’s clever and suggest instead that it’s powerful.
Logged
UniversalistGuy
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Inquirer
Posts: 90


« Reply #69 on: February 24, 2011, 12:02:14 PM »

Then it shouldn't claim it can do more.

What's the point of having universal ordinary jurisdiction if it's not used when it's needed?

What does universal ordinary jurisdiction entail?

This is Izzy's favorite picture. He drags it out when ever he wants to bash Catholics. For some reason, it appears that he has higher regard for the Pope than most traditionalist Catholics.

As best I can recall, I've never seen it before so I'd like to thank him for introducing it.
Logged
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,359


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #70 on: February 24, 2011, 12:13:24 PM »

Then it shouldn't claim it can do more.

What's the point of having universal ordinary jurisdiction if it's not used when it's needed?

What does universal ordinary jurisdiction entail?

This is Izzy's favorite picture. He drags it out when ever he wants to bash Catholics. For some reason, it appears that he has higher regard for the Pope than most traditionalist Catholics.

As best I can recall, I've never seen it before so I'd like to thank him for introducing it.
I guess if you are into that sort of thing... I'm not hear to judge.
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,359


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #71 on: February 24, 2011, 12:13:57 PM »

Then it shouldn't claim it can do more.

What's the point of having universal ordinary jurisdiction if it's not used when it's needed?

What does universal ordinary jurisdiction entail?


A picture is worth a thousand words.

This picture is one of Isa's favorites. It is from the early 16th century by Lucas Cranach der Ältere, a German painter and engraver. Cranach was popular among the German princes (Lutheran) and many Protestant reformation leaders, including being a close friend of Martin Luther. This print is intended to be derogatory against Roman Catholicism and the Papacy exemplifying the Protestant position as well as maintaining the Pope as the anti-Christ.

It’s extremely clever because the notion that it is derogatory has to be inferred since it is apparently no more than a visual reminder of what actually happens in real life.

Not true. The posture of the "Pope" is arrogant, the congregation look like skeletons (appear dead), the bishops in the back are grinning and whispering, etc. The piece (titled "Antichrist") was produced and is obviously satirical propaganda to produce an emotional reaction against the act.

I see. I wasn’t aware that it was titled “Antichrist” and I didn’t observe those things that you’ve pointed out.  I accept, then, that it is satirical and that as such it constitutes a dig at the Catholic Church.  I guess in light of this new information it’s appropriate to withdraw my comment that it’s clever and suggest instead that it’s powerful.
Your background is unitarian?
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
UniversalistGuy
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Inquirer
Posts: 90


« Reply #72 on: February 24, 2011, 12:23:10 PM »

On the tradition of kissing, e.g kissing hands, icons, cloaks, feet... , etc., there is a support article from New Advent.

Quote
Kissing of the feet

The veneration shown in the kissing of a person's hand or the hem of his garment is accentuated in the kissing of the feet. This is probably implied by the phrase of Isaias (49:23): "Kings...shall lick up the dust of Thy feet." Under the influence, no doubt, of the ceremonial of king-worship, as manifested in the cultus of the Roman emperors, this particular mark of veneration came to prevail at an early date among the usages of the papal court (see Lattey, "Ancient King-Worship", Lond., 1909 C. T. S. pamhlet). We read of it in the first "Ordo Romanus" belonging to the seventh century, but even earlier than this the "Liber Pontificalis" attests that the Emperor Justin paid this mark of respect to Pope John I (523-26), as later on Justinian II also did to Pope Constantine. At the election of Leo IV (847) the custom of so kissing the pope's foot was spoken of as an ancient one. It is not, therefore, wonderful that a practice supported by so early a tradition should still be observed. It is observed liturgically in a solemn papal Mass by the Latin and Greek subdeacons, and quasi-liturgically in the "adoration" of the pope by the cardinals after his election. It is also the normal salutation which papal etiquette prescribes for those of the faithful who are presented to the pope in a private audience. In his "De altaris mysterio" (VI, 6) Innocent III explains that this ceremony indicates "the very great reverence due to the Supreme Pontiff as the Vicar of Him whose feet" were kissed by the woman who was a sinner.

By way of contrast, a story involving the first pope:

Quote
Jesus knew that the Father had put all things under his power, and that he had come from God and was returning to God; so he got up from the meal, took off his outer clothing, and wrapped a towel around his waist.  After that, he poured water into a basin and began to wash his disciples' feet, drying them with the towel that was wrapped around him.  He came to Simon Peter, who said to him, "Lord, are you going to wash my feet?"  Jesus replied, "You do not realize now what I am doing, but later you will understand."  "No," said Peter, "you shall never wash my feet." Jesus answered, "Unless I wash you, you have no part with me."  "Then, Lord," Simon Peter replied, "not just my feet but my hands and my head as well!"  Jesus answered, "A person who has had a bath needs only to wash his feet; his whole body is clean. And you are clean, though not every one of you."  For he knew who was going to betray him, and that was why he said not every one was clean.  When he had finished washing their feet, he put on his clothes and returned to his place. "Do you understand what I have done for you?" he asked them.  "You call me 'Teacher' and 'Lord,' and rightly so, for that is what I am.  Now that I, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also should wash one another's feet.  I have set you an example that you should do as I have done for you.  I tell you the truth, no servant is greater than his master, nor is a messenger greater than the one who sent him.  Now that you know these things, you will be blessed if you do them.


How is this contrast?

I think it’s quite a vivid one.  Perhaps you should just continue thinking about it until you see it.

Do you not show Jesus respect?

Yes.

When you pray do you, at the minimum, not also bow your head?

Yes.

The eastern churches include, themselves, kissing, prostrations and other acts of submission to priests, bishops, icons, and relics.

But they don’t kiss the pope’s feet, right?

The only conclusion that can be made is, acts of submission to the Pope is wrong, not because you're being submissive, but because it's Roman Catholic, and Roman Catholics are evil.

But wouldn’t an act of submission to the pope i.e. kissing his feet be wrong for an Orthodox Christian or indeed for any Non–Catholic?
Logged
UniversalistGuy
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Inquirer
Posts: 90


« Reply #73 on: February 24, 2011, 12:26:29 PM »

Then it shouldn't claim it can do more.

What's the point of having universal ordinary jurisdiction if it's not used when it's needed?

What does universal ordinary jurisdiction entail?


A picture is worth a thousand words.

This picture is one of Isa's favorites. It is from the early 16th century by Lucas Cranach der Ältere, a German painter and engraver. Cranach was popular among the German princes (Lutheran) and many Protestant reformation leaders, including being a close friend of Martin Luther. This print is intended to be derogatory against Roman Catholicism and the Papacy exemplifying the Protestant position as well as maintaining the Pope as the anti-Christ.

It’s extremely clever because the notion that it is derogatory has to be inferred since it is apparently no more than a visual reminder of what actually happens in real life.

Not true. The posture of the "Pope" is arrogant, the congregation look like skeletons (appear dead), the bishops in the back are grinning and whispering, etc. The piece (titled "Antichrist") was produced and is obviously satirical propaganda to produce an emotional reaction against the act.

I see. I wasn’t aware that it was titled “Antichrist” and I didn’t observe those things that you’ve pointed out.  I accept, then, that it is satirical and that as such it constitutes a dig at the Catholic Church.  I guess in light of this new information it’s appropriate to withdraw my comment that it’s clever and suggest instead that it’s powerful.
Your background is unitarian?

No, Evangelical.
Logged
wynd
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 501


Transfiguration


« Reply #74 on: February 24, 2011, 12:51:36 PM »

The Catholic Church has a pope and every Catholic apologist I come across, whether amateur or professional, uses the papacy as a foundational argument for the truth of Catholicism yet it appears that the Catholic Church is in a big mess.  What’s the use of having an infallible papacy if Catholic priests do whatever they want regardless of what the Catholic Church tells them to do?  What’s the use of having an infallible papacy if Catholic bishops let Catholic priests lead Catholic faithful astray?  What’s the use of having an infallible papacy if the incumbent finds himself stuck in the same position as the old woman who lived in a shoe and had so many children she didn’t know what to do?  It has to be tough on ordinary Catholics seeking after God to see their faith community heavily burdened with inept leadership and enmeshed in chaos and confusion.

This is exactly what I meant.
Logged
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,359


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #75 on: February 24, 2011, 01:12:18 PM »

Then it shouldn't claim it can do more.

What's the point of having universal ordinary jurisdiction if it's not used when it's needed?

What does universal ordinary jurisdiction entail?


A picture is worth a thousand words.

This picture is one of Isa's favorites. It is from the early 16th century by Lucas Cranach der Ältere, a German painter and engraver. Cranach was popular among the German princes (Lutheran) and many Protestant reformation leaders, including being a close friend of Martin Luther. This print is intended to be derogatory against Roman Catholicism and the Papacy exemplifying the Protestant position as well as maintaining the Pope as the anti-Christ.

It’s extremely clever because the notion that it is derogatory has to be inferred since it is apparently no more than a visual reminder of what actually happens in real life.

Not true. The posture of the "Pope" is arrogant, the congregation look like skeletons (appear dead), the bishops in the back are grinning and whispering, etc. The piece (titled "Antichrist") was produced and is obviously satirical propaganda to produce an emotional reaction against the act.

I see. I wasn’t aware that it was titled “Antichrist” and I didn’t observe those things that you’ve pointed out.  I accept, then, that it is satirical and that as such it constitutes a dig at the Catholic Church.  I guess in light of this new information it’s appropriate to withdraw my comment that it’s clever and suggest instead that it’s powerful.
Your background is unitarian?

No, Evangelical.
Makes perfect sense. Protestantism is not a religion or faith in and of itself. It is a religion in opposition: opposition to the Catholic Church, and especially, oppostion to the Catholic Pope. No wonder you enjoy this picture so much.
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,359


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #76 on: February 24, 2011, 01:14:29 PM »


But they don’t kiss the pope’s feet, right?

Neither do I nor do any Catholics I know. Though, I wouldn't be surprised if an Eastern Orthodox Christian, at some point in the past, kissed the feet of the "Divine All-Holy and Ecumenical" Patriach of Constantinople, given the reverence that they show for priests and bishops. "Blessed are the feet of him who brings good news".
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
podkarpatska
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,765


Pokrov


WWW
« Reply #77 on: February 24, 2011, 01:39:30 PM »

On the tradition of kissing, e.g kissing hands, icons, cloaks, feet... , etc., there is a support article from New Advent.
Quote
Kissing of the feet

The veneration shown in the kissing of a person's hand or the hem of his garment is accentuated in the kissing of the feet. This is probably implied by the phrase of Isaias (49:23): "Kings...shall lick up the dust of Thy feet." Under the influence, no doubt, of the ceremonial of king-worship, as manifested in the cultus of the Roman emperors, this particular mark of veneration came to prevail at an early date among the usages of the papal court (see Lattey, "Ancient King-Worship", Lond., 1909 C. T. S. pamhlet). We read of it in the first "Ordo Romanus" belonging to the seventh century, but even earlier than this the "Liber Pontificalis" attests that the Emperor Justin paid this mark of respect to Pope John I (523-26), as later on Justinian II also did to Pope Constantine. At the election of Leo IV (847) the custom of so kissing the pope's foot was spoken of as an ancient one. It is not, therefore, wonderful that a practice supported by so early a tradition should still be observed. It is observed liturgically in a solemn papal Mass by the Latin and Greek subdeacons, and quasi-liturgically in the "adoration" of the pope by the cardinals after his election. It is also the normal salutation which papal etiquette prescribes for those of the faithful who are presented to the pope in a private audience. In his "De altaris mysterio" (VI, 6) Innocent III explains that this ceremony indicates "the very great reverence due to the Supreme Pontiff as the Vicar of Him whose feet" were kissed by the woman who was a sinner.

By way of contrast, a story involving the first pope:

Quote
Jesus knew that the Father had put all things under his power, and that he had come from God and was returning to God; so he got up from the meal, took off his outer clothing, and wrapped a towel around his waist.  After that, he poured water into a basin and began to wash his disciples' feet, drying them with the towel that was wrapped around him.  He came to Simon Peter, who said to him, "Lord, are you going to wash my feet?"  Jesus replied, "You do not realize now what I am doing, but later you will understand."  "No," said Peter, "you shall never wash my feet." Jesus answered, "Unless I wash you, you have no part with me."  "Then, Lord," Simon Peter replied, "not just my feet but my hands and my head as well!"  Jesus answered, "A person who has had a bath needs only to wash his feet; his whole body is clean. And you are clean, though not every one of you."  For he knew who was going to betray him, and that was why he said not every one was clean.  When he had finished washing their feet, he put on his clothes and returned to his place. "Do you understand what I have done for you?" he asked them.  "You call me 'Teacher' and 'Lord,' and rightly so, for that is what I am.  Now that I, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also should wash one another's feet.  I have set you an example that you should do as I have done for you.  I tell you the truth, no servant is greater than his master, nor is a messenger greater than the one who sent him.  Now that you know these things, you will be blessed if you do them.


How is this contrast? Do you not show Jesus respect? When you pray do you, at the minimum, not also bow your head? The eastern churches include, themselves, kissing, prostrations and other acts of submission to priests, bishops, icons, and relics. The only conclusion that can be made is, acts of submission to the Pope is wrong, not because you're being submissive, but because it's Roman Catholic, and Roman Catholics are evil.

The foundational doctrine of Eastern Orthodoxy. They have more in common with protestants than they would like to admit.

Bah. All of you, step back, count to ten and give us a break. If both sides here are really honest, they should reflect on the insulting, hurtful inanity of much which is being written here.
« Last Edit: February 24, 2011, 01:40:36 PM by podkarpatska » Logged
UniversalistGuy
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Inquirer
Posts: 90


« Reply #78 on: February 24, 2011, 01:49:39 PM »

Bah. All of you, step back, count to ten and give us a break. If both sides here are really honest, they should reflect on the insulting, hurtful inanity of much which is being written here.

I'm very sorry.
Logged
lubeltri
Latin Catholic layman
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Boston
Posts: 3,795



« Reply #79 on: February 24, 2011, 03:16:44 PM »

Getting back to the topic, I hope you EO finally stop clinging to your myth of the scary all-powerful pope. Benedict is the Supreme Pontiff indeed, but the pope is one man. There is a lot of disobedience at this moment in history, but that doesn't invalidate the papacy, no more than disobedience to bishops invalidates the episcopacy. Supreme Pontiff means "bridge-builder." Imagine the Catholic Church during the current Western cultural tsunami WITHOUT the papacy---it would be schisms all over the place, total disaster. So I say, THANK GOD for the Holy See. THANK GOD that the Holy See is preserving the Faith even when many local priests or bishops adulterate it. Peter speaks through Leo who speaks through Benedict.

Consider all the problems in your EO churches and "alternative" churches (Old Calendarists, vagantes, etc.)---do these problems invalidate your ecclesiology? I didn't think so.

The problem is sin, not the papacy.
Logged
podkarpatska
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,765


Pokrov


WWW
« Reply #80 on: February 24, 2011, 04:09:09 PM »

Getting back to the topic, I hope you EO finally stop clinging to your myth of the scary all-powerful pope. Benedict is the Supreme Pontiff indeed, but the pope is one man. There is a lot of disobedience at this moment in history, but that doesn't invalidate the papacy, no more than disobedience to bishops invalidates the episcopacy. Supreme Pontiff means "bridge-builder." Imagine the Catholic Church during the current Western cultural tsunami WITHOUT the papacy---it would be schisms all over the place, total disaster. So I say, THANK GOD for the Holy See. THANK GOD that the Holy See is preserving the Faith even when many local priests or bishops adulterate it. Peter speaks through Leo who speaks through Benedict.

Consider all the problems in your EO churches and "alternative" churches (Old Calendarists, vagantes, etc.)---do these problems invalidate your ecclesiology? I didn't think so.

The problem is sin, not the papacy.

While I can not endorse your celebration of the historical institution of the papacy, I will agree that the strength of personality and purpose exhibited by certain modern popes has had a positive and a bonding effect on the Catholic Church in the face of her modern problems. The problem is sin, not any one man, office or institution.

Logged
Ortho_cat
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: AOCA-DWMA
Posts: 5,392



« Reply #81 on: February 24, 2011, 06:16:45 PM »

Getting back to the topic, I hope you EO finally stop clinging to your myth of the scary all-powerful pope. Benedict is the Supreme Pontiff indeed, but the pope is one man. There is a lot of disobedience at this moment in history, but that doesn't invalidate the papacy, no more than disobedience to bishops invalidates the episcopacy. Supreme Pontiff means "bridge-builder." Imagine the Catholic Church during the current Western cultural tsunami WITHOUT the papacy---it would be schisms all over the place, total disaster. So I say, THANK GOD for the Holy See. THANK GOD that the Holy See is preserving the Faith even when many local priests or bishops adulterate it. Peter speaks through Leo who speaks through Benedict.

Consider all the problems in your EO churches and "alternative" churches (Old Calendarists, vagantes, etc.)---do these problems invalidate your ecclesiology? I didn't think so.

The problem is sin, not the papacy.

But the pope has so much power, i mean, look how much Pope JPII changed! Putting so much power in the hands of one man is just scary, and infallibility makes him even more scarier.
« Last Edit: February 24, 2011, 06:18:43 PM by Ortho_cat » Logged
PoorFoolNicholas
Site Supporter
OC.net guru
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Theologoumenon
Posts: 1,664


« Reply #82 on: February 24, 2011, 06:31:31 PM »

Quote
But the pope has so much power, i mean, look how much Pope JPII changed! Putting so much power in the hands of one man is just scary, and infallibility makes him even more scarier.
Agreed.
Logged
Aindriú
Faster! Funnier!
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Cynical
Jurisdiction: Vestibule of Hell
Posts: 3,918



WWW
« Reply #83 on: February 24, 2011, 06:33:55 PM »

Getting back to the topic, I hope you EO finally stop clinging to your myth of the scary all-powerful pope. Benedict is the Supreme Pontiff indeed, but the pope is one man. There is a lot of disobedience at this moment in history, but that doesn't invalidate the papacy, no more than disobedience to bishops invalidates the episcopacy. Supreme Pontiff means "bridge-builder." Imagine the Catholic Church during the current Western cultural tsunami WITHOUT the papacy---it would be schisms all over the place, total disaster. So I say, THANK GOD for the Holy See. THANK GOD that the Holy See is preserving the Faith even when many local priests or bishops adulterate it. Peter speaks through Leo who speaks through Benedict.

Consider all the problems in your EO churches and "alternative" churches (Old Calendarists, vagantes, etc.)---do these problems invalidate your ecclesiology? I didn't think so.

The problem is sin, not the papacy.

But the pope has so much power, i mean, look how much Pope JPII changed! Putting so much power in the hands of one man is just scary, and infallibility makes him even more scarier.

Logged


I'm going to need this.
Ortho_cat
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: AOCA-DWMA
Posts: 5,392



« Reply #84 on: February 24, 2011, 06:52:17 PM »

^ok, that's scary, but on a different level!  laugh
Logged
LBK
No Reporting Allowed
Warned
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 11,441


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #85 on: February 24, 2011, 06:58:34 PM »

C'mon! It shows the man could laugh at himself - a GOOD THING!
Logged
Ortho_cat
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: AOCA-DWMA
Posts: 5,392



« Reply #86 on: February 24, 2011, 07:01:58 PM »

I would be interested to know the context surrounding that picture, if anyone knows...
Logged
JimCBrooklyn
Site Supporter
High Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Moscow Patriarchate-Diocese of Saint Petersburg/ROCOR-Diocese of Eastern America and New York
Posts: 569


Если бога нет, то все позволено


« Reply #87 on: February 24, 2011, 07:07:23 PM »

More mundane abuses include the following:

1) use of "extra-ordinary" ministers of (i.e. non-priests and deacons) to distribute communion. The rules are that all available priests at that mass should distribute communion, but often enough, one or more of them will sit back while the laity does the distribution.


This was one of the first red herrings for me as a Catholic. I felt encouraged to become one of these "extraordinary ministers", and indeed I did; it took one, 45 minute class and there I was giving out the Eucharist. I felt odd about it, and researched it some, and couldn't really continue to hang with it.

The idea in our parish was to help everyone get to communion faster, but at what cost? I go to liturgy here now and it takes a while for everyone to be done (let alone the service itself at a Russian Cathedral), but all is well. And for the record, I have most certainly been present at masses where EM's served and some priests present did not.

And please, don't take this as spiteful anti-catholicism; I have a lot of love for the RC church, having spent a lot of time there, and having essentially grown up, in a spiritual sense, there. I have a lot of love for each of the last two popes, even if I am uncertain at best about their office. In no way is my arrival into Orthodoxy about anti-catholicism. It is about truth.

Logged

It is not the task of Christianity to provide easy answers to every question, but to make us progressively aware of a mystery. God is not so much the object of our knowledge as the cause of our wonder.
-Metropolitan Kallistos Ware
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,990


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #88 on: February 24, 2011, 11:08:49 PM »

In 1975, while celebrating the 10th anniversary of the Common Declaration at the Sistine Chapel, Metropolitan
Meliton of Chalcedon the representative of the current Ecumenical Patriarch Dimitrios I, announced the Pan-Orthodox
decision to establish a special Inter-Orthodox Theological Commission to prepare for a theological dialogue with the
Roman Church as well as the establishment in the Ecumenical Patriarchate of a Special Synodal Commission for
the Theological Dialogue with Rome. After giving his own remarks in response to this, Paul VI spontaneously went to the Metropolitan, knelt down and kissed his feet! Those attending were utterly astonished.  Meliton was later quoted as saying: “Only a saint could have done that.” Paul VI knew the history and the power of that gesture.

http://www.richmonddiocese.org/ecumenical/Orthodox_CatholicDialogPart1.pdf

http://www.amazon.com/Rome-Constantinople-Metropolitan-Meliton-Chalcedon/dp/1933275111
« Last Edit: February 24, 2011, 11:16:50 PM by Deacon Lance » Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
WUnland
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Traditional Roman Catholic
Jurisdiction: Japan / Bayern
Posts: 44


« Reply #89 on: February 25, 2011, 02:07:04 AM »

Back to the original topic,

I am a Latin Rite Catholic.  Quite frankly the types of silliness shown in the YouTube videos is EXACTLY why I am on THIS site.

My Church caught the 1960's new age bug and with Vatican II tried to get "modern" and become attractive in a new "hip and "inclusive" way.  Spiritualism was deemed to be expressible in many ways not only in the ancient ceremonies of times past.  I remember the jaw dropping amazement as a 7th grade kid when the nuns showed up without habits strumming guitars at Mass for the first time.  They wanted to be hippies, remember it was the 60's.

This freewheeling, let the people express themselves, they're all talking to God in their own way type of liberalism became the norm in the US.  That resulted in the abominations seen in the videos.  MOST parishes don't go that far, but they all "innovate".  They seem to feel they need to to keep their "audience".  That is why the traditionalists flee the NO Masses.  Now you throw the "neochatecumenal way" into the mix and the Mass has become unrecognizable when compared to the official "rules" of the Church.

As others have said the Pope is not the king.  Each Bishop is responsible for his priest's following the "rules".  But many of the Bishops started this whole touchy feely movement because they think it is better to have any members than no members.  They believe they will loose parishioners if they try to "force" any "rules" on people's expression of "faith".

  Add to that the "gay mafia" which infected the priesthood in the 70's, which eventually led to the child abuse scandals.  The devout immigrant families that had supplied priests to the Church for decades didn't want their sons getting messed up with it all and the seminaries died.  Now when I return to California for a visit all the priests I see are Filipino, Mexican, or Vietnamese.

It is easy to demand that the Pope take charge and do something, but to be honest I believe that the US Bishops would tell him to pound sand, just as many European bishops already have.  I think the belief that the Pope has some great power over the dioceses is sadly mistaken.  The Pope needs the Bishops, they really don't need him.  They collect the money, they control the properties, they ordain the priests etc.  The Pope can say NO, but as with the SSPX and others, the Bishops may just leave.  MANY believe the US Church will eventually do just that.

Sorry for the rant, but I think it unfair to lump all faithful Catholics into the circus clowns seen in the videos.  There are many of us that wish it wasn't so.  As I have said in other posts I try VERY hard to remain faithful to my Church, BUT it is becoming difficult to not see the problems with it's "liberal" disposition. At present I am in Japan which is fairly conservative, so no clown Masses, not yet anyway.

It is important to remember that the Church as an institution is not bad, but there are certainly some powerful personalities IN the Church that are either truly BAD, or just cowards unwilling to endure any hardship should they actually defend the faith.

Many think that they are great "philosophers" which are just smarter than everyone else and are moving the Church where it really should be.  Others are just trying to be liked by EVERYONE because they think that is what Jesus was all about.  It's all heresy of course, but I honestly believe in their own arrogance, they don't see it.

Regards,
William Unland
Logged
Tags:
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 »  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 0.21 seconds with 72 queries.