OrthodoxChristianity.net
August 21, 2014, 04:32:20 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  
Poll
Question: Which do you believe are legitimate obstacles to reunion?
Papal Infallibility - 75 (11.2%)
Papal Supremacy/Universal Jurisdiction - 74 (11%)
Filioque Clause - 52 (7.7%)
Proselytism (of other side) - 15 (2.2%)
Clerical Celibacy - 29 (4.3%)
Leavened/Unleavened Bread - 19 (2.8%)
Dating of Pascha - 20 (3%)
Purgatory (as doctrine) - 51 (7.6%)
Immaculate Conception (as doctrine) - 57 (8.5%)
Divorce (stances on) - 30 (4.5%)
The Epiclesis (or lack of) - 12 (1.8%)
Thomistic Theology (Aquinas) - 36 (5.4%)
Hesychasm - 10 (1.5%)
Merit and Satisfaction soteriology - 39 (5.8%)
Transubstantiation - 22 (3.3%)
Assumption of Mary (as doctrine) - 27 (4%)
Merit/Satisfaction Soteriology - 32 (4.8%)
Philosophy & Scholasticism (as opposed to Empirical Theology) - 26 (3.9%)
Original Sin (vs. Ancestral Sin) - 46 (6.8%)
Total Voters: 79

Pages: 1 2 3 4 »  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Orthodox-Catholic Obstacles to Reunion? (A Poll)  (Read 7831 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,864



« on: March 19, 2011, 07:20:50 AM »

I would like to start a poll here discussing the obstacles of reunion between Orthodox and Roman Catholics, and which issues we believe are legitimate obstacles and which can be circumvented via economy.
Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #1 on: March 19, 2011, 08:53:34 AM »

I would think that when the theological issues are resolved there will be two things which will prevent the Roman Catholic Pope and hierarchy coming into communion with the Church. 

These are contraception and a second marriage after divorce.
Logged
Shiranui117
Formerly known as "Wandering Sheep"
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Inquirer)
Jurisdiction: ACROD/OCA
Posts: 150


PUDDI PUDDI!


« Reply #2 on: March 19, 2011, 09:13:46 AM »

I selected both the options involving the Pope, and all the Roman Catholic dogmas except the Assumption. Original sin was on that list as well, as it leads to the difference in understanding of the Immaculate Conception, which seems to me to be little more than a dogmatization of Roman Catholic understanding of Original Sin, to the exclusion of Byzantine theology. The Filioque is most likely an issue in my eyes. The typical Roman Catholic explanation of Purgatory (as well as such, IMHO, nigh-heretical things as the "Sabbatine Priveledge" and all promises going along with the Brown Scapular) may prove problematic, but the basic doctrine (i.e. Souls in need of purification undergo it after death, our prayers can help them, theirs can help us) is agreeable to most Orthodox, from what I can tell.
Logged
John Larocque
Catholic
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox
Posts: 530


« Reply #3 on: March 19, 2011, 11:08:48 AM »

Many of those items - including filioque - could be resolved if they fixed the liturgy,  or rather, the way Catholics worship on a regular basis. Two of the earliest dividing points which predate the schism, filioque and azymes, are primarily liturgical ones. I endorse the conclusions of this book, linking Rome's liturgical troubles to ultrmontanism:
http://www.amazon.com/Banished-Heart-Heteropraxis-Catholic-Fundamental/dp/0567442209
« Last Edit: March 19, 2011, 11:14:42 AM by John Larocque » Logged
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,864



« Reply #4 on: March 20, 2011, 10:08:17 AM »

So would in general, you consider it to be a rejection of Vatican II and possibly Vatican I?
Logged
Shiranui117
Formerly known as "Wandering Sheep"
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Inquirer)
Jurisdiction: ACROD/OCA
Posts: 150


PUDDI PUDDI!


« Reply #5 on: March 22, 2011, 10:42:16 PM »

So would in general, you consider it to be a rejection of Vatican II and possibly Vatican I?
I believe that's a fair statement of what I believe would need to happen. Rome would need to become "Roman Orthodox," so to speak, and do away with the questionable practices and devotions that she's accumulated over the years (such things as the Brown Scapular's Sabbatine Privilege, the Medal Cross of St. Benedict, perhaps some aspects of the Sacred Heart and the Immaculate Heart conception) and the Pope would have to humble himself and accept his status as first among equals, if such a status is to be given him in the reunited Church. Several things about the Roman mindset (emphasis on apparitions, the Pope, promises attached to trinkets and fixation on body parts of Jesus and Mary) would need adjustment in my opinion.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
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: 37,359



« Reply #6 on: March 23, 2011, 12:49:40 AM »

I would think that when the theological issues are resolved there will be two things which will prevent the Roman Catholic Pope and hierarchy coming into communion with the Church. 

These are contraception and a second marriage after divorce.
LOL. Two things they have ipso facto no personal experience.

Their laity have adopted our approach to contraception.  As for divorce, their corban factories are to loose in dispensing it, but otherwise the practices are compatable (but should be tightened up).
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
jordanz
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic
Posts: 203


« Reply #7 on: March 23, 2011, 04:12:12 AM »

I would think that when the theological issues are resolved there will be two things which will prevent the Roman Catholic Pope and hierarchy coming into communion with the Church.  

These are contraception and a second marriage after divorce.

Didn't think of these.  The Roman Church's (exaggerated) focus on Humanae Vitae and subsequent pastoral and theological "cloud" that surrounds this document will provide a somewhat significant barrier to reunion.  The RC annulment process is quite lax, especially in the USA ('pay and pray', really).  The Roman and Orthodox positions on marriage are not that far apart.  An orthodox Orthodox priest will not take the decision to permit a second remarriage lightly.  Likewise, Rome (or at least the American hierarchy) should take the annulment process more seriously.  I believe that the Orthodox pastoral approach to remarriage and the Roman canonical-legal approach to remarriage can be reconciled if both parties return to a more serious and personal appraisal of the issue.

I was surprised to see a wide and even spectrum of concerns about reunification.  I am convinced that Rome would gladly agree to let the Orthodox brethren continue to confess the Symbol of Constantinople without the filioque.  I do not see why the Latins need to recite it anymore, especially given that the theological disputes that occasioned the innovation are long concluded.  Nevertheless, any "deal" would probably allow the Roman West to continue to recite the filioque.  

As for the battle between Augustinian/Scholastic thought and Eastern theological traditions: again, I do not see Rome forcing Easterners to adopt "original sin" and its logical derivations, such as the Immaculate Conception.  Also, I do not see an imposition of Scholasticism on the East.  Pope Benedict himself subscribes to the notion that the Eastern and Western understanding of key theological issues are complementary orthodox viewpoints on dogma and doctrine, not adversarial and mutually heretical positions.  The ball is in the Orthodox court on this one: given their general position that the filioque, Augustinian notions of sin and redemption, and Scholasticism are heresies, I doubt that many Orthodox would consent to the notion that both Eastern and Western teachings on important doctrines and dogmas are equally valid.

I am convinced, as I have stated many times before, that Rome's blind spot is not theological but political.  The socio-political and historical wounds that the West have inflicted on the East have been quickly forgotten in the West but are still quite bitter in the East.  So long as Rome neglects this important facet of dialogue, it will get nowhere.

Also, the Novus Ordo either has to go, or at least certain abusive practices (laypeople distributing Communion, gross liturgical abuse) must be conclusively abolished, for the Orthodox to even consider serious negotiation.  This is where Orthodoxy can change Catholicism for the better -- and this is why the Orthodox should be key protagonists in the rescue of Catholicism, even if reunion does not come to pass.          
« Last Edit: March 23, 2011, 04:14:54 AM by jordanz » Logged
bogdan
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 1,615



« Reply #8 on: March 23, 2011, 10:07:43 AM »

Nevertheless, any "deal" would probably allow the Roman West to continue to recite the filioque.  

I tend to doubt this. Orthodox theologians have disseminated why the Filioque is so important, though every Roman Catholic I've ever talked to simply don't get the importance.

There are threads on this elsewhere, but briefly: the Creed describes the ontological source of the Holy Spirit, and He cannot proceed from both Father and Son ontologically. The filioque does not specify that this "procession" is economical, and if it is, it should have been described better, because the current form is too ambiguous to be in such a definitive statement as the Creed.

The only acceptable outcomes I can see are this:

A. Rewrite the Filioque in a theologically accurate way, changing the Creed for everyone

This would be wildly unpopular, but could be necessary upon reunion to recatechize Catholics and correct any wrong ideas they may have about the Spirit.

B. Remove the Filioque and return to the original

Obviously the best solution. The heresy that needed to clause is over, as you point out.

But having some continue to say the clause simply for sentimental reasons is not acceptable. There are too many important theological reasons why the Creed cannot remain in its Western form.
Logged
jordanz
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic
Posts: 203


« Reply #9 on: March 23, 2011, 12:47:14 PM »

There are threads on this elsewhere, but briefly: the Creed describes the ontological source of the Holy Spirit, and He cannot proceed from both Father and Son ontologically. The filioque does not specify that this "procession" is economical, and if it is, it should have been described better, because the current form is too ambiguous to be in such a definitive statement as the Creed.

Agreed.  This is why most Roman theologians that I have read are not enormously concerned about the possible removal of the filioque.  I certainly wouldn't care.  The centrality of the Holy Spirit and pneumatology in Christianity is so important that Rome should yield on the filioque as a concession.  I don't know what we're going to do about the Credo settings, but we'll invent melismas to cover over the absence, I suppose.  

I hate to reduce ecumenism to a tit-for-tat trade, but Easterners will have to find a way to at least recognize Augustinian theology as orthodox, even while teaching the Eastern understanding of ancestral sin and the role of Mary in salvation.  I just cannot see why some Orthodox absolutely refuse to consider the possibility that St. Augustine of Hippo is not a heretic.  This intransigent stance strikes me more as polemic than thoughtful theological reflection.  The distance between ancestral vs. original sin and the "preserved grace of Mary" vs. the Immaculate Conception is not huge.  The Eastern and Western understanding of human salvation and Baptism can be bridged.  Disputes over the Western custom of pouring/sprinking versus Eastern immersion is a very minor issue that has been inflated well beyond its importance.  Really, why do some Orthodox rebaptise Romans simply because we receive a triune pouring on the crown of the head rather than a triune immersion at Baptism?  The formula, intent, and ministry of the aposolic clergy are identical in both Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism.  This practice strikes me as insulting and sectarian at best.  

If Rome is willing to drop the filioque (which I suspect it is) and more than willing to accept Eastern doctrinal formulations as valid, then the Orthodox should place behind their theo-political contentions and at least consider the merit of Western teachings and practices.
« Last Edit: March 23, 2011, 12:47:57 PM by jordanz » Logged
FormerReformer
Convertodox of the convertodox
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: I'll take (e) for "all of the above"
Posts: 2,404



WWW
« Reply #10 on: March 23, 2011, 02:21:11 PM »


I hate to reduce ecumenism to a tit-for-tat trade, but Easterners will have to find a way to at least recognize Augustinian theology as orthodox, even while teaching the Eastern understanding of ancestral sin and the role of Mary in salvation.  I just cannot see why some Orthodox absolutely refuse to consider the possibility that St. Augustine of Hippo is not a heretic.  This intransigent stance strikes me more as polemic than thoughtful theological reflection.  The distance between ancestral vs. original sin and the "preserved grace of Mary" vs. the Immaculate Conception is not huge.  The Eastern and Western understanding of human salvation and Baptism can be bridged.  Disputes over the Western custom of pouring/sprinking versus Eastern immersion is a very minor issue that has been inflated well beyond its importance.  Really, why do some Orthodox rebaptise Romans simply because we receive a triune pouring on the crown of the head rather than a triune immersion at Baptism?  The formula, intent, and ministry of the aposolic clergy are identical in both Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism.  This practice strikes me as insulting and sectarian at best.  

If Rome is willing to drop the filioque (which I suspect it is) and more than willing to accept Eastern doctrinal formulations as valid, then the Orthodox should place behind their theo-political contentions and at least consider the merit of Western teachings and practices.

I don't think any of the Orthodox believe St Augustine is a heretic.  Some of us might believe he was a bit mistaken about original sin and the procession of the Spirit, but there is a difference between misguided opinion and outright heresy.  Now, some of Rome's conclusions following from St Augustine's writings might be heretical, but less so, perhaps, than your average Calvinist. 

The main question, for the Orthodox, isn't whether reunion means that Rome can keep certain pious opinions, as the Immaculate Conception once was, but whether or not we'll be forced to take in Rome's misguided doctrines, as the Immaculate Conception now is.   

And, I'm sorry, but Orthodoxy is the fullness of the faith.  Any merits of Western teaching we have retained, it's all the unnecessary baggage that must be left at the door.  You are only allowed two carry-on items, of no more than 35 lbs each, and they must fit in the overhead bins.
Logged

"Funny," said Lancelot, "how the people who can't pray say that prayers are not answered, however much the people who can pray say they are."  TH White

Oh, no: I've succumbed to Hyperdoxy!
SolEX01
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of New Jersey
Posts: 11,094


WWW
« Reply #11 on: March 23, 2011, 02:34:43 PM »

Merit/Satisfaction was listed twice.

I don't think Proselytism is as significant of an issue perhaps when dealing with the Eastern Catholics.  Rome would have to clarify their existence and force them to become Latin Rite like the rest of Roman Catholicism or allow them to schism.  Rome would have to abolish the Eastern Catholic eparchies in the United States and elsewhere and force them under the nearest Latin Rite Diocese/Archdiocese.

Catholicism and Orthodoxy can easily agree on the dates of Easter unless the West would have to reprint their magazines and booklets based on recalculated Ordinary Time (which I have found very interesting reading when I had no access to other religious texts).

I don't see Heshcyasm as a major barrier - more like an issue of semantics and ontology.

I selected 15 "obstacles."   Smiley
Logged
jordanz
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic
Posts: 203


« Reply #12 on: March 23, 2011, 03:24:33 PM »

The main question, for the Orthodox, isn't whether reunion means that Rome can keep certain pious opinions, as the Immaculate Conception once was, but whether or not we'll be forced to take in Rome's misguided doctrines, as the Immaculate Conception now is. 

I doubt that Rome would force the IC on the Orthodox, but it would likely want to preserve the pious opinion as part of Western piety.  If the IC were "de-dogmatized" and returned to pious opinion, but remained liturgically binding only on the Latins, then why would the Orthodox care about the nuances of Western ritual?  There are other Western customs that the Orthodox would have to grin and bear, such as the use of unleavened bread in the Mass, the Roman method (but not the formula) of baptism, Benediction, the Roman understanding of religious and monastic life etc.  I can't see why there can't be some unity in diversity.                   

Also, I sense that many Protestant converts to Orthodoxy do not want to have anything to do with Roman Catholic identity and ritual due to historical baggage.  This is a third rail that often has little to do with theological issues and more to do with socio-cultural disputes.  This is especially true in North America.

I don't think Proselytism is as significant of an issue perhaps when dealing with the Eastern Catholics.  Rome would have to clarify their existence and force them to become Latin Rite like the rest of Roman Catholicism or allow them to schism.  Rome would have to abolish the Eastern Catholic eparchies in the United States and elsewhere and force them under the nearest Latin Rite Diocese/Archdiocese.

Why couldn't the various sui juris Eastern Catholic churches be given Orthodox autocephaly?  I don't see why their eparchies would be forced to merge under the Roman diocesan system.  I could see Moscow denying renunited Ukrainian Catholics autocephaly (heck, they've steadfastly refused to give it to the Ukrainian Orthodox -- and now there's a noncanonical Ukrainian eparchy because of the dispute), but would Moscow respect Ukrainian autocephaly as a condition of reunification with Rome? 

Catholicism and Orthodoxy can easily agree on the dates of Easter unless the West would have to reprint their magazines and booklets based on recalculated Ordinary Time (which I have found very interesting reading when I had no access to other religious texts).

Why can't we continue to have Gregorian calendar Western Churches with their Easter calculation, and Julian calendar Eastern Churches with their Easter calculation?  I don't see why two calendars can't coexist.
Logged
SolEX01
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of New Jersey
Posts: 11,094


WWW
« Reply #13 on: March 23, 2011, 03:51:15 PM »

I don't think Proselytism is as significant of an issue perhaps when dealing with the Eastern Catholics.  Rome would have to clarify their existence and force them to become Latin Rite like the rest of Roman Catholicism or allow them to schism.  Rome would have to abolish the Eastern Catholic eparchies in the United States and elsewhere and force them under the nearest Latin Rite Diocese/Archdiocese.

Why couldn't the various sui juris Eastern Catholic churches be given Orthodox autocephaly?

The subject of autocephaly continues to be debated among the Orthodox.  Until that discussion is resolved, autocephaly isn't like ordering a Happy Meal from McDonalds....   Smiley

I don't see why their eparchies would be forced to merge under the Roman diocesan system.  I could see Moscow denying renunited Ukrainian Catholics autocephaly (heck, they've steadfastly refused to give it to the Ukrainian Orthodox -- and now there's a noncanonical Ukrainian eparchy because of the dispute), but would Moscow respect Ukrainian autocephaly as a condition of reunification with Rome?

The topic of Ukraine is mired in geopolitics; so is autocephaly....  The solution may be uglier than the problem....   Undecided 

Catholicism and Orthodoxy can easily agree on the dates of Easter unless the West would have to reprint their magazines and booklets based on recalculated Ordinary Time (which I have found very interesting reading when I had no access to other religious texts).

Why can't we continue to have Gregorian calendar Western Churches with their Easter calculation, and Julian calendar Eastern Churches with their Easter calculation?  I don't see why two calendars can't coexist.

Calendars don't bother me - unlike some people.  I never heard of Old Calendar Roman Catholics although I imagine that they exist, somewhere....   Shocked
Logged
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #14 on: March 23, 2011, 03:54:05 PM »

Papal supremacy (jurisdictional and doctrinal), the filioque, and Chalcedon are the three biggest issues.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #15 on: March 23, 2011, 05:14:48 PM »

I said Papal Infallibility, Papal Supremacy/Universal Jurisdiction, Immaculate Conception, Assumption, Transubstantiation, Purgatory, and Original Sin. Though these are things which I believe are obstacles, that does not necessarily mean that, in the event of a reunion, the Eastern Churches would have to outright integrate each and everyone of these things into their theology. Some of these the East would only have to begin to recognize as legitimate teachings/practices of the Latin Church.
Logged
Shiranui117
Formerly known as "Wandering Sheep"
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Inquirer)
Jurisdiction: ACROD/OCA
Posts: 150


PUDDI PUDDI!


« Reply #16 on: March 23, 2011, 05:31:03 PM »

I don't think Proselytism is as significant of an issue perhaps when dealing with the Eastern Catholics.  Rome would have to clarify their existence and force them to become Latin Rite like the rest of Roman Catholicism or allow them to schism.  Rome would have to abolish the Eastern Catholic eparchies in the United States and elsewhere and force them under the nearest Latin Rite Diocese/Archdiocese.

Why couldn't the various sui juris Eastern Catholic churches be given Orthodox autocephaly?  I don't see why their eparchies would be forced to merge under the Roman diocesan system.  I could see Moscow denying renunited Ukrainian Catholics autocephaly (heck, they've steadfastly refused to give it to the Ukrainian Orthodox -- and now there's a noncanonical Ukrainian eparchy because of the dispute), but would Moscow respect Ukrainian autocephaly as a condition of reunification with Rome? 
Or, better yet: Why not reunite the Eastern Catholics to their Orthodox counterparts? Aside from groups like the Maronites who have no counterpart, that is. Having two different Ukrainian Churches, one formerly Eastern Catholic and one formerly Eastern Orthodox makes no sense. Let the groups who share the same traditions, yet are separated by the schism, reunite with each other.
Logged
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #17 on: March 23, 2011, 06:34:29 PM »

From a perspective from the other side?

Assumption

Isn't our doctrine that Saint Mary reposed, the Lord ushered her soul into Heaven, three days later resurrected her, and then assumed her bodily into Heaven sufficient? Isn't that essentially the doctrine you hold to?

Transubstantiation

Isn't it sufficient that we hold that the bread and wine become the Body and Blood of Christ notwithstanding the status of the bread and wine themselves afterward?

Original Sin

Isn't our view of the inherited Adamic curse sufficient?
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,864



« Reply #18 on: March 23, 2011, 06:59:45 PM »

From a perspective from the other side?

Assumption

Isn't our doctrine that Saint Mary reposed, the Lord ushered her soul into Heaven, three days later resurrected her, and then assumed her bodily into Heaven sufficient? Isn't that essentially the doctrine you hold to?


I thought the Orthodox doctrine of the Dormition was that she died, her soul went to heaven, and her body was assumed to heaven to be united with her body. I didn't think she literally rose like Lazarus or Christ.
Logged
Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #19 on: March 23, 2011, 07:05:02 PM »

From a perspective from the other side?

Assumption

Isn't our doctrine that Saint Mary reposed, the Lord ushered her soul into Heaven, three days later resurrected her, and then assumed her bodily into Heaven sufficient? Isn't that essentially the doctrine you hold to?

Transubstantiation

Isn't it sufficient that we hold that the bread and wine become the Body and Blood of Christ notwithstanding the status of the bread and wine themselves afterward?

Original Sin

Isn't our view of the inherited Adamic curse sufficient?
Uh...did you miss what I said? I said this would not require the Eastern Churches to outright adopt our theology, but only recognize that our theological understanding is legitimate. Meaning the Eastern (and Oriental) Orthodox would need to come to a point where they do not protest our teachings on Original Sin, Transubstantiation, Immaculate Conception, Assumption, etc. They would not need to assimilate these into their traditions, but rather simply acknowledge it is not heretical for the Latin Church to profess these teachings.
Logged
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 29,479



« Reply #20 on: March 23, 2011, 07:13:16 PM »

LOL at clerical celibacy getting 17 votes so far.
Logged

I would strongly recommend Orthodoxy and the Religion of the Future by Fr Seraphim Rose.
Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #21 on: March 23, 2011, 07:20:17 PM »

LOL at clerical celibacy getting 17 votes so far.
I would love to know who all voted for that. Sadly it was probably uninformed RCs. :/
Logged
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #22 on: March 23, 2011, 07:35:44 PM »

LOL at clerical celibacy getting 17 votes so far.
I would love to know who all voted for that. Sadly it was probably uninformed RCs. :/

I'm sorry for letting you down.
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #23 on: March 23, 2011, 09:56:03 PM »

From a perspective from the other side?

Assumption

Isn't our doctrine that Saint Mary reposed, the Lord ushered her soul into Heaven, three days later resurrected her, and then assumed her bodily into Heaven sufficient? Isn't that essentially the doctrine you hold to?

Transubstantiation

Isn't it sufficient that we hold that the bread and wine become the Body and Blood of Christ notwithstanding the status of the bread and wine themselves afterward?

Original Sin

Isn't our view of the inherited Adamic curse sufficient?
Uh...did you miss what I said? I said this would not require the Eastern Churches to outright adopt our theology, but only recognize that our theological understanding is legitimate. Meaning the Eastern (and Oriental) Orthodox would need to come to a point where they do not protest our teachings on Original Sin, Transubstantiation, Immaculate Conception, Assumption, etc. They would not need to assimilate these into their traditions, but rather simply acknowledge it is not heretical for the Latin Church to profess these teachings.

Oh, I thought you were talking about coming to unity of doctrine on these issues. So I thought you were talking about to what degree we would need to come into uniformity with your doctrines, and was a little confused, as it seems we are already sufficiently one on those issues, at least from your side of things.

BTW, I don't see how there is any distinction concerning the Assumption of Saint Mary, other than that perhaps our own doctrine is more defined in this case, asserting that Saint Mary truly reposed.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,436



« Reply #24 on: March 23, 2011, 09:59:13 PM »

LOL at clerical celibacy getting 17 votes so far.
I would love to know who all voted for that. Sadly it was probably uninformed RCs. :/

RC Priests probably, well the 17 who would marry a woman.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,436



« Reply #25 on: March 23, 2011, 10:01:29 PM »

I said Papal Infallibility, Papal Supremacy/Universal Jurisdiction, Immaculate Conception, Assumption, Transubstantiation, Purgatory, and Original Sin. Though these are things which I believe are obstacles, that does not necessarily mean that, in the event of a reunion, the Eastern Churches would have to outright integrate each and everyone of these things into their theology. Some of these the East would only have to begin to recognize as legitimate teachings/practices of the Latin Church.

Ain't never going to happen. From heresy to the superfluous.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
IsmiLiora
Chronic Exaggerator
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: One step closer!
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America (GOA)
Posts: 3,434


Back by unpopular demand.


« Reply #26 on: March 23, 2011, 10:11:03 PM »

RC Priests probably, well the 17 who would marry a woman.

Oh SNAP!  Shocked (I did have my suspicions with BOTH the priests I knew very well, but of course it is none of my business if they are upholding their vow of celibacy.)

Are there a lot of disgruntled deacons voting here? Mad that you only made it the halfway point?  Wink

In all seriousness, the people that I have discussed Orthodoxy with view married clergy as the BIGGEST selling point (that and confession without having the priest tell you to say a certain number of Hail Marys based on what you just confessed. Yes. I used to compete with my sister and find out how many prayers we were assigned when I was younger. For some reason, I usually got the most.  Roll Eyes I like to think it's because I ACKNOWLEDGED more sins).

My biggest major stumbling points would be Papal Infallibility, Papal Supremacy and Purgatory. The first two need to break, and I'm not sure if that will happen in my lifetime...or ever, for that matter.
Logged

She's touring the facility/and picking up slack.
--
"For in much wisdom is much grief, and he who increases knowledge increases sorrow." Ecclesiastes 1:18
--
I once believed in causes too, I had my pointless point of view --
Life went on no matter who was wrong or right
orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,436



« Reply #27 on: March 23, 2011, 10:38:42 PM »

I don't see Heshcyasm as a major barrier - more like an issue of semantics and ontology.

The hesychasts are just remaining silent on the issue.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
FormerReformer
Convertodox of the convertodox
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: I'll take (e) for "all of the above"
Posts: 2,404



WWW
« Reply #28 on: March 23, 2011, 11:09:09 PM »

I don't see Heshcyasm as a major barrier - more like an issue of semantics and ontology.

The hesychasts are just remaining silent on the issue.

 laugh laugh laugh
Logged

"Funny," said Lancelot, "how the people who can't pray say that prayers are not answered, however much the people who can pray say they are."  TH White

Oh, no: I've succumbed to Hyperdoxy!
jordanz
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic
Posts: 203


« Reply #29 on: March 24, 2011, 02:32:04 AM »

Or, better yet: Why not reunite the Eastern Catholics to their Orthodox counterparts? Aside from groups like the Maronites who have no counterpart, that is. Having two different Ukrainian Churches, one formerly Eastern Catholic and one formerly Eastern Orthodox makes no sense. Let the groups who share the same traditions, yet are separated by the schism, reunite with each other.

Perhaps the former Eastern Catholics (I'm thinking of the Slavic Eastern Catholics here, in particular), would not want to be involved with the politics of Moscow vs. the former Soviet churches.  

RC Priests probably, well the 17 who would marry a woman.

Great comeback!  Actually, this is a very valid observation.  I have met gay Roman priests who have candidly said that they would feel strange working alongside a regular married RC clergy.  The restoration of optional celibacy to the Roman presbyterate will be one of the most healthy psychological developments Rome will ever undertake, should it do so (and I hope it does).  I don't think that all gay RC priests are pedos, or that all gay priests are promiscuous.  However, having a predominately gay clergy is demographically unbalanced.  Need some diversity there.

Let's be honest though -- there have to be gay celibate Orthodox clergy.  Or, is homosexuality in the clergy just not discussed as much in Orthodoxy as it is in the Roman church?  (lay Catholics talk about this issue more frequently than you might think)

My biggest major stumbling points would be Papal Infallibility, Papal Supremacy and Purgatory. The first two need to break, and I'm not sure if that will happen in my lifetime...or ever, for that matter.

Of the three, Purgatory might "give" more easily than you think.  Pope Benedict has recently remarked that Purgatory is more conceptual/metaphorical than an actual place of fire and brimstone.  That is merging closer to the Orthodox "pious opinion" on the issue and the teaching of theosis.  Also, Pope Benedict has quietly shelved Limbo (another Augustinian logical oddity).  Lots of subtle advances on this front.  
« Last Edit: March 24, 2011, 02:33:08 AM by jordanz » Logged
IsmiLiora
Chronic Exaggerator
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: One step closer!
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America (GOA)
Posts: 3,434


Back by unpopular demand.


« Reply #30 on: March 24, 2011, 09:07:40 AM »


Of the three, Purgatory might "give" more easily than you think.  Pope Benedict has recently remarked that Purgatory is more conceptual/metaphorical than an actual place of fire and brimstone.  That is merging closer to the Orthodox "pious opinion" on the issue and the teaching of theosis.  Also, Pope Benedict has quietly shelved Limbo (another Augustinian logical oddity).  Lots of subtle advances on this front.  
Oh, actually, I do know that!  Cheesy I just think that it should go by the by-way completely - just my opinion on it. For me, purgatory/limbo is a pretty important issue (because I REALLY don't know how they can justify that), although I'm sure that others on the list are more important to the other members.

Papal Infallibility is probably #1, if I had to guess. Once that goes, who knows what might happen?
Logged

She's touring the facility/and picking up slack.
--
"For in much wisdom is much grief, and he who increases knowledge increases sorrow." Ecclesiastes 1:18
--
I once believed in causes too, I had my pointless point of view --
Life went on no matter who was wrong or right
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #31 on: March 24, 2011, 09:13:27 AM »

Let's be honest though -- there have to be gay celibate Orthodox clergy.  

I'm sure there are.
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
IsmiLiora
Chronic Exaggerator
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: One step closer!
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America (GOA)
Posts: 3,434


Back by unpopular demand.


« Reply #32 on: March 24, 2011, 09:25:31 AM »


Great comeback!  Actually, this is a very valid observation.  I have met gay Roman priests who have candidly said that they would feel strange working alongside a regular married RC clergy.  The restoration of optional celibacy to the Roman presbyterate will be one of the most healthy psychological developments Rome will ever undertake, should it do so (and I hope it does).  I don't think that all gay RC priests are pedos, or that all gay priests are promiscuous.  However, having a predominately gay clergy is demographically unbalanced.  Need some diversity there.

Let's be honest though -- there have to be gay celibate Orthodox clergy.  Or, is homosexuality in the clergy just not discussed as much in Orthodoxy as it is in the Roman church?  (lay Catholics talk about this issue more frequently than you might think)
Hm, I do agree with this (and yes, lay Catholics guess and argue about the sexuality of their own priests a lot!). I guess the gay clergy do have a point about concerns with working alongside married RC clergy, but it's a move that I am cheering on from the sidelines. This needs to happen, big time.

And as long as they remained celibate, their homosexuality is between them, God and their main confessor. I
Logged

She's touring the facility/and picking up slack.
--
"For in much wisdom is much grief, and he who increases knowledge increases sorrow." Ecclesiastes 1:18
--
I once believed in causes too, I had my pointless point of view --
Life went on no matter who was wrong or right
orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,436



« Reply #33 on: March 24, 2011, 09:45:03 AM »

At least we have established jordanz has a sense of humor. I can place him outside the sandbox.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
podkarpatska
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,205


SS Cyril and Methodius Church, Mercer, PA


WWW
« Reply #34 on: March 24, 2011, 09:51:05 AM »

Let's be honest though -- there have to be gay celibate Orthodox clergy.  

I'm sure there are.

ah...you betcha...
Logged
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,104



« Reply #35 on: March 24, 2011, 01:27:00 PM »

Papal Infallibility is probably #1, if I had to guess. Once that goes, who knows what might happen?

Personally, I don't think Papal Infallibility should be regarded as #1.

On one of the other threads ialmisry recently asked whether the Cathechism of the Catholic Church is an ex cathedra document -- which personally I find a strange thing to ask: isn't it obvious that it isn't? But anyhow, one worthwhile thing that came out of the discussion was this from LBK:

Is not the the content of the CCC what all Roman Catholics should affirm? Is this not the document that those who wish to enter the RCC have to absorb and abide by? If they don't, i.e. if the CCC is "optional", does this not make a mockery of what the RCC expects of its prospective entrants?  Whether it's ex cathedra or not kinda misses the point, dontcha think??

(boldface added)

My answer to that is Yes, I think worry about whether it's ex cathedra or not does miss the point to a certain extent. I don't know how many (if any) ex cathedra statements there have been, and frankly it's not something I worry about.

For example, I know that we Catholics have been required to belief in the Immaculate Conception ever since Pope Pius IX issued "Ineffabilis Deus" on 8 December 1854. Now, did "Ineffabilis Deus" contain an ex cathedra statement? Yes, according to Pope John Paul II, but personally I would just say that I don't know -- what difference does it really make anyhow?
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
jordanz
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic
Posts: 203


« Reply #36 on: March 24, 2011, 01:41:41 PM »

On one of the other threads ialmisry recently asked whether the Cathechism of the Catholic Church is an ex cathedra document -- which personally I find a strange thing to ask: isn't it obvious that it isn't?

One current theological debate among traditional Catholics is the infallibility of the "new" (actually, restored) doctrine that the Mass is a propitiation sacrifice and the "Paschal Mystery".  The doctrine that the Mass is the Paschal Mystery is not new: it was just de-emphasized at Trent in response to the Reformation.  Yet, if the entire contents of the CCC is infallible, then Catholics must confess both the dogmatic definition of Trent and the new emphasis on the Paschal Mystery.  While most traditional priests I know assent to the doctrine of the Paschal Mystery, most publicly preach the dogma of Trent.  In response, a good number of progressive Catholics ignore the Tridentine dogma and hyper-emphasize the Paschal Mystery.

I wish that Rome were to issue a separate encyclical that re-affirms the dogma of the Mass.  That document would certainly be ex cathedra.    
« Last Edit: March 24, 2011, 01:44:37 PM by jordanz » Logged
montalban
Now in colour
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek
Posts: 1,813



« Reply #37 on: March 25, 2011, 03:44:19 AM »

I can say that I would like to see them return to the church
Logged

Fàilte dhut a Mhoire,
tha thu lan de na gràsan;
Tha an Tighearna maille riut.
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #38 on: March 25, 2011, 06:51:08 AM »

Given the shambles with which the Chambesy meeting has just ended, with the Primates of the Churches unable to agree about their ranking, I would say that one of the primary obstacles to reunion with the Church of Rome may be the Primates themselves and their incapability of reaching agreement on such an issue.  After all, if they cannot even agree as to what order they will sit around a table... Shocked

I was pleased to see the exceptional humility shown by the Church of Serbia which informed the Primates that it would willingly accept to move down from 5th place to 6th place to allow Georgia to move up to 5th place.   
Logged
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #39 on: March 25, 2011, 10:46:31 AM »

Given the shambles with which the Chambesy meeting has just ended, with the Primates of the Churches unable to agree about their ranking, I would say that one of the primary obstacles to reunion with the Church of Rome may be the Primates themselves and their incapability of reaching agreement on such an issue.  After all, if they cannot even agree as to what order they will sit around a table... Shocked

I was pleased to see the exceptional humility shown by the Church of Serbia which informed the Primates that it would willingly accept to move down from 5th place to 6th place to allow Georgia to move up to 5th place.   

God will provide.  Don't worry.  You have more folks praying for peace and unity within Orthodox jurisdictions than you realize.
Logged

Aindriú
Faster! Funnier!
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

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



WWW
« Reply #40 on: March 25, 2011, 10:48:30 AM »

Given the shambles with which the Chambesy meeting has just ended, with the Primates of the Churches unable to agree about their ranking, I would say that one of the primary obstacles to reunion with the Church of Rome may be the Primates themselves and their incapability of reaching agreement on such an issue.  After all, if they cannot even agree as to what order they will sit around a table... Shocked

I was pleased to see the exceptional humility shown by the Church of Serbia which informed the Primates that it would willingly accept to move down from 5th place to 6th place to allow Georgia to move up to 5th place.   

Met. Hilarion Confident Pan-Orthodox Synod will Resume in “Near Future”
http://www.aoiusa.org/blog/2011/03/met-hilarion-confident-pan-orthodox-synod-will-resume-in-near-future/
Logged


I'm going to need this.
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #41 on: March 25, 2011, 11:45:27 AM »

Given the shambles with which the Chambesy meeting has just ended, with the Primates of the Churches unable to agree about their ranking, I would say that one of the primary obstacles to reunion with the Church of Rome may be the Primates themselves and their incapability of reaching agreement on such an issue.  After all, if they cannot even agree as to what order they will sit around a table... Shocked

I was pleased to see the exceptional humility shown by the Church of Serbia which informed the Primates that it would willingly accept to move down from 5th place to 6th place to allow Georgia to move up to 5th place.  

God will provide.  Don't worry.  You have more folks praying for peace and unity within Orthodox jurisdictions than you realize.

Hush!!!  I correspond with a few of the holy fathers on Mount Athos and they say that many of them see the chaos of Chambesy and the inability of the Primates to agree on who gets to be served raki first as a direct intervention of the Holy Spirit to protect the Church from the miseries and even schisms which they believe will come upon the Church if this soi-disant Great Council goes ahead.
« Last Edit: March 25, 2011, 11:53:38 AM by Irish Hermit » Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #42 on: March 25, 2011, 11:51:50 AM »

Given the shambles with which the Chambesy meeting has just ended, with the Primates of the Churches unable to agree about their ranking, I would say that one of the primary obstacles to reunion with the Church of Rome may be the Primates themselves and their incapability of reaching agreement on such an issue.  After all, if they cannot even agree as to what order they will sit around a table... Shocked

I was pleased to see the exceptional humility shown by the Church of Serbia which informed the Primates that it would willingly accept to move down from 5th place to 6th place to allow Georgia to move up to 5th place.  

God will provide.  Don't worry.  You have more folks praying for peace and unity within Orthodox jurisdictions than you realize.

I do realise.  Every day thousands of church services are offered to God and every one contains the prayer in the Great Litany which commences every service ..."for the welfare of the holy Churches of God and for the union of all...."
« Last Edit: March 25, 2011, 11:52:28 AM by Irish Hermit » Logged
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #43 on: March 25, 2011, 11:53:34 AM »

Given the shambles with which the Chambesy meeting has just ended, with the Primates of the Churches unable to agree about their ranking, I would say that one of the primary obstacles to reunion with the Church of Rome may be the Primates themselves and their incapability of reaching agreement on such an issue.  After all, if they cannot even agree as to what order they will sit around a table... Shocked

I was pleased to see the exceptional humility shown by the Church of Serbia which informed the Primates that it would willingly accept to move down from 5th place to 6th place to allow Georgia to move up to 5th place.   

God will provide.  Don't worry.  You have more folks praying for peace and unity within Orthodox jurisdictions than you realize.

Hush!!!  I correspond with a few of the holy fathers on Mount Athos and they say that many of them see the chaos of Chambesy and the inability of the Primates to agree on who gets to be served raki first is a direct intervention of the Holy Spirit to protect the Church from the miseries and even schisms which they believe will come upon the Church if this soi-disant Great Council goes ahead.


Tell your brother monks not to tempt God by putting their desires before the Will of the Master.
Logged

Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #44 on: March 25, 2011, 12:03:32 PM »

Given the shambles with which the Chambesy meeting has just ended, with the Primates of the Churches unable to agree about their ranking, I would say that one of the primary obstacles to reunion with the Church of Rome may be the Primates themselves and their incapability of reaching agreement on such an issue.  After all, if they cannot even agree as to what order they will sit around a table... Shocked

I was pleased to see the exceptional humility shown by the Church of Serbia which informed the Primates that it would willingly accept to move down from 5th place to 6th place to allow Georgia to move up to 5th place.   

God will provide.  Don't worry.  You have more folks praying for peace and unity within Orthodox jurisdictions than you realize.

Hush!!!  I correspond with a few of the holy fathers on Mount Athos and they say that many of them see the chaos of Chambesy and the inability of the Primates to agree on who gets to be served raki first is a direct intervention of the Holy Spirit to protect the Church from the miseries and even schisms which they believe will come upon the Church if this soi-disant Great Council goes ahead.


Tell your brother monks not to tempt God by putting their desires before the Will of the Master.

I would agree with our holy monastic father and theologian Saint Justin Popovic that it is not the will of the Master.  He implored the Churches not to go ahead with plans for it. We do not want this Council.

The idea for this Great Orthodox Council was born in the giddy atmosphere of post Vatican II.  "Look, the Catholics have just had one; we should do the same."   And so the Orthodox looked around and dredged up topics for an agenda to justify an unnecessary Council.  The enthusiasm of those times in the 1970s has withered away as we have seen the unexpected consequences of Vatican II.    God preserve us from such.
Logged
Tags:
Pages: 1 2 3 4 »  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 0.168 seconds with 74 queries.