OrthodoxChristianity.net
October 01, 2014, 10:31:34 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: When will our two Churches reunite (if you select "other," please explain in a post)?
Within the next 10 to 20 years
Pshh! Not within my lifetime!
When the Pope becomes Orthodox
When the East stops being schismatic
NEVER
Other

Pages: 1 2 3 4 All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Is Orthodox-Catholic reunion on the horizon?  (Read 7146 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« on: June 08, 2011, 10:05:59 PM »

Hi everyone. I realize this is a somewhat tongue in cheek format, but I am interested in hearing what everyone thinks and why. Everyone's feedback is welcome! If you select "other" I ask you to please explain, but anyone is free to tell how they voted and why if they want to.
Logged
Kasatkin fan
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA - Archdiocese of Canada
Posts: 636



« Reply #1 on: June 08, 2011, 10:19:52 PM »

When the Pope becomes Orthodox.

I don't mean he adapts Orthodox discipline (married priests, beards, all that), I simply mean he confesses the Orthodox Faith. Once he does that it will only be a matter of properly organizing it (as between the EO and OO).
Logged
88Devin12
Moderated
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,922



« Reply #2 on: June 08, 2011, 10:51:06 PM »

I said "when the Pope becomes Orthodox". But really I would say, when the Roman Catholic Church becomes Orthodox. It isn't just enough that the Pope "becomes Orthodox", but rather the whole Church. The Latin church shouldn't just be following the Pope in whatever he does.
« Last Edit: June 08, 2011, 10:51:18 PM by 88Devin12 » Logged
JamesRottnek
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Anglican
Jurisdiction: Episcopal Diocese of Arizona
Posts: 5,121


I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine


« Reply #3 on: June 08, 2011, 11:24:56 PM »

I said "when the Pope becomes Orthodox". But really I would say, when the Roman Catholic Church becomes Orthodox. It isn't just enough that the Pope "becomes Orthodox", but rather the whole Church. The Latin church shouldn't just be following the Pope in whatever he does.
Logged

I know a secret about a former Supreme Court Justice.  Can you guess what it is?

The greatest tragedy in the world is when a cigarette ends.

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011
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: 37,831



« Reply #4 on: June 08, 2011, 11:26:54 PM »

Christ is ascended!

I said other.  There are chances with the collapse of Western Europe, the restoration of the Russian Church and others (if they don't follow the Greeks in killing their next generation) it might happen in 40 years or so. So I might live to see it.
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
bogdan
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 1,615



« Reply #5 on: June 08, 2011, 11:30:25 PM »

When we can all confidently say we confess the same faith and share all things in common, we will have communion.
Logged
John of the North
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christianity
Jurisdiction: Eparchy of Edmonton and the West
Posts: 3,533


Christ is Risen!

tgild
« Reply #6 on: June 08, 2011, 11:34:40 PM »

Other: When they draw/paint/write icons the way we Orthodox do for the reasons we Orthodox do.
Logged

"Christianity is not a philosophy, not a doctrine, but life." - Elder Sophrony (Sakharov)
GabrieltheCelt
Hillbilly Extraordinaire
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,988


Chasin' down a Hoodoo...


« Reply #7 on: June 08, 2011, 11:45:39 PM »

Although I voted for having the Pope convert to Eastern Orthodoxy, I would much rather see the Orthodox churches unite (Eastern Orthodox, Ethiopian, Coptic, etc...) before we unite with the Roman Catholics.
Logged

"The Scots-Irish; Brewed in Scotland, bottled in Ireland, uncorked in America."  ~Scots-Irish saying
akimori makoto
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Non-heretical Christian
Jurisdiction: Fully-sik-hektic archdiocese of Australia, bro
Posts: 3,126

No-one bound by fleshly pleasures is worthy ...


« Reply #8 on: June 08, 2011, 11:46:32 PM »

(if they don't follow the Greeks in killing their next generation)

I have a suspicion we are of the same mind, Isa, but would you mind unpacking this for me?
Logged

The Episcopallian road is easy and wide, for many go through it to find destruction. lol sorry channeling Isa.
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #9 on: June 09, 2011, 12:09:00 AM »

What do you mean by "both churches" reuniting? Do you mean the majority? Or all Bishops along with the majority of their faithful? Or all of their faithful?
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
Kasatkin fan
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA - Archdiocese of Canada
Posts: 636



« Reply #10 on: June 09, 2011, 12:55:01 AM »

Although I voted for having the Pope convert to Eastern Orthodoxy, I would much rather see the Orthodox churches unite (Eastern Orthodox, Ethiopian, Coptic, etc...) before we unite with the Roman Catholics.
Yes, I don't think we can move forward until that occurs. We already agree the EO and OO have the same faith, therefore it is a situation in which we can figure out how reunion can happen. Once we have things sorted out then we can worry about the Catholics coming to Orthodoxy.
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 #11 on: June 09, 2011, 01:00:09 AM »

It is on the horizon.......




And there it shall stay.


Seriously, I can never see it happening.  Undecided
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
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #12 on: June 09, 2011, 02:13:00 AM »

It is on the horizon.......




And there it shall stay.


Seriously, I can never see it happening.  Undecided
Yes, it would seem that NEVER and When the Pope becomes Orthodox are the same answer in reality,
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #13 on: June 09, 2011, 02:51:35 AM »

While I do have a hope for the union of our Churches I am also inclined to accept these words from Saint Nektary of Optina, the last Optina Elder who died in 1927:

Once N. Pavlovich asked the Elder: "Is it possible to hope for the unification of the churches?"

He replied, "No! only an Ecumenical Council could do that, but there will be no more councils. There have already been seven councils, like the seven sacraments and the seven gifts of the Holy Spirit. For our age, the number of fullness is the number seven. Eight is the number of the future age. Only separate people will be united to our Church."

"Wisdom has built herself a house with seven pillars. Orthodoxy has these seven pillars. But God's wisdom has other dwellings- they may have six pillars or fewer, and accordingly a lesser measure of grace." Saint Nektary of Optina


Source: Elder Nektary of Optina by I.M. Kontzevitch Pages 181 and 182
 
 
Logged
Maria
Orthodox Christian
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 9,592


O most Holy Theotokos, save us.


« Reply #14 on: June 09, 2011, 03:28:53 AM »

While I do have a hope for the union of our Churches I am also inclined to accept these words from Saint Nektary of Optina, the last Optina Elder who died in 1927:

Once N. Pavlovich asked the Elder: "Is it possible to hope for the unification of the churches?"

He replied, "No! only an Ecumenical Council could do that, but there will be no more councils. There have already been seven councils, like the seven sacraments and the seven gifts of the Holy Spirit. For our age, the number of fullness is the number seven. Eight is the number of the future age. Only separate people will be united to our Church."

"Wisdom has built herself a house with seven pillars. Orthodoxy has these seven pillars. But God's wisdom has other dwellings- they may have six pillars or fewer, and accordingly a lesser measure of grace." Saint Nektary of Optina


Source: Elder Nektary of Optina by I.M. Kontzevitch Pages 181 and 182
 
 


Interesting. Could this planned Orthodox council lead to a false union?

It has been mentioned that in the End times, there would be a false one world religion. Is that possible
Logged

Glory to Jesus Christ!
Glory to Him forever!
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #15 on: June 09, 2011, 03:38:48 AM »


Interesting. Could this planned Orthodox council lead to a false union?


Not in my estimation. They abandoned their recent meeting in Chambesy because the Orthodox primates couldn't agree as to where they should sit at the conference table.  If the big boys are unable to decide even that..................well, I doubt they can really get their heads around the major question of reintegrating Rome into the Church.   The anti-unionists can breathe a sigh of relief.
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: 37,831



« Reply #16 on: June 09, 2011, 06:26:01 AM »

Christ is ascended!
(if they don't follow the Greeks in killing their next generation)

I have a suspicion we are of the same mind, Isa, but would you mind unpacking this for me?

The abortion rate and the decay of family life in Greece is atrocious. It's bad in Russia, Serbia etc. too, but there they had a militant atheist dictatorship imposing that.  The Greeks freely chose to go down that route.  Russia, Serbia etc. can chose to go in the opposite direction. If they do, Orthodoxy's star in the world will rise, and can meet the Vatican on a more equal footing in the world (Orthodoxy having the Truth, in the other world it is no contest).  If Russia, Serbia etc. decide to use their new found freedom to go down the same road to hell that Greece has chosen, well, you can't act surprise if you arrive where you are going.
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
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,128



« Reply #17 on: June 09, 2011, 08:27:31 AM »

We already agree the EO and OO have the same faith, therefore it is a situation in which we can figure out how reunion can happen.

So then I guess the big question is, what would have to change in the RCC in order for you to be able to say "EO and RC have the same faith"?
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
bogdan
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 1,615



« Reply #18 on: June 09, 2011, 08:52:38 AM »

We already agree the EO and OO have the same faith, therefore it is a situation in which we can figure out how reunion can happen.

So then I guess the big question is, what would have to change in the RCC in order for you to be able to say "EO and RC have the same faith"?

For my part, I think Fr Thomas Hopko (who is a generally moderate Orthodox voice) has an excellent and balanced list at the end of this article: http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/articles6/HopkoPope.php
« Last Edit: June 09, 2011, 08:54:24 AM by bogdan » Logged
Altar Server
High Elder
******
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Christian(as of 12/18/10)
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 894


Most Holy Theotokos Save Us!


« Reply #19 on: June 09, 2011, 09:50:06 AM »

I voted other because not only would the Pope have to become Orthodox the Catholic church as a whole would have to renounce it's heterodox doctrines
Logged

All my hope I place in you, O Mother of God, keep me under your protection!
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #20 on: June 09, 2011, 11:47:40 AM »

He replied, "No! only an Ecumenical Council could do that, but there will be no more councils. There have already been seven councils,

Or eight, or nine...

Quote
like the seven sacraments and the seven gifts of the Holy Spirit.

He read RCC catechism too often.
« Last Edit: June 09, 2011, 11:48:12 AM by Michał Kalina » Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #21 on: June 09, 2011, 11:53:50 AM »

He replied, "No! only an Ecumenical Council could do that, but there will be no more councils. There have already been seven councils,

Or eight, or nine...


So what can we say?  Just as the Catholics cannot say how many infallible statements there are the Orthodox have no idea how many Ecumenical Councils we have held?  Hmmmm!

We used to be called "The Church of the Seven Councils" but these days...?
Logged
podkarpatska
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,474


Pokrov


WWW
« Reply #22 on: June 09, 2011, 12:03:31 PM »

He replied, "No! only an Ecumenical Council could do that, but there will be no more councils. There have already been seven councils,

Or eight, or nine...


So what can we say?  Just as the Catholics cannot say how many infallible statements there are the Orthodox have no idea how many Ecumenical Councils we have held?  Hmmmm!

We used to be called "The Church of the Seven Councils" but these days...?

I not big on numerology either way! In any event, I couldn't find a 'Happy Belated Great Council' card to send the Patriarchs at the local greeting card kiosk, so I don't think it's going to happen any time soon! lol
« Last Edit: June 09, 2011, 12:03:59 PM by podkarpatska » Logged
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,192


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #23 on: June 09, 2011, 01:02:31 PM »

We already agree the EO and OO have the same faith, therefore it is a situation in which we can figure out how reunion can happen.

So then I guess the big question is, what would have to change in the RCC in order for you to be able to say "EO and RC have the same faith"?

For my part, I think Fr Thomas Hopko (who is a generally moderate Orthodox voice) has an excellent and balanced list at the end of this article: http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/articles6/HopkoPope.php
There only seem to be a few points in there that are actually Church dividing issues.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
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: 37,831



« Reply #24 on: June 09, 2011, 01:26:09 PM »

Christ is ascended!
We already agree the EO and OO have the same faith, therefore it is a situation in which we can figure out how reunion can happen.

So then I guess the big question is, what would have to change in the RCC in order for you to be able to say "EO and RC have the same faith"?
Anathematize filioque, Pastor Aeternus, Ineffibilis Deus, withdraw recognition of your "ecumenical councils" as ecumenical after Nicea II, reaffirm Constantinople IV 879 (including voiding Constantinople IV 869), reaffirm Quintesext, abolish the college of cardinals, set up your local Bishops conferences into Holy Synods and grant autocephaly and autonomy to appropriate Holy Synods (and prepare to unite them to local the Orthodox Holy Synods, once an act of canonical communion is effected), reunite the sui juris Churches to their Mother Churches instanter, stop promotion of "private revelation," correct scholasticism. 
I'll see if I can think of anything else.
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
podkarpatska
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,474


Pokrov


WWW
« Reply #25 on: June 09, 2011, 01:28:54 PM »

If only it were so simple.....  (and prepare to unite them to local the Orthodox Holy Synods, once an act of canonical communion is effected) ..... I assume then that you would be willing to sacrifice our praxis to that of the predominant western majority here in the United States? That didn't work out so well for the Eastern Catholics in the 19th and 20th centuries.  That couldn't be what you mean....
« Last Edit: June 09, 2011, 01:31:34 PM by podkarpatska » Logged
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,147


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #26 on: June 09, 2011, 01:58:09 PM »

I wonder if a more appropriate question might not be, "How many people really want Orthodox-Catholic 'reunion'"?

It ain't *ever* gonna happen if people don't want it.  And it may not, anyway.  We don't know God's mind and there is certainly the possibility that He doesn't want it.  Or, He may, and we're just going to continue to try to make Him yield to our wills, instead of vice-versa.
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,128



« Reply #27 on: June 09, 2011, 02:11:26 PM »

Christ is ascended!
We already agree the EO and OO have the same faith, therefore it is a situation in which we can figure out how reunion can happen.

So then I guess the big question is, what would have to change in the RCC in order for you to be able to say "EO and RC have the same faith"?
Anathematize filioque, Pastor Aeternus, Ineffibilis Deus, withdraw recognition of your "ecumenical councils" as ecumenical after Nicea II, reaffirm Constantinople IV 879 (including voiding Constantinople IV 869), reaffirm Quintesext, abolish the college of cardinals, set up your local Bishops conferences into Holy Synods and grant autocephaly and autonomy to appropriate Holy Synods (and prepare to unite them to local the Orthodox Holy Synods, once an act of canonical communion is effected), reunite the sui juris Churches to their Mother Churches instanter, stop promotion of "private revelation," correct scholasticism. 
I'll see if I can think of anything else.

I don't think that's going to happen, except for the last part.

Anyhow, the point of my question wasn't so much to get an answer as to consider a different line of thinking regarding what the main question is.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Kasatkin fan
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA - Archdiocese of Canada
Posts: 636



« Reply #28 on: June 09, 2011, 02:16:44 PM »

We already agree the EO and OO have the same faith, therefore it is a situation in which we can figure out how reunion can happen.

So then I guess the big question is, what would have to change in the RCC in order for you to be able to say "EO and RC have the same faith"?
This question has been asked and addressed over and over on internet forums around the world ad infinitum, so I'll just give one major example - the belief in Papal Infallibility. The belief that an individual human being can be infallible under any circumstances stands contrary to the Orthodox faith.
Logged
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,128



« Reply #29 on: June 09, 2011, 02:30:58 PM »

There's already a discussion about Fr. Z's podcast, "Toward a true ecumenism", but there's one thing I noticed in it that pertains to this thread: he says something to the effect that he doesn't think reunion will happen until the end of time.

Personally I don't agree with that at all. I don't think we are close to reunion, but I see no reason to think it won't happen somewhere down the road, in a generation or two, or ...
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Melodist
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: The Faith That Established The Universe
Jurisdiction: AOANA
Posts: 2,523



« Reply #30 on: June 09, 2011, 02:32:27 PM »

We already agree the EO and OO have the same faith, therefore it is a situation in which we can figure out how reunion can happen.

So then I guess the big question is, what would have to change in the RCC in order for you to be able to say "EO and RC have the same faith"?

For my part, I think Fr Thomas Hopko (who is a generally moderate Orthodox voice) has an excellent and balanced list at the end of this article: http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/articles6/HopkoPope.php

After giving it a quick look-over, I think this is pretty reasonable. It addresses the causes of our division without forcing Rome to give up more than what was had before the schism.

I wonder if a more appropriate question might not be, "How many people really want Orthodox-Catholic 'reunion'"?

It ain't *ever* gonna happen if people don't want it.  And it may not, anyway.  We don't know God's mind and there is certainly the possibility that He doesn't want it.  Or, He may, and we're just going to continue to try to make Him yield to our wills, instead of vice-versa.

I think there is truth in this.
Logged

And FWIW, these are our Fathers too, you know.

Made Perfect in Weakness - Latest Post: The Son of God
Benjamin the Red
Recovering Calvinist
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America, Diocese of Dallas and the South ||| American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 1,601


Have mercy on me, O God, have mercy on me.


« Reply #31 on: June 09, 2011, 03:04:05 PM »

To re-format this into list form...

Christ is ascended!
We already agree the EO and OO have the same faith, therefore it is a situation in which we can figure out how reunion can happen.

So then I guess the big question is, what would have to change in the RCC in order for you to be able to say "EO and RC have the same faith"?
1. Anathematize filioque,
2. Pastor Aeternus,
3. Ineffibilis Deus,
4. withdraw recognition of your "ecumenical councils" as ecumenical after Nicea II,
5. reaffirm Constantinople IV 879 (including voiding Constantinople IV 869),
6. reaffirm Quintesext,
7. abolish the college of cardinals,
8. set up your local Bishops conferences into Holy Synods and grant autocephaly and 9. autonomy to appropriate Holy Synods (and prepare to unite them to local the Orthodox Holy Synods, once an act of canonical communion is effected),
10. reunite the sui juris Churches to their Mother Churches instanter,
11. stop promotion of "private revelation,"
12. correct scholasticism.
 
I'll see if I can think of anything else.

I like this list. However, I think #9 will be tricky, because of the resentment between Western and Eastern Rite. It exists in both churches (although, somewhat more in the RCC against the East) and we would have to be careful that it doesn't happen again. I would propose, for a time, for the Eastern and Western Rite churches in the same area to remain administratively separate, having all of the bishops of both rites meeting as a Synod and electing a single primate, but relegating the place of second honor after the primate to a bishop of the other rite.

Great list! Definitely something I can get behind! ;-D

Oh, and I voted "When the Pope becomes Orthodox." Just for the record!
Logged

"Hades is not a place, no, but a state of the soul. It begins here on earth. Just so, paradise begins in the soul of a man here in the earthly life. Here we already have contact with the divine..." -St. John, Wonderworker of Shanghai and San Francisco, Homily On the Sunday of Orthodoxy
podkarpatska
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,474


Pokrov


WWW
« Reply #32 on: June 09, 2011, 03:34:30 PM »

To re-format this into list form...

Christ is ascended!
We already agree the EO and OO have the same faith, therefore it is a situation in which we can figure out how reunion can happen.

So then I guess the big question is, what would have to change in the RCC in order for you to be able to say "EO and RC have the same faith"?
1. Anathematize filioque,
2. Pastor Aeternus,
3. Ineffibilis Deus,
4. withdraw recognition of your "ecumenical councils" as ecumenical after Nicea II,
5. reaffirm Constantinople IV 879 (including voiding Constantinople IV 869),
6. reaffirm Quintesext,
7. abolish the college of cardinals,
8. set up your local Bishops conferences into Holy Synods and grant autocephaly and 9. autonomy to appropriate Holy Synods (and prepare to unite them to local the Orthodox Holy Synods, once an act of canonical communion is effected),
10. reunite the sui juris Churches to their Mother Churches instanter,
11. stop promotion of "private revelation,"
12. correct scholasticism.
 
I'll see if I can think of anything else.

I like this list. However, I think #9 will be tricky, because of the resentment between Western and Eastern Rite. It exists in both churches (although, somewhat more in the RCC against the East) and we would have to be careful that it doesn't happen again. I would propose, for a time, for the Eastern and Western Rite churches in the same area to remain administratively separate, having all of the bishops of both rites meeting as a Synod and electing a single primate, but relegating the place of second honor after the primate to a bishop of the other rite.

Great list! Definitely something I can get behind! ;-D

Oh, and I voted "When the Pope becomes Orthodox." Just for the record!

Sounds better than it plays out, ask the Lebanese how that's worked out the fifty years under their constitution with alternating top jobs between Muslims and Maronites.
Logged
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,128



« Reply #33 on: June 09, 2011, 03:42:21 PM »

To re-format this into list form...

Christ is ascended!
We already agree the EO and OO have the same faith, therefore it is a situation in which we can figure out how reunion can happen.

So then I guess the big question is, what would have to change in the RCC in order for you to be able to say "EO and RC have the same faith"?
1. Anathematize filioque,
2. Pastor Aeternus,
3. Ineffibilis Deus,
4. withdraw recognition of your "ecumenical councils" as ecumenical after Nicea II,
5. reaffirm Constantinople IV 879 (including voiding Constantinople IV 869),
6. reaffirm Quintesext,
7. abolish the college of cardinals,
8. set up your local Bishops conferences into Holy Synods and grant autocephaly and 9. autonomy to appropriate Holy Synods (and prepare to unite them to local the Orthodox Holy Synods, once an act of canonical communion is effected),
10. reunite the sui juris Churches to their Mother Churches instanter,
11. stop promotion of "private revelation,"
12. correct scholasticism.
 
I'll see if I can think of anything else.

I like this list. However, I think #9 will be tricky, because of the resentment between Western and Eastern Rite. It exists in both churches (although, somewhat more in the RCC against the East) and we would have to be careful that it doesn't happen again. I would propose, for a time, for the Eastern and Western Rite churches in the same area to remain administratively separate, having all of the bishops of both rites meeting as a Synod and electing a single primate, but relegating the place of second honor after the primate to a bishop of the other rite.

Great list! Definitely something I can get behind! ;-D

Oh, and I voted "When the Pope becomes Orthodox." Just for the record!

Let's back up a step here. Are y'all saying that if the RC side doesn't "prepare to unite them to local the Orthodox Holy Synods, once an act of canonical communion is effected", then it follows that we don't "have the same faith"?

Ay caramba.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
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: 37,831



« Reply #34 on: June 09, 2011, 04:01:40 PM »

Christ is ascended!
If only it were so simple.....  (and prepare to unite them to local the Orthodox Holy Synods, once an act of canonical communion is effected) ..... I assume then that you would be willing to sacrifice our praxis to that of the predominant western majority here in the United States? That didn't work out so well for the Eastern Catholics in the 19th and 20th centuries.  That couldn't be what you mean....
No, it's not.  We know that there were Latin Churches in Constantinople before 1053, because EP Celarius shut them down, and there were Eastern/Greek parishes in Italy, because the Normans suppressed them.  So it would be like that, minus the suppression.

Reaffirmation of Quintisext would eliminate many of the praxis problems.
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
Benjamin the Red
Recovering Calvinist
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America, Diocese of Dallas and the South ||| American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 1,601


Have mercy on me, O God, have mercy on me.


« Reply #35 on: June 09, 2011, 04:36:44 PM »

To re-format this into list form...

Christ is ascended!
We already agree the EO and OO have the same faith, therefore it is a situation in which we can figure out how reunion can happen.

So then I guess the big question is, what would have to change in the RCC in order for you to be able to say "EO and RC have the same faith"?
1. Anathematize filioque,
2. Pastor Aeternus,
3. Ineffibilis Deus,
4. withdraw recognition of your "ecumenical councils" as ecumenical after Nicea II,
5. reaffirm Constantinople IV 879 (including voiding Constantinople IV 869),
6. reaffirm Quintesext,
7. abolish the college of cardinals,
8. set up your local Bishops conferences into Holy Synods and grant autocephaly and 9. autonomy to appropriate Holy Synods (and prepare to unite them to local the Orthodox Holy Synods, once an act of canonical communion is effected),
10. reunite the sui juris Churches to their Mother Churches instanter,
11. stop promotion of "private revelation,"
12. correct scholasticism.
 
I'll see if I can think of anything else.

I like this list. However, I think #9 will be tricky, because of the resentment between Western and Eastern Rite. It exists in both churches (although, somewhat more in the RCC against the East) and we would have to be careful that it doesn't happen again. I would propose, for a time, for the Eastern and Western Rite churches in the same area to remain administratively separate, having all of the bishops of both rites meeting as a Synod and electing a single primate, but relegating the place of second honor after the primate to a bishop of the other rite.

Great list! Definitely something I can get behind! ;-D

Oh, and I voted "When the Pope becomes Orthodox." Just for the record!

Let's back up a step here. Are y'all saying that if the RC side doesn't "prepare to unite them to local the Orthodox Holy Synods, once an act of canonical communion is effected", then it follows that we don't "have the same faith"?

Ay caramba.

Ecclesiology is intregal to the faith. If the RCC accepts the EO understanding of ecclesiology, it becomes necessary to divide the RCC into autocephalous churches, and merge them with the EO communities already in place there. It's simply the end result of attaining to the same faith.
Logged

"Hades is not a place, no, but a state of the soul. It begins here on earth. Just so, paradise begins in the soul of a man here in the earthly life. Here we already have contact with the divine..." -St. John, Wonderworker of Shanghai and San Francisco, Homily On the Sunday of Orthodoxy
Jetavan
Argumentum ad australopithecum
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Science to the Fourth Power
Jurisdiction: Ohayo Gozaimasu
Posts: 6,580


Barlaam and Josaphat


WWW
« Reply #36 on: June 09, 2011, 04:47:50 PM »

Although I voted for having the Pope convert to Eastern Orthodoxy, I would much rather see the Orthodox churches unite (Eastern Orthodox, Ethiopian, Coptic, etc...) before we unite with the Roman Catholics.
Yes, I don't think we can move forward until that occurs. We already agree the EO and OO have the same faith,
...and Rome, I believe, agrees that it and the OO have the same faith.
Logged

If you will, you can become all flame.
Extra caritatem nulla salus.
In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness".
सर्वभूतहित
Ἄνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας
"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas Gandhi
Y dduw bo'r diolch.
Benjamin the Red
Recovering Calvinist
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America, Diocese of Dallas and the South ||| American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 1,601


Have mercy on me, O God, have mercy on me.


« Reply #37 on: June 09, 2011, 04:57:07 PM »

Although I voted for having the Pope convert to Eastern Orthodoxy, I would much rather see the Orthodox churches unite (Eastern Orthodox, Ethiopian, Coptic, etc...) before we unite with the Roman Catholics.
Yes, I don't think we can move forward until that occurs. We already agree the EO and OO have the same faith,
...and Rome, I believe, agrees that it and the OO have the same faith.

I think they have mutually agreed that they have the same Christology. Rome may say that they have the same faith, but...I think the OO (at least most of them) would probably respond in the same way the EO would to that statement.

That said, I think it's essential for the EO and OO to reunite before the East unites with Rome. The EO and OO already largely agree that we maintain the same Orthodox faith, and reunion is now simply a matter of logistics and historical interpretation. Once that has been worked out, it can be the model of reunification between the Orthodox and the Romans, who presently do not share the same faith.
Logged

"Hades is not a place, no, but a state of the soul. It begins here on earth. Just so, paradise begins in the soul of a man here in the earthly life. Here we already have contact with the divine..." -St. John, Wonderworker of Shanghai and San Francisco, Homily On the Sunday of Orthodoxy
Melodist
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: The Faith That Established The Universe
Jurisdiction: AOANA
Posts: 2,523



« Reply #38 on: June 10, 2011, 10:02:27 AM »

Ecclesiology is intregal to the faith. If the RCC accepts the EO understanding of ecclesiology, it becomes necessary to divide the RCC into autocephalous churches, and merge them with the EO communities already in place there. It's simply the end result of attaining to the same faith.

Please forgive me for playing Rome's advocate here but, your proposed solution could hypothetically be pushed the other direction, especially in lands that are traditionally Roman Catholic, have higher numbers of them, or they were simly there first even if a minority. If a period (not permanace) of multi-jusdictional overlap between Roman and Eastern church authority with intercommunion is what is necessary to soften people's hearts, then I would not find the (temporary) situation to be too offensive, otherwise everyone will be demanding authority over everyone else's churches. It's bad enough in areas where this is happening between Orthodox churches who were never in schism with each other to begin with, demanding immediate jurisdictional unity will either extend the present schism unnecessarily or cause more schisms to happen unnecessarily.

I don't think anyone who is not willing to personally follow this to it's logical conclusion should really push the issue of jurisdictional unity being an immediate requirement of reunion.

Just my opinion.

EDIT: This was written with the assumption that a unity of faith has (hypothetically) been reached for the re-establishment of communion (in the hypothetical situation given).
« Last Edit: June 10, 2011, 10:05:30 AM by Melodist » Logged

And FWIW, these are our Fathers too, you know.

Made Perfect in Weakness - Latest Post: The Son of God
podkarpatska
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,474


Pokrov


WWW
« Reply #39 on: June 10, 2011, 10:24:16 AM »

Christ is ascended!
If only it were so simple.....  (and prepare to unite them to local the Orthodox Holy Synods, once an act of canonical communion is effected) ..... I assume then that you would be willing to sacrifice our praxis to that of the predominant western majority here in the United States? That didn't work out so well for the Eastern Catholics in the 19th and 20th centuries.  That couldn't be what you mean....
No, it's not.  We know that there were Latin Churches in Constantinople before 1053, because EP Celarius shut them down, and there were Eastern/Greek parishes in Italy, because the Normans suppressed them.  So it would be like that, minus the suppression.

Reaffirmation of Quintisext would eliminate many of the praxis problems.

Therein lies the rub, doesn't it? Human nature wouldn't change, even if the 'rules' did.....
Logged
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,128



« Reply #40 on: June 10, 2011, 11:03:08 AM »

To re-format this into list form...

Christ is ascended!
We already agree the EO and OO have the same faith, therefore it is a situation in which we can figure out how reunion can happen.

So then I guess the big question is, what would have to change in the RCC in order for you to be able to say "EO and RC have the same faith"?
1. Anathematize filioque,
2. Pastor Aeternus,
3. Ineffibilis Deus,
4. withdraw recognition of your "ecumenical councils" as ecumenical after Nicea II,
5. reaffirm Constantinople IV 879 (including voiding Constantinople IV 869),
6. reaffirm Quintesext,
7. abolish the college of cardinals,
8. set up your local Bishops conferences into Holy Synods and grant autocephaly and 9. autonomy to appropriate Holy Synods (and prepare to unite them to local the Orthodox Holy Synods, once an act of canonical communion is effected),
10. reunite the sui juris Churches to their Mother Churches instanter,
11. stop promotion of "private revelation,"
12. correct scholasticism.
 
I'll see if I can think of anything else.

I like this list. However, I think #9 will be tricky, because of the resentment between Western and Eastern Rite. It exists in both churches (although, somewhat more in the RCC against the East) and we would have to be careful that it doesn't happen again. I would propose, for a time, for the Eastern and Western Rite churches in the same area to remain administratively separate, having all of the bishops of both rites meeting as a Synod and electing a single primate, but relegating the place of second honor after the primate to a bishop of the other rite.

Great list! Definitely something I can get behind! ;-D

Oh, and I voted "When the Pope becomes Orthodox." Just for the record!

Let's back up a step here. Are y'all saying that if the RC side doesn't "prepare to unite them to local the Orthodox Holy Synods, once an act of canonical communion is effected", then it follows that we don't "have the same faith"?

Ay caramba.

Ecclesiology is intregal to the faith. If the RCC accepts the EO understanding of ecclesiology, it becomes necessary to divide the RCC into autocephalous churches, and merge them with the EO communities already in place there. It's simply the end result of attaining to the same faith.

I guess I'm in agreement with you insofar as neither of us subscribe to "Branch Theory". But there's a difference between saying "This is how it should be ideally" and forcing an impractical situation on everyone.

Consider: but the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church already have situations of overlapping jurisdictions.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #41 on: June 10, 2011, 04:18:21 PM »

Consider: but the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church already have situations of overlapping jurisdictions.

No. Overlapping jurisdictions can occur between two local Churches. There aren't any overlapping jurisdictions between the Church and other religious communities.
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
HeruvimTajno
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Latin Catholic with a love of the East
Posts: 23


Christ the Bridegroom


« Reply #42 on: June 10, 2011, 04:41:24 PM »

Top-down reunification has happened before (such as after the Council of Florence) and lasted for relatively short periods of times. I think that while top-down reunification that lasts is more feasible in our age, it's the bottom-up reunification that is going to matter most. If the people do not accept the decision of the patriarchs then the schism will still de facto exist. Of course, if one were to be truly faithful to your patriarchs you would follow them through with their reunification with Rome, in my opinion. The reunification may possibly only exist in small numbers and the rest would be in schism with the newly reunified church.

Personally, I think what needs to happen is a synod between the Pope and all the EO patriarchs, and the college of cardinals perhaps, and a long time spent in prayer and dialogue to reestablish unity and the role of the bishops. This might be a bit too ecumenical for some people but what is necessary to do must be done.

Whatever the solution to the schism is and whatever ultimately is necessary for unity, I want to live to see it. I have read some articles and it seems like the patriarchs of some of the churches are open to dialogue, and what a patriarch says has much more weight then what a layman on an internet forum says.

Life is too short and the world is too moribund for such a profound disunity to still exist.

While I do have a hope for the union of our Churches I am also inclined to accept these words from Saint Nektary of Optina, the last Optina Elder who died in 1927:

Once N. Pavlovich asked the Elder: "Is it possible to hope for the unification of the churches?"

He replied, "No! only an Ecumenical Council could do that, but there will be no more councils. There have already been seven councils, like the seven sacraments and the seven gifts of the Holy Spirit. For our age, the number of fullness is the number seven. Eight is the number of the future age. Only separate people will be united to our Church."

"Wisdom has built herself a house with seven pillars. Orthodoxy has these seven pillars. But God's wisdom has other dwellings- they may have six pillars or fewer, and accordingly a lesser measure of grace." Saint Nektary of Optina

What about the eight beatitudes? What if we consider monastic tonsure and installation of an emperor sacraments, as some Orthodox do, so I have heard? (Correct me if I'm wrong.)
What about Constantinople IV and V and the Synod of Jerusalem, considered by some Orthodox to be ecumenical?
This quote sounds very poetic and wise on the surface but it really doesn't reflect history and all its nuances as it actually is.
« Last Edit: June 10, 2011, 04:43:51 PM by HeruvimTajno » Logged

Let us who mystically represent the cherubim and sing the thrice-holy hymn unto the life-giving Trinity now lay aside all earthly care. Amen. That we may receive the King of All escorted invisibly by angelic hosts. Alleluia, Alleluia, Alleluia.
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,128



« Reply #43 on: June 10, 2011, 05:48:27 PM »

Consider: but the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church already have situations of overlapping jurisdictions.

No. Overlapping jurisdictions can occur between two local Churches. There aren't any overlapping jurisdictions between the Church and other religious communities.

Hi Michał. I'm not really clear on what you're saying here. Are you disagree with my statement that the Orthodox Church has situations of overlapping jurisdictions?
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #44 on: June 10, 2011, 06:16:05 PM »

Hi Michał. I'm not really clear on what you're saying here. Are you disagree with my statement that the Orthodox Church has situations of overlapping jurisdictions?

There are overlapping jurisdictions within the Church but there are not between the EOC and the RCC.
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,128



« Reply #45 on: June 10, 2011, 06:24:00 PM »

Hi Michał. I'm not really clear on what you're saying here. Are you disagree with my statement that the Orthodox Church has situations of overlapping jurisdictions?

There are overlapping jurisdictions within the Church but there are not between the EOC and the RCC.

What I'm saying is that the Orthodox Church has situations of overlapping jurisdictions, just like the Catholic Church does.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #46 on: June 10, 2011, 09:40:41 PM »

Personally, I think what needs to happen is a synod between the Pope and all the EO patriarchs, ...
Maybe lock the Pope together with the EO Patriarchs and theological advisers from both sides in a building in Greece, until agreement is reached.
Logged
HeruvimTajno
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Latin Catholic with a love of the East
Posts: 23


Christ the Bridegroom


« Reply #47 on: June 10, 2011, 10:24:48 PM »

Personally, I think what needs to happen is a synod between the Pope and all the EO patriarchs, ...
Maybe lock the Pope together with the EO Patriarchs and theological advisers from both sides in a building in Greece, until agreement is reached.

And then when the waiting gets too long rip the roof off like at the end of the conclave of 1268-1271.
Logged

Let us who mystically represent the cherubim and sing the thrice-holy hymn unto the life-giving Trinity now lay aside all earthly care. Amen. That we may receive the King of All escorted invisibly by angelic hosts. Alleluia, Alleluia, Alleluia.
ICXCNIKA
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 661



« Reply #48 on: June 10, 2011, 10:35:21 PM »

It would take more than just meeting with the Patriarchs/Primates he would save time and effort by meeting with all the Bishops. Even if the Patriarchs agreed they would need to get their brother Bishops to agree. which seems unlikely if they weren't involved in the discussions or had concerns that weren't addressed by such a meeting. If they can't form consensus within their respective Synods it is just another failed attempt.
Logged
88Devin12
Moderated
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,922



« Reply #49 on: June 10, 2011, 10:36:28 PM »

Even if the Bishops of the EO Church and the Bishops of the RC Church met together and reached an agreement, it still doesn't have any authority unless the whole Orthodox Church accepts it. That means the laity, the clergy and the monastics.
Logged
ICXCNIKA
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 661



« Reply #50 on: June 10, 2011, 10:44:45 PM »

You are absolutely correct about it needing to be accepted by the whole church. My only point was that Patriarchs are not little popes and don't always get what they want. I think some orthodox and a lot of nonorthodox don't understand that.
Logged
88Devin12
Moderated
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,922



« Reply #51 on: June 10, 2011, 10:51:59 PM »

You are absolutely correct about it needing to be accepted by the whole church. My only point was that Patriarchs are not little popes and don't always get what they want. I think some orthodox and a lot of nonorthodox don't understand that.
Oh lol, I was responding to the posts just before yours from the roman catholic members.
Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #52 on: June 10, 2011, 10:55:29 PM »

You are absolutely correct about it needing to be accepted by the whole church. My only point was that Patriarchs are not little popes and don't always get what they want. I think some orthodox and a lot of nonorthodox don't understand that.
Oh lol, I was responding to the posts just before yours from the roman catholic members.
thanks.
Suppose then, that all of the Orthodox Patriarchs and all of the Orthodox bishops and their participating theologians,  reached an agreement with the Roman Pope. Would it be likely to be rejected by the rest of the Orthodox Church?
Logged
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,128



« Reply #53 on: June 10, 2011, 11:28:30 PM »

Personally, I think what needs to happen is a synod between the Pope and all the EO patriarchs, and the college of cardinals perhaps, and a long time spent in prayer and dialogue to reestablish unity and the role of the bishops. This might be a bit too ecumenical for some people but what is necessary to do must be done.

It would take more than just meeting with the Patriarchs/Primates he would save time and effort by meeting with all the Bishops. Even if the Patriarchs agreed they would need to get their brother Bishops to agree. which seems unlikely if they weren't involved in the discussions or had concerns that weren't addressed by such a meeting. If they can't form consensus within their respective Synods it is just another failed attempt.

But you agree, at least, that the Patriarchs/Primates would see the light, as it were, if they had such a meeting with the Pope?
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
ICXCNIKA
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 661



« Reply #54 on: June 10, 2011, 11:32:40 PM »

I thought the Pope would be the one seeing the Light and subsequently spending years in an Orthodox Monastery practicing hesychia  perhaps the Uncreated Light.
« Last Edit: June 10, 2011, 11:33:52 PM by ICXCNIKA » Logged
88Devin12
Moderated
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,922



« Reply #55 on: June 10, 2011, 11:42:36 PM »

You are absolutely correct about it needing to be accepted by the whole church. My only point was that Patriarchs are not little popes and don't always get what they want. I think some orthodox and a lot of nonorthodox don't understand that.
Oh lol, I was responding to the posts just before yours from the roman catholic members.
thanks.
Suppose then, that all of the Orthodox Patriarchs and all of the Orthodox bishops and their participating theologians,  reached an agreement with the Roman Pope. Would it be likely to be rejected by the rest of the Orthodox Church?

It pretty much happened at Florence.

It depends on what the agreement is. If we believe it's a departure from the faith, then yes. To be Orthodox means you have to have the exact same faith we have, no compromise.

So any council basically would reinforce the Orthodox position, and would have to result in the Pope (and the Roman Catholic Church) returning to it's pre-schism status as defined by the Orthodox Church.
Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #56 on: June 11, 2011, 03:20:25 AM »

You are absolutely correct about it needing to be accepted by the whole church. My only point was that Patriarchs are not little popes and don't always get what they want. I think some orthodox and a lot of nonorthodox don't understand that.
Oh lol, I was responding to the posts just before yours from the roman catholic members.
thanks.
Suppose then, that all of the Orthodox Patriarchs and all of the Orthodox bishops and their participating theologians,  reached an agreement with the Roman Pope. Would it be likely to be rejected by the rest of the Orthodox Church?

It pretty much happened at Florence.

It depends on what the agreement is. If we believe it's a departure from the faith, then yes. To be Orthodox means you have to have the exact same faith we have, no compromise.

So any council basically would reinforce the Orthodox position, and would have to result in the Pope (and the Roman Catholic Church) returning to it's pre-schism status as defined by the Orthodox Church.
Suppose that all of  the Orthodox Patriarchs, all of  the Orthodox bishops and the participating Orthodox theologians said that the agreement with the Pope of Rome  was not a departure from the faith, then would it be possible for it to be rejected by the rest of the Orthodox Church?
Logged
Basil 320
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 3,066



« Reply #57 on: June 11, 2011, 04:18:09 AM »

Neither the Pope or a pan-Orthodox Synod today would compromise any to the doctrine (i.e. for Roman Catholics, innovations since the Great Schism, the Immaculate Conception of the Mother of God, Papal Infallibility), traditions or practices of the churches today.

However, there probably would be support among a minority of ecumenist bishops in Eastern Orthodoxy, and among a sizeable number of Roman Catholic bishops, including the Pope, that could accommodate a "reunion" by accepting the Eastern Orthodox Church as an autonomous rite, much like its so called Byzantine Rites of today, wherein, the Pope would not exercise the full authority of his office as Roman Catholicism views it today, but he would only act as a "First Among Equals" among the heads (primates/first hierarchs) of today's Orthodox Churches.  In this situation, the doctrinal differences would by soft pedaled as insignificant linguistic matters.  But this scenario will not happen, because there is far too much opposition to it among a vast majority of hierarchy, clergy, monastics, and laity in each of the Holy Orthodox Churches, and a schism would be caused among the Orthodox by such a "union."  I believe the Orthodox Churches current division over the calendar is still substantially due to the fact that it was introduced by a Roman Catholic Pope, (Gregory).


I'm 58 years old and voted "Not within my lifetime," as circumstances in the world would have to change significantly, like a greater influence of the Moslem religion and overt Christian suppression by it, to affect the current positions of both churches.

Never-the-less, I would advocate for a council of Christian Churches, Churches that adhere to the belief in the Holy Trinity, to advocate, promote, to today's world the essential traditional message of the Christian Gospel, without acting as if it is a religion unto itself.
« Last Edit: June 11, 2011, 04:19:35 AM by Basil 320 » Logged

"...Strengthen the Orthodox Community..."
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,128



« Reply #58 on: June 11, 2011, 07:28:57 AM »

I thought the Pope would be the one seeing the Light and subsequently spending years in an Orthodox Monastery practicing hesychia  perhaps the Uncreated Light.

As you've probably already guessed, my last question was tongue-in-cheek. Actually I think the idea the problems will be solved if the leaders meet together is bizarre. (Almost as bizarre as the reunion in the novel “Pierced by a Sword”. See this post.)
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,128



« Reply #59 on: June 11, 2011, 08:59:24 AM »

There's already a discussion about Fr. Z's podcast, "Toward a true ecumenism", but there's one thing I noticed in it that pertains to this thread: he says something to the effect that he doesn't think reunion will happen until the end of time.

Correction: he didn't say reunion won't happen until the end of time. He said he thinks it is "so difficult to solve, that only God can solve it".
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
podkarpatska
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,474


Pokrov


WWW
« Reply #60 on: June 11, 2011, 10:11:12 AM »

Just a point about trying to force Florence comparisons with any modern attempts to resolve our differences. Their world and ours are not really analogous. The military and economic pressures on the Eastern Empire placed the Orthodox delegation there in a great position of weakness. Secondly, there were no sources of mass information as exist today. The masses were ignorant and relied on what their Bishops, holy men and Princes dispensed to them in terms of information.

Today, if real progress were to be made, it would have been vetted in the courts of public opinion for decades, if not centuries. Why do you thing that the international consultations have been meeting and publishing their papers for comment and revision for more than fifty years. No modern Pope or Patriarch in his right mind would or could force a union on the faithful. I can't foresee any union being advanced that the vast majority of hierarchs of both east and west did not believe was the desire of God or that would not meet with the general, but not unanimous, support of the majorities of their communions.

We are not there in any way, none of us living may see that day if it comes at all.  We lose too much sleep and angst speculating about hypotheticals while the world around us is going to hell in a hand-basket as they say.
Logged
JamesRottnek
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Anglican
Jurisdiction: Episcopal Diocese of Arizona
Posts: 5,121


I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine


« Reply #61 on: June 11, 2011, 12:44:52 PM »

Does anyone happen to know if monks from Mt. Athos, Valaam (sp?), and any other major center of monasticism that I don't know about or am forgetting, are involved in the talks with the Vatican?  It would seem to me that it would make sense for them to.  If the bishops of the Church (even if all of the bishops of the Church) agreed to unite with Rome, but the monks of major monastic centers opposed it, I should think a lot of other monks would - and so many Orthodox would then be influenced to not accept the agreement. 
Logged

I know a secret about a former Supreme Court Justice.  Can you guess what it is?

The greatest tragedy in the world is when a cigarette ends.

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011
Basil 320
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 3,066



« Reply #62 on: June 11, 2011, 08:20:11 PM »

I've read most of the reports of the various consultations; never did I see a monk's name associated with an Orthodox delegation, aside from bishops who are technically monastics, but no monks who live the angelic life in a monastery.
Logged

"...Strengthen the Orthodox Community..."
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #63 on: June 11, 2011, 08:53:37 PM »

Neither the Pope or a pan-Orthodox Synod today would compromise any to the doctrine (i.e. for Roman Catholics, innovations since the Great Schism, the Immaculate Conception of the Mother of God, Papal Infallibility), traditions or practices of the churches today
Why do you think it would be impossible for the Roman Church to compromise on papal infallibility and the Immaculate Conception. Although they might not use the word compromise, but in the end, operationally, the teaching could be clarified and brought more in line with the Orthodox teaching of first among equals. This is not unprecedented, since, as you know, the Roman Catholic Church has clarified the teaching on the filioque, so that it gives more weight to the Orthodox position.
Logged
JamesRottnek
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Anglican
Jurisdiction: Episcopal Diocese of Arizona
Posts: 5,121


I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine


« Reply #64 on: June 11, 2011, 09:25:30 PM »

I've read most of the reports of the various consultations; never did I see a monk's name associated with an Orthodox delegation, aside from bishops who are technically monastics, but no monks who live the angelic life in a monastery.

That's a shame.  If anything of any real consequence is to ever get done, it will require the backing of monks.
Logged

I know a secret about a former Supreme Court Justice.  Can you guess what it is?

The greatest tragedy in the world is when a cigarette ends.

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #65 on: June 11, 2011, 09:56:41 PM »

Just a point about trying to force Florence comparisons with any modern attempts to resolve our differences. Their world and ours are not really analogous. The military and economic pressures on the Eastern Empire placed the Orthodox delegation there in a great position of weakness. Secondly, there were no sources of mass information as exist today. The masses were ignorant and relied on what their Bishops, holy men and Princes dispensed to them in terms of information.

Today, if real progress were to be made, it would have been vetted in the courts of public opinion for decades, if not centuries. Why do you thing that the international consultations have been meeting and publishing their papers for comment and revision for more than fifty years. No modern Pope or Patriarch in his right mind would or could force a union on the faithful. I can't foresee any union being advanced that the vast majority of hierarchs of both east and west did not believe was the desire of God or that would not meet with the general, but not unanimous, support of the majorities of their communions.

We are not there in any way, none of us living may see that day if it comes at all.  We lose too much sleep and angst speculating about hypotheticals while the world around us is going to hell in a hand-basket as they say.

We might not be going so fast if we'd come to terms on the resumption of communion.

To say that we will not see it in our life time, guarantees that we will not see it in our life time.

I believe it is entirely possible for me to see it in my life time.
Logged

podkarpatska
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,474


Pokrov


WWW
« Reply #66 on: June 11, 2011, 10:31:20 PM »

As I reread the scenarios that many seem to lay out for a reconciliation of east and west, I wonder if the meaning of the parable of the prodigal is lost upon us all.

Are we like the fallen away son who asks himself, "How many hired servants of my father's have bread enough to spare, and I'm dying with hunger! I will get up and go to my father, and will tell him, 'Father, I have sinned against heaven, and in your sight. I am no more worthy to be called your son. Make me as one of your hired servants.' He arose, and came to his father. But while he was still far off, his father saw him, and was moved with compassion, and ran, and fell on his neck, and kissed him.– Luke 15:17-20."

Are we the angry,prideful brother who resents his father for welcoming his brother after he squandered his inheritance: But he answered his father, "Behold, these many years I have served you, and I never disobeyed a commandment of yours, but you never gave me a goat, that I might celebrate with my friends. But when this, your son, came, who has devoured your living with prostitutes, you killed the fattened calf for him."– Luke 15:29-3"

I believe that should pay heed to the words of our Lord in summing up the situation, "But it was appropriate to celebrate and be glad, for this, your brother, was dead, and is alive again. He was lost, and is found." – Luke 15:32"

Rather than speculate that one side has to do this or that etc... perhaps the answer can be found through prayerful contemplation and acceptance of God's will should He will us to become one as once we were?

Logged
88Devin12
Moderated
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,922



« Reply #67 on: June 11, 2011, 10:44:25 PM »

As I reread the scenarios that many seem to lay out for a reconciliation of east and west, I wonder if the meaning of the parable of the prodigal is lost upon us all.

Are we like the fallen away son who asks himself, "How many hired servants of my father's have bread enough to spare, and I'm dying with hunger! I will get up and go to my father, and will tell him, 'Father, I have sinned against heaven, and in your sight. I am no more worthy to be called your son. Make me as one of your hired servants.' He arose, and came to his father. But while he was still far off, his father saw him, and was moved with compassion, and ran, and fell on his neck, and kissed him.– Luke 15:17-20."

Are we the angry,prideful brother who resents his father for welcoming his brother after he squandered his inheritance: But he answered his father, "Behold, these many years I have served you, and I never disobeyed a commandment of yours, but you never gave me a goat, that I might celebrate with my friends. But when this, your son, came, who has devoured your living with prostitutes, you killed the fattened calf for him."– Luke 15:29-3"

I believe that should pay heed to the words of our Lord in summing up the situation, "But it was appropriate to celebrate and be glad, for this, your brother, was dead, and is alive again. He was lost, and is found." – Luke 15:32"

Rather than speculate that one side has to do this or that etc... perhaps the answer can be found through prayerful contemplation and acceptance of God's will should He will us to become one as once we were?



I would say that to reject reunion isn't equivalent to the story of the prodigal son. To us as Orthodox, the prodigal son actually has to return to the household before we can accept him in. When it comes to the Roman Catholic Church, that means that she has to return to and accept her pre-schism status as we define it. If it ever comes to that point, then it is our job to run out to meet her and welcome her home with open arms. But we don't seek after a premature reunion when she is still living the prodigal lifestyle.
Logged
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,128



« Reply #68 on: June 11, 2011, 10:59:18 PM »

To us as Orthodox, the prodigal son actually has to return to the household before we can accept him in.

You'll be glad to hear that we Catholics also believe that the prodigal son has to return to the household before we can accept him in.

Wink
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #69 on: June 12, 2011, 12:22:22 PM »

To us as Orthodox, the prodigal son actually has to return to the household before we can accept him in.

You'll be glad to hear that we Catholics also believe that the prodigal son has to return to the household before we can accept him in.

Wink

If you think about it, we're already moving out to meet him.

M.
Logged

Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,128



« Reply #70 on: June 12, 2011, 12:49:09 PM »

To us as Orthodox, the prodigal son actually has to return to the household before we can accept him in.

You'll be glad to hear that we Catholics also believe that the prodigal son has to return to the household before we can accept him in.

Wink

If you think about it, we're already moving out to meet him.

M.

Good point. I hadn't thought of it in that way.

The father in the story could go out of the house the meet the son; but I (as a Catholic) can't go out of the household (the Church), except by moving out of it. That seems to be where a lot of ecumenists run amok.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #71 on: June 12, 2011, 01:00:29 PM »

To us as Orthodox, the prodigal son actually has to return to the household before we can accept him in.

You'll be glad to hear that we Catholics also believe that the prodigal son has to return to the household before we can accept him in.

Wink

If you think about it, we're already moving out to meet him.

M.

Good point. I hadn't thought of it in that way.

The father in the story could go out of the house the meet the son; but I (as a Catholic) can't go out of the household (the Church), except by moving out of it. That seems to be where a lot of ecumenists run amok.

Just as an aside, I am happy that we no longer lock horns and am grateful to Schultz for promoting a better way for both of us.  Thanks for your own kindnesses as well.

M.
« Last Edit: June 12, 2011, 01:01:01 PM by elijahmaria » Logged

88Devin12
Moderated
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,922



« Reply #72 on: June 12, 2011, 03:30:08 PM »

To us as Orthodox, the prodigal son actually has to return to the household before we can accept him in.

You'll be glad to hear that we Catholics also believe that the prodigal son has to return to the household before we can accept him in.

Wink

If you think about it, we're already moving out to meet him.

M.

And you see, that is where we would argue that there cannot be any communion. We will not run out to meet the prodigal son until the prodigal son repents and decides to come back. That hasn't happened yet. And I guarantee you, the Orthodox will not be running to the Roman Catholics anytime soon. We have nothing to repent for as far as the schism is concerned.
« Last Edit: June 12, 2011, 03:30:22 PM by 88Devin12 » Logged
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,128



« Reply #73 on: June 12, 2011, 03:54:52 PM »

To us as Orthodox, the prodigal son actually has to return to the household before we can accept him in.

You'll be glad to hear that we Catholics also believe that the prodigal son has to return to the household before we can accept him in.

Wink

If you think about it, we're already moving out to meet him.

M.

Good point. I hadn't thought of it in that way.

The father in the story could go out of the house the meet the son; but I (as a Catholic) can't go out of the household (the Church), except by moving out of it. That seems to be where a lot of ecumenists run amok.

Just as an aside, I am happy that we no longer lock horns and am grateful to Schultz for promoting a better way for both of us.  Thanks for your own kindnesses as well.

M.

Indeed, he seems to have more wisdom than I gave him credit for.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #74 on: June 12, 2011, 04:14:27 PM »

To the OP: Yes, it's on the horizon*.

*The horizon is the apparent line that separates earth from sky and goes away when we are approaching it.
« Last Edit: June 12, 2011, 04:18:46 PM by Michał Kalina » Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #75 on: June 12, 2011, 05:03:03 PM »

We might not be going so fast if we'd come to terms on the resumption of communion.

To say that we will not see it in our life time, guarantees that we will not see it in our life time.

I believe it is entirely possible for me to see it in my life time.


The Orthodox position is that communion will be the crowning point of union, not the starting point nor a stage along the way.  

They say it will proceed in the stages that we see in the Liturgy...

"Let us love one another....."   love will be the first stage

".... that we may confess..."  Identity of confession of faith will be stage two

and that will lead very quickly to stage three.... communion.

For any Orthodox who want to brush up on the Orthodox understanding of ecclesiology and communion, there is Bishop Kallistos Ware's Communion and Intercommunion which gives the viewpoint of the Patriarchate of Constantinople ( and I would be sure, of all the Orthodox Churches.)   In a brief booklet he explains why intercommunion is an impossibility for the Orthodox and we shall share communion on that glorious day when unity is complete.
« Last Edit: June 12, 2011, 05:10:50 PM by Irish Hermit » Logged
podkarpatska
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,474


Pokrov


WWW
« Reply #76 on: June 12, 2011, 08:35:57 PM »

As I reread the scenarios that many seem to lay out for a reconciliation of east and west, I wonder if the meaning of the parable of the prodigal is lost upon us all.

Are we like the fallen away son who asks himself, "How many hired servants of my father's have bread enough to spare, and I'm dying with hunger! I will get up and go to my father, and will tell him, 'Father, I have sinned against heaven, and in your sight. I am no more worthy to be called your son. Make me as one of your hired servants.' He arose, and came to his father. But while he was still far off, his father saw him, and was moved with compassion, and ran, and fell on his neck, and kissed him.– Luke 15:17-20."

Are we the angry,prideful brother who resents his father for welcoming his brother after he squandered his inheritance: But he answered his father, "Behold, these many years I have served you, and I never disobeyed a commandment of yours, but you never gave me a goat, that I might celebrate with my friends. But when this, your son, came, who has devoured your living with prostitutes, you killed the fattened calf for him."– Luke 15:29-3"

I believe that should pay heed to the words of our Lord in summing up the situation, "But it was appropriate to celebrate and be glad, for this, your brother, was dead, and is alive again. He was lost, and is found." – Luke 15:32"

Rather than speculate that one side has to do this or that etc... perhaps the answer can be found through prayerful contemplation and acceptance of God's will should He will us to become one as once we were?



I would say that to reject reunion isn't equivalent to the story of the prodigal son. To us as Orthodox, the prodigal son actually has to return to the household before we can accept him in. When it comes to the Roman Catholic Church, that means that she has to return to and accept her pre-schism status as we define it. If it ever comes to that point, then it is our job to run out to meet her and welcome her home with open arms. But we don't seek after a premature reunion when she is still living the prodigal lifestyle.

That wasn't my point. In the parable, the father accepts the prodigal upon the prodigal's decision to return to his father's home. Indeed, the father made no demands upon the son, but it was the son's desire to return to his father with humility and regret that inspired the father to offer the fatted calf and offer the prodigal a seat at his table.

My concern is that we Orthodox, should the time ever come when God's will demands reunion, will react like the faithful son who having honored the father and kept his commandments, reacted with bitterness and hurt upon the father's joyous acceptance of the return of the prodigal.

I am not offering any judgment, but merely food for thought.
Logged
podkarpatska
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,474


Pokrov


WWW
« Reply #77 on: June 12, 2011, 08:39:39 PM »

We might not be going so fast if we'd come to terms on the resumption of communion.

To say that we will not see it in our life time, guarantees that we will not see it in our life time.

I believe it is entirely possible for me to see it in my life time.


The Orthodox position is that communion will be the crowning point of union, not the starting point nor a stage along the way.  

They say it will proceed in the stages that we see in the Liturgy...

"Let us love one another....."   love will be the first stage

".... that we may confess..."  Identity of confession of faith will be stage two

and that will lead very quickly to stage three.... communion.

For any Orthodox who want to brush up on the Orthodox understanding of ecclesiology and communion, there is Bishop Kallistos Ware's Communion and Intercommunion which gives the viewpoint of the Patriarchate of Constantinople ( and I would be sure, of all the Orthodox Churches.)   In a brief booklet he explains why intercommunion is an impossibility for the Orthodox and we shall share communion on that glorious day when unity is complete.

Thank you Father, for that sums up the long standing position of the Orthodox members of the North American Theological Consultation under the spiritual guidance of Metropolitan Maximos these many years. As he is not in the best of health, please remember His Eminence in your prayers. A more humble, gracious, intelligent and pious servant of God, one would be hard pressed to find in any church.
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: 37,831



« Reply #78 on: June 12, 2011, 08:58:17 PM »

The Spirit is descended!
To the OP: Yes, it's on the horizon*.

*The horizon is the apparent line that separates earth from sky and goes away when we are approaching it.
LOL. Perfect.
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: 37,831



« Reply #79 on: June 12, 2011, 09:01:08 PM »

The Spirit is descended!
We might not be going so fast if we'd come to terms on the resumption of communion.

To say that we will not see it in our life time, guarantees that we will not see it in our life time.

I believe it is entirely possible for me to see it in my life time.


The Orthodox position is that communion will be the crowning point of union, not the starting point nor a stage along the way.  

They say it will proceed in the stages that we see in the Liturgy...

"Let us love one another....."   love will be the first stage

".... that we may confess..."  Identity of confession of faith will be stage two

and that will lead very quickly to stage three.... communion.

For any Orthodox who want to brush up on the Orthodox understanding of ecclesiology and communion, there is Bishop Kallistos Ware's Communion and Intercommunion which gives the viewpoint of the Patriarchate of Constantinople ( and I would be sure, of all the Orthodox Churches.)   In a brief booklet he explains why intercommunion is an impossibility for the Orthodox and we shall share communion on that glorious day when unity is complete.

Thank you Father, for that sums up the long standing position of the Orthodox members of the North American Theological Consultation under the spiritual guidance of Metropolitan Maximos these many years. As he is not in the best of health, please remember His Eminence in your prayers. A more humble, gracious, intelligent and pious servant of God, one would be hard pressed to find in any church.
Many years!
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
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #80 on: June 12, 2011, 10:07:21 PM »

The Orthodox position is that communion will be the crowning point of union, not the starting point nor a stage along the way.  

They say it will proceed in the stages that we see in the Liturgy...

"Let us love one another....."   love will be the first stage

".... that we may confess..."  Identity of confession of faith will be stage two

and that will lead very quickly to stage three.... communion.
I wonder how long it will be before the first stage is reached?
Logged
Kasatkin fan
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA - Archdiocese of Canada
Posts: 636



« Reply #81 on: June 12, 2011, 10:27:09 PM »

The Orthodox position is that communion will be the crowning point of union, not the starting point nor a stage along the way.  

They say it will proceed in the stages that we see in the Liturgy...

"Let us love one another....."   love will be the first stage

".... that we may confess..."  Identity of confession of faith will be stage two

and that will lead very quickly to stage three.... communion.
I wonder how long it will be before the first stage is reached?
I don't know. Unlikely until everyone acknowledges it's a two way street.
Logged
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,128



« Reply #82 on: June 13, 2011, 10:14:54 AM »

The Orthodox position is that communion will be the crowning point of union, not the starting point nor a stage along the way.  

That's also a partial explanation of why I don't join the Orthodox Church.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
podkarpatska
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,474


Pokrov


WWW
« Reply #83 on: June 13, 2011, 11:10:03 AM »

The Orthodox position is that communion will be the crowning point of union, not the starting point nor a stage along the way.  

They say it will proceed in the stages that we see in the Liturgy...

"Let us love one another....."   love will be the first stage

".... that we may confess..."  Identity of confession of faith will be stage two

and that will lead very quickly to stage three.... communion.
I wonder how long it will be before the first stage is reached?
I don't know. Unlikely until everyone acknowledges it's a two way street.

Unlike what one might ferret from this board, I do think that there is more love out there than you would think, not universal but it is real.
Logged
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #84 on: June 13, 2011, 03:12:33 PM »

The Orthodox position is that communion will be the crowning point of union, not the starting point nor a stage along the way.  

They say it will proceed in the stages that we see in the Liturgy...

"Let us love one another....."   love will be the first stage

".... that we may confess..."  Identity of confession of faith will be stage two

and that will lead very quickly to stage three.... communion.
I wonder how long it will be before the first stage is reached?
I don't know. Unlikely until everyone acknowledges it's a two way street.

Unlike what one might ferret from this board, I do think that there is more love out there than you would think, not universal but it is real.

What Orthodox faithful do to one another is far far worse than what they do to Catholics.
Logged

podkarpatska
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,474


Pokrov


WWW
« Reply #85 on: June 13, 2011, 03:18:38 PM »

The Orthodox position is that communion will be the crowning point of union, not the starting point nor a stage along the way.  

They say it will proceed in the stages that we see in the Liturgy...

"Let us love one another....."   love will be the first stage

".... that we may confess..."  Identity of confession of faith will be stage two

and that will lead very quickly to stage three.... communion.
I wonder how long it will be before the first stage is reached?
I don't know. Unlikely until everyone acknowledges it's a two way street.

Unlike what one might ferret from this board, I do think that there is more love out there than you would think, not universal but it is real.

What Orthodox faithful do to one another is far far worse than what they do to Catholics.

Ahhh, we're pretty tough on them too..... Wink Wink Wink
Logged
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #86 on: June 13, 2011, 03:24:31 PM »

The Orthodox position is that communion will be the crowning point of union, not the starting point nor a stage along the way.  

They say it will proceed in the stages that we see in the Liturgy...

"Let us love one another....."   love will be the first stage

".... that we may confess..."  Identity of confession of faith will be stage two

and that will lead very quickly to stage three.... communion.
I wonder how long it will be before the first stage is reached?
I don't know. Unlikely until everyone acknowledges it's a two way street.

Unlike what one might ferret from this board, I do think that there is more love out there than you would think, not universal but it is real.

What Orthodox faithful do to one another is far far worse than what they do to Catholics.

Ahhh, we're pretty tough on them too..... Wink Wink Wink

Pretty combative stuff all 'round !!...........
Logged

Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,970


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #87 on: June 13, 2011, 03:33:38 PM »

You are absolutely correct about it needing to be accepted by the whole church. My only point was that Patriarchs are not little popes and don't always get what they want. I think some orthodox and a lot of nonorthodox don't understand that.
Oh lol, I was responding to the posts just before yours from the roman catholic members.
thanks.
Suppose then, that all of the Orthodox Patriarchs and all of the Orthodox bishops and their participating theologians,  reached an agreement with the Roman Pope. Would it be likely to be rejected by the rest of the Orthodox Church?

No. It happened before and failed, ending in recanting or schism. It is not the bishops and theologians who guard the faith, but the people. This is our experiential ecclesiology. It's messy, but it's ours, and we rather like it.
Logged

Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #88 on: June 13, 2011, 03:37:54 PM »

You are absolutely correct about it needing to be accepted by the whole church. My only point was that Patriarchs are not little popes and don't always get what they want. I think some orthodox and a lot of nonorthodox don't understand that.
Oh lol, I was responding to the posts just before yours from the roman catholic members.
thanks.
Suppose then, that all of the Orthodox Patriarchs and all of the Orthodox bishops and their participating theologians,  reached an agreement with the Roman Pope. Would it be likely to be rejected by the rest of the Orthodox Church?

No. It happened before and failed, ending in recanting or schism. It is not the bishops and theologians who guard the faith, but the people. This is our experiential ecclesiology. It's messy, but it's ours, and we rather like it.

One always wonders why you and your coreligionists bother with a hierarchy in any event.  Seems something of a waste...or a contradiction.
Logged

Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,970


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #89 on: June 13, 2011, 03:47:59 PM »

The Orthodox position is that communion will be the crowning point of union, not the starting point nor a stage along the way.  

That's also a partial explanation of why I don't join the Orthodox Church.

And here, with other examples, I think, is why the Orthodox Church and the Roman Catholic Church do not unite, and may never unite in a good way without serious change happening in the Roman Catholic Church. Dogma is not the most serious thing that divides us. Dogmas are assented to easily enough. It is worldview which is much more difficult to change. Our Churches view things in opposing ways. I look at the whole history of the Western Church and see fundamental changes to worldview beginning in the late 11th and 12th centuries, and continuing to the present day, while I see continuities in the Orthodox Church from age to age. You may say this is because my perspective is biased. Fair enough. But I can provide many examples, not in an effort to chastise or assault, but to help you understand what I'm talking about. I'm not sure it would be beneficial to do this publicly since some may be offended, and it is not my intention at all, I only wish t say that the Orthodox Church does not recognize the Roman Catholic Church as being of one mind, and we believe that, as the Church, we have the mind of Christ. This is problematic for corporate reunions and for individual conversions. Whoever comes to the Church must put on Christ, including his mind, which is not divided. I'm not sure if I make myself clear. Some Eastern Catholics have a worldview which is much closer, if not much the same as ours, but I believe the Orthodox Church would have grave difficulty accepting the possibility of being in communion with those who do not share the same mind and spirituality (I don't speak of liturgical rites). Along with changes in dogma, we see more fundamental changes in worldview and spirituality in the West with Roman Catholics and Protestants, than we see with Non-Chalcedonians. (Non-Ephesians, in that they do not accept to call Our Lady the Mother of God and some have done away with icons under Muslim pressure, are of a mind quite different from that of the Orthodox.)
Logged

Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,970


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #90 on: June 13, 2011, 03:50:34 PM »

You are absolutely correct about it needing to be accepted by the whole church. My only point was that Patriarchs are not little popes and don't always get what they want. I think some orthodox and a lot of nonorthodox don't understand that.
Oh lol, I was responding to the posts just before yours from the roman catholic members.
thanks.
Suppose then, that all of the Orthodox Patriarchs and all of the Orthodox bishops and their participating theologians,  reached an agreement with the Roman Pope. Would it be likely to be rejected by the rest of the Orthodox Church?

No. It happened before and failed, ending in recanting or schism. It is not the bishops and theologians who guard the faith, but the people. This is our experiential ecclesiology. It's messy, but it's ours, and we rather like it.

One always wonders why you and your coreligionists bother with a hierarchy in any event.  Seems something of a waste...or a contradiction.

I think you are being provacative again here and you don't really mean what you say. We just believe that it is possible, and has happened before, for hierarchs and emperors to be wrong. At no time have all Orthodox bishops departed into heresy, and the Lord will not permit the grace of the priesthood to disappear before he returns. So, please, end the hyperbole.
Logged

Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,128



« Reply #91 on: June 13, 2011, 03:53:26 PM »

Suppose then, that all of the Orthodox Patriarchs and all of the Orthodox bishops and their participating theologians,  reached an agreement with the Roman Pope. Would it be likely to be rejected by the rest of the Orthodox Church?

No. It happened before and failed, ending in recanting or schism.

I believe you are mistaken there, Shanghaiski. Neither the Council of Florence nor any of the "unions" that happened in subsequent centuries involved all of the Orthodox Patriarchs (much less all of the Orthodox bishops).
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,970


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #92 on: June 13, 2011, 03:55:14 PM »

Neither the Pope or a pan-Orthodox Synod today would compromise any to the doctrine (i.e. for Roman Catholics, innovations since the Great Schism, the Immaculate Conception of the Mother of God, Papal Infallibility), traditions or practices of the churches today
Why do you think it would be impossible for the Roman Church to compromise on papal infallibility and the Immaculate Conception. Although they might not use the word compromise, but in the end, operationally, the teaching could be clarified and brought more in line with the Orthodox teaching of first among equals. This is not unprecedented, since, as you know, the Roman Catholic Church has clarified the teaching on the filioque, so that it gives more weight to the Orthodox position.

And this is another problem. Rome keeps changing what its position is, and then claims its position has never changed. The statement we sign with such a party would not be worth the paper it's printed on. And perhaps we return to the worldview difference.
Logged

Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #93 on: June 13, 2011, 03:58:05 PM »

You are absolutely correct about it needing to be accepted by the whole church. My only point was that Patriarchs are not little popes and don't always get what they want. I think some orthodox and a lot of nonorthodox don't understand that.
Oh lol, I was responding to the posts just before yours from the roman catholic members.
thanks.
Suppose then, that all of the Orthodox Patriarchs and all of the Orthodox bishops and their participating theologians,  reached an agreement with the Roman Pope. Would it be likely to be rejected by the rest of the Orthodox Church?

No. It happened before and failed, ending in recanting or schism. It is not the bishops and theologians who guard the faith, but the people. This is our experiential ecclesiology. It's messy, but it's ours, and we rather like it.
One always wonders why you and your coreligionists bother with a hierarchy in any event.  Seems something of a waste...or a contradiction.

I am sure you know more of Orthodoxy than that statement would lead us to believe.   The primary work of a bishop is that of sanctification.  He is the one from whom all the Sacraments/Mysteries and their grace flow. Without him there are no Sacraments in the Church.   In the Slavonic languages he is known as the "Sviatitel' - he who makes holy.

This is not to downplay his other important Petrine powers of binding and loosing, in maintaining the purity of the faith and in leading the faithful of his diocese, but his work of sanctification is paramount and is occurring every day.
Logged
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,970


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #94 on: June 13, 2011, 04:00:14 PM »

Suppose then, that all of the Orthodox Patriarchs and all of the Orthodox bishops and their participating theologians,  reached an agreement with the Roman Pope. Would it be likely to be rejected by the rest of the Orthodox Church?

No. It happened before and failed, ending in recanting or schism.

I believe you are mistaken there, Shanghaiski. Neither the Council of Florence nor any of the "unions" that happened in subsequent centuries involved all of the Orthodox Patriarchs (much less all of the Orthodox bishops).

I did not explicitly say they did. "All" was understood loosely. My apologies. Okay, so even if all, as in every single living Orthodox bishop and theologian--who are they?--appeared in council and voted on whatever sort of agreement was put on the table leading to full communion, they could still all be wrong if their vote was not in accord with holy tradition. Each bishop, upon his consecration, vows not to make any innovations in the faith, and to uphold the tradition of the Church, that which has been handed down by Christ, his apostles, the holy ecumenical synods, and the saints. I won't go beyond this, being opposed to hypothetical questions in general.
Logged

Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.
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: 37,831



« Reply #95 on: June 13, 2011, 04:01:54 PM »

The Spirit is descended!
You are absolutely correct about it needing to be accepted by the whole church. My only point was that Patriarchs are not little popes and don't always get what they want. I think some orthodox and a lot of nonorthodox don't understand that.
Oh lol, I was responding to the posts just before yours from the roman catholic members.
thanks.
Suppose then, that all of the Orthodox Patriarchs and all of the Orthodox bishops and their participating theologians,  reached an agreement with the Roman Pope. Would it be likely to be rejected by the rest of the Orthodox Church?

No. It happened before and failed, ending in recanting or schism. It is not the bishops and theologians who guard the faith, but the people. This is our experiential ecclesiology. It's messy, but it's ours, and we rather like it.

One always wonders why you and your coreligionists bother with a hierarchy in any event.
 
Because Christ founded it and it works.
Seems something of a waste...or a contradiction.
Your confusion isnt' our contradiction.
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: 37,831



« Reply #96 on: June 13, 2011, 04:04:23 PM »

The Spirit is descended!
You are absolutely correct about it needing to be accepted by the whole church. My only point was that Patriarchs are not little popes and don't always get what they want. I think some orthodox and a lot of nonorthodox don't understand that.
Oh lol, I was responding to the posts just before yours from the roman catholic members.
thanks.
Suppose then, that all of the Orthodox Patriarchs and all of the Orthodox bishops and their participating theologians,  reached an agreement with the Roman Pope. Would it be likely to be rejected by the rest of the Orthodox Church?

No. It happened before and failed, ending in recanting or schism. It is not the bishops and theologians who guard the faith, but the people. This is our experiential ecclesiology. It's messy, but it's ours, and we rather like it.
One always wonders why you and your coreligionists bother with a hierarchy in any event.  Seems something of a waste...or a contradiction.

I am sure you know more of Orthodoxy than that statement would lead us to believe.   The primary work of a bishop is that of sanctification.  He is the one from whom all the Sacraments/Mysteries and their grace flow. Without him there are no Sacraments in the Church.   In the Slavonic languages he is known as the "Sviatitel' - he who makes holy.

This is not to downplay his other important Petrine powers of binding and loosing, in maintaining the purity of the faith and in leading the faithful of his diocese, but his work of sanctification is paramount and is occurring every day.

Indeed, Father! It is the bishops who chrismate the Faithful to keep the episcopacy in line should they be tempted to stray.
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
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,128



« Reply #97 on: June 13, 2011, 04:29:43 PM »

Suppose then, that all of the Orthodox Patriarchs and all of the Orthodox bishops and their participating theologians,  reached an agreement with the Roman Pope. Would it be likely to be rejected by the rest of the Orthodox Church?

No. It happened before and failed, ending in recanting or schism.

I believe you are mistaken there, Shanghaiski. Neither the Council of Florence nor any of the "unions" that happened in subsequent centuries involved all of the Orthodox Patriarchs (much less all of the Orthodox bishops).

I did not explicitly say they did. "All" was understood loosely. My apologies. Okay, so even if all, as in every single living Orthodox bishop and theologian--who are they?--appeared in council and voted on whatever sort of agreement was put on the table leading to full communion, they could still all be wrong if their vote was not in accord with holy tradition. Each bishop, upon his consecration, vows not to make any innovations in the faith, and to uphold the tradition of the Church, that which has been handed down by Christ, his apostles, the holy ecumenical synods, and the saints. I won't go beyond this, being opposed to hypothetical questions in general.

I have to admit that I myself find it to be a rather strange hypothetical.

I'm reminded of Pope John Paul II on the anniversary of one of the "unions". I forget his exact words, but the Orthodox complained that he was making it sound like the Union of Brest could have reunited the two sides but it didn't because of an Orthodox misunderstanding. (My apologies if I'm not expressing the complaint very well.)
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,970


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #98 on: June 13, 2011, 05:17:44 PM »

Suppose then, that all of the Orthodox Patriarchs and all of the Orthodox bishops and their participating theologians,  reached an agreement with the Roman Pope. Would it be likely to be rejected by the rest of the Orthodox Church?

No. It happened before and failed, ending in recanting or schism.

I believe you are mistaken there, Shanghaiski. Neither the Council of Florence nor any of the "unions" that happened in subsequent centuries involved all of the Orthodox Patriarchs (much less all of the Orthodox bishops).

I did not explicitly say they did. "All" was understood loosely. My apologies. Okay, so even if all, as in every single living Orthodox bishop and theologian--who are they?--appeared in council and voted on whatever sort of agreement was put on the table leading to full communion, they could still all be wrong if their vote was not in accord with holy tradition. Each bishop, upon his consecration, vows not to make any innovations in the faith, and to uphold the tradition of the Church, that which has been handed down by Christ, his apostles, the holy ecumenical synods, and the saints. I won't go beyond this, being opposed to hypothetical questions in general.

I have to admit that I myself find it to be a rather strange hypothetical.

I'm reminded of Pope John Paul II on the anniversary of one of the "unions". I forget his exact words, but the Orthodox complained that he was making it sound like the Union of Brest could have reunited the two sides but it didn't because of an Orthodox misunderstanding. (My apologies if I'm not expressing the complaint very well.)

If that comment is accurate, it shows  just how poorly our Churches understand one another, for we did not reject Brest because we did not understand it, but because it did not bring about a real union, as we see it. Even if the Orthodox were presented with an agreement whereby we had to change nothing of our dogma or practice and accept nothing of the Roman Catholic Church's dogma or practice, only enter into communion, it would still be unacceptable to us, not because we want to create difficulties or even want Rome to drop the last 1,000 years, but because the communion would not be real, we would not be of one mind in the faith. It would also be like pretending we have no real differences, which, frankly, is a philosophy I hear from many who advocate open communion. In our tradition, we have always worked to resolve, not dismiss, the differences we have had with  those in schism or heresy. This has happened to varying degrees of success. I respect the desire and the work many have done on both sides, but I think that, often, people enter into religious dialogue as a kind of hobby. Lyons, Florence, and Brest were all rather unbalanced summits with bad terms for us and lots of political pressure on our bishops to conform to their decrees. I think this has has burned our ecclesiastical psyche. For better or worse we look at Roman Catholic proposals with suspicion, often because in what they bill as overtures, we see evidence that they don't understand our position. It has happened so often, we wonder maybe they don't want to understand. We try to state our position clearly, using language which is often blunt and are rebuffed as uncharitable. (I don't say you do this, Peter, I'm speaking only in general, from my observations.) Some things we don't understand, like when the pope dropped the title "Patriarch  of the West" in what was billed, at least by the media, as a gesture of reconciliation. But we have never had a problem with that title, which has existed since Rome was Orthodox. In our view, the west is where Rome belongs. So, this as a gesture toward us we find puzzling, for one example.
Logged

Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #99 on: June 13, 2011, 05:29:20 PM »

You are absolutely correct about it needing to be accepted by the whole church. My only point was that Patriarchs are not little popes and don't always get what they want. I think some orthodox and a lot of nonorthodox don't understand that.
Oh lol, I was responding to the posts just before yours from the roman catholic members.
thanks.
Suppose then, that all of the Orthodox Patriarchs and all of the Orthodox bishops and their participating theologians,  reached an agreement with the Roman Pope. Would it be likely to be rejected by the rest of the Orthodox Church?

No. It happened before and failed, ending in recanting or schism. It is not the bishops and theologians who guard the faith, but the people. This is our experiential ecclesiology. It's messy, but it's ours, and we rather like it.
One always wonders why you and your coreligionists bother with a hierarchy in any event.  Seems something of a waste...or a contradiction.

I am sure you know more of Orthodoxy than that statement would lead us to believe.   The primary work of a bishop is that of sanctification.  He is the one from whom all the Sacraments/Mysteries and their grace flow. Without him there are no Sacraments in the Church.   In the Slavonic languages he is known as the "Sviatitel' - he who makes holy.

This is not to downplay his other important Petrine powers of binding and loosing, in maintaining the purity of the faith and in leading the faithful of his diocese, but his work of sanctification is paramount and is occurring every day.


In the Catholic Church sanctification comes from the Holy Spirit and Indwelling Trinity...with and without our bishops.  Each individual soul is open and capable of theosis and it is not necessary for any bishop to work sanctification in us or certify it in us.
Logged

elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #100 on: June 13, 2011, 05:32:57 PM »

I will ask again, given the range of beliefs within Orthodoxy, what do you envision as a shared faith?  What does that mean in real terms?

Suppose then, that all of the Orthodox Patriarchs and all of the Orthodox bishops and their participating theologians,  reached an agreement with the Roman Pope. Would it be likely to be rejected by the rest of the Orthodox Church?

No. It happened before and failed, ending in recanting or schism.

I believe you are mistaken there, Shanghaiski. Neither the Council of Florence nor any of the "unions" that happened in subsequent centuries involved all of the Orthodox Patriarchs (much less all of the Orthodox bishops).

I did not explicitly say they did. "All" was understood loosely. My apologies. Okay, so even if all, as in every single living Orthodox bishop and theologian--who are they?--appeared in council and voted on whatever sort of agreement was put on the table leading to full communion, they could still all be wrong if their vote was not in accord with holy tradition. Each bishop, upon his consecration, vows not to make any innovations in the faith, and to uphold the tradition of the Church, that which has been handed down by Christ, his apostles, the holy ecumenical synods, and the saints. I won't go beyond this, being opposed to hypothetical questions in general.

I have to admit that I myself find it to be a rather strange hypothetical.

I'm reminded of Pope John Paul II on the anniversary of one of the "unions". I forget his exact words, but the Orthodox complained that he was making it sound like the Union of Brest could have reunited the two sides but it didn't because of an Orthodox misunderstanding. (My apologies if I'm not expressing the complaint very well.)

If that comment is accurate, it shows  just how poorly our Churches understand one another, for we did not reject Brest because we did not understand it, but because it did not bring about a real union, as we see it. Even if the Orthodox were presented with an agreement whereby we had to change nothing of our dogma or practice and accept nothing of the Roman Catholic Church's dogma or practice, only enter into communion, it would still be unacceptable to us, not because we want to create difficulties or even want Rome to drop the last 1,000 years, but because the communion would not be real, we would not be of one mind in the faith. It would also be like pretending we have no real differences, which, frankly, is a philosophy I hear from many who advocate open communion. In our tradition, we have always worked to resolve, not dismiss, the differences we have had with  those in schism or heresy. This has happened to varying degrees of success. I respect the desire and the work many have done on both sides, but I think that, often, people enter into religious dialogue as a kind of hobby. Lyons, Florence, and Brest were all rather unbalanced summits with bad terms for us and lots of political pressure on our bishops to conform to their decrees. I think this has has burned our ecclesiastical psyche. For better or worse we look at Roman Catholic proposals with suspicion, often because in what they bill as overtures, we see evidence that they don't understand our position. It has happened so often, we wonder maybe they don't want to understand. We try to state our position clearly, using language which is often blunt and are rebuffed as uncharitable. (I don't say you do this, Peter, I'm speaking only in general, from my observations.) Some things we don't understand, like when the pope dropped the title "Patriarch  of the West" in what was billed, at least by the media, as a gesture of reconciliation. But we have never had a problem with that title, which has existed since Rome was Orthodox. In our view, the west is where Rome belongs. So, this as a gesture toward us we find puzzling, for one example.
Logged

Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,970


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #101 on: June 13, 2011, 05:54:45 PM »

I will ask again, given the range of beliefs within Orthodoxy, what do you envision as a shared faith?  What does that mean in real terms?

Suppose then, that all of the Orthodox Patriarchs and all of the Orthodox bishops and their participating theologians,  reached an agreement with the Roman Pope. Would it be likely to be rejected by the rest of the Orthodox Church?

No. It happened before and failed, ending in recanting or schism.

I believe you are mistaken there, Shanghaiski. Neither the Council of Florence nor any of the "unions" that happened in subsequent centuries involved all of the Orthodox Patriarchs (much less all of the Orthodox bishops).

I did not explicitly say they did. "All" was understood loosely. My apologies. Okay, so even if all, as in every single living Orthodox bishop and theologian--who are they?--appeared in council and voted on whatever sort of agreement was put on the table leading to full communion, they could still all be wrong if their vote was not in accord with holy tradition. Each bishop, upon his consecration, vows not to make any innovations in the faith, and to uphold the tradition of the Church, that which has been handed down by Christ, his apostles, the holy ecumenical synods, and the saints. I won't go beyond this, being opposed to hypothetical questions in general.

I have to admit that I myself find it to be a rather strange hypothetical.

I'm reminded of Pope John Paul II on the anniversary of one of the "unions". I forget his exact words, but the Orthodox complained that he was making it sound like the Union of Brest could have reunited the two sides but it didn't because of an Orthodox misunderstanding. (My apologies if I'm not expressing the complaint very well.)

If that comment is accurate, it shows  just how poorly our Churches understand one another, for we did not reject Brest because we did not understand it, but because it did not bring about a real union, as we see it. Even if the Orthodox were presented with an agreement whereby we had to change nothing of our dogma or practice and accept nothing of the Roman Catholic Church's dogma or practice, only enter into communion, it would still be unacceptable to us, not because we want to create difficulties or even want Rome to drop the last 1,000 years, but because the communion would not be real, we would not be of one mind in the faith. It would also be like pretending we have no real differences, which, frankly, is a philosophy I hear from many who advocate open communion. In our tradition, we have always worked to resolve, not dismiss, the differences we have had with  those in schism or heresy. This has happened to varying degrees of success. I respect the desire and the work many have done on both sides, but I think that, often, people enter into religious dialogue as a kind of hobby. Lyons, Florence, and Brest were all rather unbalanced summits with bad terms for us and lots of political pressure on our bishops to conform to their decrees. I think this has has burned our ecclesiastical psyche. For better or worse we look at Roman Catholic proposals with suspicion, often because in what they bill as overtures, we see evidence that they don't understand our position. It has happened so often, we wonder maybe they don't want to understand. We try to state our position clearly, using language which is often blunt and are rebuffed as uncharitable. (I don't say you do this, Peter, I'm speaking only in general, from my observations.) Some things we don't understand, like when the pope dropped the title "Patriarch  of the West" in what was billed, at least by the media, as a gesture of reconciliation. But we have never had a problem with that title, which has existed since Rome was Orthodox. In our view, the west is where Rome belongs. So, this as a gesture toward us we find puzzling, for one example.

And what do you envision as the "range of beliefs?" I could say the same exists, and perhaps with broader range, in the Roman Catholic Church. That is not the point. You are not listening to what I am saying.
Logged

Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #102 on: June 13, 2011, 05:59:42 PM »

I will ask again, given the range of beliefs within Orthodoxy, what do you envision as a shared faith?  What does that mean in real terms?

Suppose then, that all of the Orthodox Patriarchs and all of the Orthodox bishops and their participating theologians,  reached an agreement with the Roman Pope. Would it be likely to be rejected by the rest of the Orthodox Church?

No. It happened before and failed, ending in recanting or schism.

I believe you are mistaken there, Shanghaiski. Neither the Council of Florence nor any of the "unions" that happened in subsequent centuries involved all of the Orthodox Patriarchs (much less all of the Orthodox bishops).

I did not explicitly say they did. "All" was understood loosely. My apologies. Okay, so even if all, as in every single living Orthodox bishop and theologian--who are they?--appeared in council and voted on whatever sort of agreement was put on the table leading to full communion, they could still all be wrong if their vote was not in accord with holy tradition. Each bishop, upon his consecration, vows not to make any innovations in the faith, and to uphold the tradition of the Church, that which has been handed down by Christ, his apostles, the holy ecumenical synods, and the saints. I won't go beyond this, being opposed to hypothetical questions in general.

I have to admit that I myself find it to be a rather strange hypothetical.

I'm reminded of Pope John Paul II on the anniversary of one of the "unions". I forget his exact words, but the Orthodox complained that he was making it sound like the Union of Brest could have reunited the two sides but it didn't because of an Orthodox misunderstanding. (My apologies if I'm not expressing the complaint very well.)

If that comment is accurate, it shows  just how poorly our Churches understand one another, for we did not reject Brest because we did not understand it, but because it did not bring about a real union, as we see it. Even if the Orthodox were presented with an agreement whereby we had to change nothing of our dogma or practice and accept nothing of the Roman Catholic Church's dogma or practice, only enter into communion, it would still be unacceptable to us, not because we want to create difficulties or even want Rome to drop the last 1,000 years, but because the communion would not be real, we would not be of one mind in the faith. It would also be like pretending we have no real differences, which, frankly, is a philosophy I hear from many who advocate open communion. In our tradition, we have always worked to resolve, not dismiss, the differences we have had with  those in schism or heresy. This has happened to varying degrees of success. I respect the desire and the work many have done on both sides, but I think that, often, people enter into religious dialogue as a kind of hobby. Lyons, Florence, and Brest were all rather unbalanced summits with bad terms for us and lots of political pressure on our bishops to conform to their decrees. I think this has has burned our ecclesiastical psyche. For better or worse we look at Roman Catholic proposals with suspicion, often because in what they bill as overtures, we see evidence that they don't understand our position. It has happened so often, we wonder maybe they don't want to understand. We try to state our position clearly, using language which is often blunt and are rebuffed as uncharitable. (I don't say you do this, Peter, I'm speaking only in general, from my observations.) Some things we don't understand, like when the pope dropped the title "Patriarch  of the West" in what was billed, at least by the media, as a gesture of reconciliation. But we have never had a problem with that title, which has existed since Rome was Orthodox. In our view, the west is where Rome belongs. So, this as a gesture toward us we find puzzling, for one example.

And what do you envision as the "range of beliefs?" I could say the same exists, and perhaps with broader range, in the Roman Catholic Church. That is not the point. You are not listening to what I am saying.

There's outright de facto schism in the Roman rite.  But that is not the case in Orthodoxy.  There is an observable tolerance for variation in doctrinal teachings, and in the anthropologies of tradition or popular piety, and in liturgical prayer.  Yet you will not extend that to the Catholic Church.  I find that interesting.  Not judging it here just noting it.

What am I missing that you are saying?  I am only addressing one of your points so I may not be missing it...quite...just not noting it at the moment.  You latest posts have been pretty substantial and I am not trying to address it all at once.  No time or mind for that at the moment.

M.
Logged

James2
Mr.
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: skeptic
Posts: 749



« Reply #103 on: June 13, 2011, 06:06:53 PM »

I can envision large segments of the Catholic and Orthodox churches reuniting within 10-20 years.  But such reunions would be accompanied by further schisms on both sides by the many who would refuse to accept them.  One of the difficulties is that, while each church has its own history of continuous and consistent development, many of these developments took place in relative isolation from each other during the first millennium, such that the roots of the schism lie centuries before it was consummated (whenever that was).  For example, one of the posts on this thread includes acceptance of the Quinisext Council as a condition for reunion, but some of the acts of this council were very controversial in the Western Church of the 7th-8th centuries and remain so to this day.  Another obstacle is the history of mutual persecution between the two Churches which is so hard to forget.  Feuds are easy to start but hard to stop without a tremendous amount of humility and goodwill.
Logged
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,970


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #104 on: June 13, 2011, 06:18:26 PM »

I can envision large segments of the Catholic and Orthodox churches reuniting within 10-20 years.  But such reunions would be accompanied by further schisms on both sides by the many who would refuse to accept them.  One of the difficulties is that, while each church has its own history of continuous and consistent development, many of these developments took place in relative isolation from each other during the first millennium, such that the roots of the schism lie centuries before it was consummated (whenever that was).  For example, one of the posts on this thread includes acceptance of the Quinisext Council as a condition for reunion, but some of the acts of this council were very controversial in the Western Church of the 7th-8th centuries and remain so to this day.  Another obstacle is the history of mutual persecution between the two Churches which is so hard to forget.  Feuds are easy to start but hard to stop without a tremendous amount of humility and goodwill.

"Mutual persecution" may need to be qualified in another thread.
Logged

Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,128



« Reply #105 on: June 13, 2011, 07:23:16 PM »

The Orthodox position is that communion will be the crowning point of union, not the starting point nor a stage along the way.  

They say it will proceed in the stages that we see in the Liturgy...

"Let us love one another....."   love will be the first stage

".... that we may confess..."  Identity of confession of faith will be stage two

and that will lead very quickly to stage three.... communion.
I wonder how long it will be before the first stage is reached?
I don't know. Unlikely until everyone acknowledges it's a two way street.

Unlike what one might ferret from this board, I do think that there is more love out there than you would think, not universal but it is real.

I would venture to say that the main thing at this point is to get to know, and understand, one another.

I happened upon an interesting tidbit today, "Eastern Schism: A Thing of the Past?" which is an "Interview With Father Marko Rupnik, of Aletti Center". (Don't ask me what the Aletti Center is, because I won't tell you.) Here's the bit that caught my attention:

Quote
Q: What happened, then, to those disputed issues? For example, the most famous, the "Filioque."

Father Rupnik: On the question of the "Filioque," namely, the fact that the Holy Spirit does not proceed only from the Father, but also from the Son, there is nothing left, as the Catholic Church, in a declaration a few years ago, totally resolved the question, which today does not represent any difficulty with the East.

It sounds to me like we still have a ways to go as far as understanding one another.


P.S. Speculation ... I wonder what the reaction would be if a published interview contained this:

"Q: What happened, then, to those disputed issues between Catholic and Presbyterians? For example, the most famous, predestination.

Father X: On the question of the predestination, there is nothing left, as the Catholic Church, in a declaration a few years ago, totally resolved the question, which today does not represent any difficulty with the Presbyterians."
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #106 on: June 13, 2011, 07:44:49 PM »

The Orthodox position is that communion will be the crowning point of union, not the starting point nor a stage along the way. 

They say it will proceed in the stages that we see in the Liturgy...

"Let us love one another....."   love will be the first stage

".... that we may confess..."  Identity of confession of faith will be stage two

and that will lead very quickly to stage three.... communion.
I wonder how long it will be before the first stage is reached?
I don't know. Unlikely until everyone acknowledges it's a two way street.

Unlike what one might ferret from this board, I do think that there is more love out there than you would think, not universal but it is real.

I would venture to say that the main thing at this point is to get to know, and understand, one another.

I happened upon an interesting tidbit today, "Eastern Schism: A Thing of the Past?" which is an "Interview With Father Marko Rupnik, of Aletti Center". (Don't ask me what the Aletti Center is, because I won't tell you.) Here's the bit that caught my attention:

Quote
Q: What happened, then, to those disputed issues? For example, the most famous, the "Filioque."

Father Rupnik: On the question of the "Filioque," namely, the fact that the Holy Spirit does not proceed only from the Father, but also from the Son, there is nothing left, as the Catholic Church, in a declaration a few years ago, totally resolved the question, which today does not represent any difficulty with the East.

It sounds to me like we still have a ways to go as far as understanding one another.


P.S. Speculation ... I wonder what the reaction would be if a published interview contained this:

"Q: What happened, then, to those disputed issues between Catholic and Presbyterians? For example, the most famous, predestination.

Father X: On the question of the predestination, there is nothing left, as the Catholic Church, in a declaration a few years ago, totally resolved the question, which today does not represent any difficulty with the Presbyterians."


A very real example of how shared faith is not is the Joint Declaration on Justification with Lutherans [some Lutherans] and Catholics.  There is not a shared teaching at all on at least one very important issue which results in the teaching, on the part of Catholics, concerning infused virtue at Baptism and the Indwelling Trinity.  That still, apparently, does not compute with members of the ELCA...at least based on my own personal experience.

Also at the last moment Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger moved in and changed the language of one of the statements so that it comported more closely with Catholic teaching and which started the hue and cry in the ELCA that their signing members had sold out Lutheran teaching.

Can Orthodox and Catholics do better than that?  I think so indeed!

« Last Edit: June 13, 2011, 07:45:13 PM by elijahmaria » Logged

Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,128



« Reply #107 on: June 13, 2011, 08:24:45 PM »

A very real example of how shared faith is not is the Joint Declaration on Justification with Lutherans [some Lutherans] and Catholics.  There is not a shared teaching at all on at least one very important issue which results in the teaching, on the part of Catholics, concerning infused virtue at Baptism and the Indwelling Trinity.  That still, apparently, does not compute with members of the ELCA...at least based on my own personal experience.

Also at the last moment Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger moved in and changed the language of one of the statements so that it comported more closely with Catholic teaching and which started the hue and cry in the ELCA that their signing members had sold out Lutheran teaching.

That's an excellent example, and an excellent contrast with:

Quote
Q: What happened, then, to those disputed issues? For example, the most famous, the "Filioque."

Father Rupnik: On the question of the "Filioque," namely, the fact that the Holy Spirit does not proceed only from the Father, but also from the Son, there is nothing left, as the Catholic Church, in a declaration a few years ago, totally resolved the question, which today does not represent any difficulty with the East.

Can Orthodox and Catholics do better than that?  I think so indeed!

Yes, I think Orthodox and Catholics do better than both of those examples.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
bogdan
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 1,615



« Reply #108 on: June 13, 2011, 09:32:59 PM »

I can envision large segments of the Catholic and Orthodox churches reuniting within 10-20 years.  But such reunions would be accompanied by further schisms on both sides by the many who would refuse to accept them.

I don't think that will happen. If we can only manage to reunite "large segments", that means it moved too fast. A bitter divorce is not something that can be pushed together so quickly without getting very messy. It would be a greater sin to move too quickly and cause new schisms than to remain divided, I feel. If that means it takes 1000 years instead of 100, it's a small price to pay.

Unity must be Kata Holos—Catholic, "according to the whole"—not just according to a few, or even according to most.
« Last Edit: June 13, 2011, 09:38:12 PM by bogdan » Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #109 on: June 13, 2011, 09:33:36 PM »

[
I happened upon an interesting tidbit today, "Eastern Schism: A Thing of the Past?" which is an "Interview With Father Marko Rupnik, of Aletti Center". (Don't ask me what the Aletti Center is, because I won't tell you.) Here's the bit that caught my attention:

Quote
Q: What happened, then, to those disputed issues? For example, the most famous, the "Filioque."

Father Rupnik: On the question of the "Filioque," namely, the fact that the Holy Spirit does not proceed only from the Father, but also from the Son, there is nothing left, as the Catholic Church, in a declaration a few years ago, totally resolved the question, which today does not represent any difficulty with the East.

His faith that the Vatican can kiss a disputed issue and make it all better is touching.  But really! the man is living in an alternative universe.

Oh, I've just noticed it is a Zenit article.  Zenit is known for being uber optimistic that the Orthodox are about to submit to Rome.   laugh
Logged
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,128



« Reply #110 on: June 13, 2011, 10:06:37 PM »

A very real example of how shared faith is not is the Joint Declaration on Justification with Lutherans [some Lutherans] and Catholics.  There is not a shared teaching at all on at least one very important issue which results in the teaching, on the part of Catholics, concerning infused virtue at Baptism and the Indwelling Trinity.  That still, apparently, does not compute with members of the ELCA...at least based on my own personal experience.

Also at the last moment Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger moved in and changed the language of one of the statements so that it comported more closely with Catholic teaching and which started the hue and cry in the ELCA that their signing members had sold out Lutheran teaching.

That's an excellent example, and an excellent contrast with:

Quote
Q: What happened, then, to those disputed issues? For example, the most famous, the "Filioque."

Father Rupnik: On the question of the "Filioque," namely, the fact that the Holy Spirit does not proceed only from the Father, but also from the Son, there is nothing left, as the Catholic Church, in a declaration a few years ago, totally resolved the question, which today does not represent any difficulty with the East.

Can Orthodox and Catholics do better than that?  I think so indeed!

Yes, I think Orthodox and Catholics do better than both of those examples.

I just realized I wrote "do" when I meant to write "can do"

Yes, I think Orthodox and Catholics can do better than both of those examples.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,128



« Reply #111 on: June 13, 2011, 10:10:50 PM »

[
I happened upon an interesting tidbit today, "Eastern Schism: A Thing of the Past?" which is an "Interview With Father Marko Rupnik, of Aletti Center". (Don't ask me what the Aletti Center is, because I won't tell you.) Here's the bit that caught my attention:

Quote
Q: What happened, then, to those disputed issues? For example, the most famous, the "Filioque."

Father Rupnik: On the question of the "Filioque," namely, the fact that the Holy Spirit does not proceed only from the Father, but also from the Son, there is nothing left, as the Catholic Church, in a declaration a few years ago, totally resolved the question, which today does not represent any difficulty with the East.

His faith that the Vatican can kiss a disputed issue and make it all better is touching.  But really! the man is living in an alternative universe.

I think his remark was quite presumptuous. In any case, it illustrates just the opposite of what he meant to illustrate: how far away reunion really is.

Oh, I've just noticed it is a Zenit article.  Zenit is known for being uber optimistic that the Orthodox are about to submit to Rome.   laugh

Hmmm I wasn't aware of that.
« Last Edit: June 13, 2011, 10:14:08 PM by Peter J » Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Kasatkin fan
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA - Archdiocese of Canada
Posts: 636



« Reply #112 on: June 13, 2011, 11:50:52 PM »

You are absolutely correct about it needing to be accepted by the whole church. My only point was that Patriarchs are not little popes and don't always get what they want. I think some orthodox and a lot of nonorthodox don't understand that.
Oh lol, I was responding to the posts just before yours from the roman catholic members.
thanks.
Suppose then, that all of the Orthodox Patriarchs and all of the Orthodox bishops and their participating theologians,  reached an agreement with the Roman Pope. Would it be likely to be rejected by the rest of the Orthodox Church?

No. It happened before and failed, ending in recanting or schism. It is not the bishops and theologians who guard the faith, but the people. This is our experiential ecclesiology. It's messy, but it's ours, and we rather like it.

One always wonders why you and your coreligionists bother with a hierarchy in any event.  Seems something of a waste...or a contradiction.
I've often wondered the same about you and your coreligionists (apparently only one of us is Christian).
Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #113 on: June 14, 2011, 01:03:33 AM »

Okay, so even if all, as in every single living Orthodox bishop and theologian--who are they?--appeared in council and voted on whatever sort of agreement was put on the table leading to full communion, they could still all be wrong if their vote was not in accord with holy tradition.
This is interesting in that you say that all of the Orthodox Patriarchs, together with all of the Orthodox bishops and participating theologians could all be in error. So this group of all Orthodox Patriarchs, all Orthodox bishops and participating theologians would not be under the protection of the Holy Spirit, according to your view.
Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #114 on: June 14, 2011, 01:06:14 AM »

Zenit is known for being uber optimistic that the Orthodox are about to submit to Rome. 
My guess is that it is more like positive thinking.
Logged
Kasatkin fan
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA - Archdiocese of Canada
Posts: 636



« Reply #115 on: June 14, 2011, 01:08:22 AM »

Okay, so even if all, as in every single living Orthodox bishop and theologian--who are they?--appeared in council and voted on whatever sort of agreement was put on the table leading to full communion, they could still all be wrong if their vote was not in accord with holy tradition.
This is interesting in that you say that all of the Orthodox Patriarchs, together with all of the Orthodox bishops and participating theologians could all be in error. So this group of all Orthodox Patriarchs, all Orthodox bishops and participating theologians would not be under the protection of the Holy Spirit, according to your view.
The Holy Spirit protects the Church as a whole. None of those groups are the Church as a whole.

It is unlikely that all bishops (Patriarchs are bishops, you don't need to list them seperately) and all theologeons (using the term loosly, as it is used in the west) would be wrong, but such an event itself is not something we believe to be impossible.
Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #116 on: June 14, 2011, 01:11:28 AM »

Suppose then, that all of the Orthodox Patriarchs and all of the Orthodox bishops and their participating theologians,  reached an agreement with the Roman Pope. Would it be likely to be rejected by the rest of the Orthodox Church?

No. It happened before and failed, ending in recanting or schism.

I believe you are mistaken there, Shanghaiski. Neither the Council of Florence nor any of the "unions" that happened in subsequent centuries involved all of the Orthodox Patriarchs (much less all of the Orthodox bishops).

I did not explicitly say they did. "All" was understood loosely. My apologies. Okay, so even if all, as in every single living Orthodox bishop and theologian--who are they?--appeared in council and voted on whatever sort of agreement was put on the table leading to full communion, they could still all be wrong if their vote was not in accord with holy tradition. Each bishop, upon his consecration, vows not to make any innovations in the faith, and to uphold the tradition of the Church, that which has been handed down by Christ, his apostles, the holy ecumenical synods, and the saints. I won't go beyond this, being opposed to hypothetical questions in general.

I have to admit that I myself find it to be a rather strange hypothetical.

I'm reminded of Pope John Paul II on the anniversary of one of the "unions". I forget his exact words, but the Orthodox complained that he was making it sound like the Union of Brest could have reunited the two sides but it didn't because of an Orthodox misunderstanding. (My apologies if I'm not expressing the complaint very well.)

If that comment is accurate, it shows  just how poorly our Churches understand one another, for we did not reject Brest because we did not understand it, but because it did not bring about a real union, as we see it. Even if the Orthodox were presented with an agreement whereby we had to change nothing of our dogma or practice and accept nothing of the Roman Catholic Church's dogma or practice, only enter into communion, it would still be unacceptable to us, not because we want to create difficulties or even want Rome to drop the last 1,000 years, but because the communion would not be real, we would not be of one mind in the faith. It would also be like pretending we have no real differences, which, frankly, is a philosophy I hear from many who advocate open communion. In our tradition, we have always worked to resolve, not dismiss, the differences we have had with  those in schism or heresy. This has happened to varying degrees of success. I respect the desire and the work many have done on both sides, but I think that, often, people enter into religious dialogue as a kind of hobby. Lyons, Florence, and Brest were all rather unbalanced summits with bad terms for us and lots of political pressure on our bishops to conform to their decrees. I think this has has burned our ecclesiastical psyche. For better or worse we look at Roman Catholic proposals with suspicion, often because in what they bill as overtures, we see evidence that they don't understand our position. It has happened so often, we wonder maybe they don't want to understand. We try to state our position clearly, using language which is often blunt and are rebuffed as uncharitable. (I don't say you do this, Peter, I'm speaking only in general, from my observations.) Some things we don't understand, like when the pope dropped the title "Patriarch  of the West" in what was billed, at least by the media, as a gesture of reconciliation. But we have never had a problem with that title, which has existed since Rome was Orthodox. In our view, the west is where Rome belongs. So, this as a gesture toward us we find puzzling, for one example.
There is a point here. I also did not understand why the Pope would want to drop the title of Patriarch of the West. But accepting the fact that he did drop the title, I don't understand how that promotes union with the Orthodox Church? It seems like it might be perceived as  better for reunion, if the Pope accepted the title of Patriarch of the West or of Rome, or of the Roman Church or something like that?
Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #117 on: June 14, 2011, 01:13:17 AM »

Okay, so even if all, as in every single living Orthodox bishop and theologian--who are they?--appeared in council and voted on whatever sort of agreement was put on the table leading to full communion, they could still all be wrong if their vote was not in accord with holy tradition.
This is interesting in that you say that all of the Orthodox Patriarchs, together with all of the Orthodox bishops and participating theologians could all be in error. So this group of all Orthodox Patriarchs, all Orthodox bishops and participating theologians would not be under the protection of the Holy Spirit, according to your view.
The Holy Spirit protects the Church as a whole. None of those groups are the Church as a whole.

It is unlikely that all bishops (Patriarchs are bishops, you don't need to list them seperately) and all theologeons (using the term loosly, as it is used in the west) would be wrong, but such an event itself is not something we believe to be impossible.
Then, that would be a major difference with Roman Catholicism, I think.
Logged
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #118 on: June 14, 2011, 04:59:11 AM »

It is unlikely that all bishops (Patriarchs are bishops, you don't need to list them seperately) and all theologeons (using the term loosly, as it is used in the west) would be wrong, but such an event itself is not something we believe to be impossible.

How? There is no Church without a Bishop. There has to be at least one (or three) left.
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,128



« Reply #119 on: June 14, 2011, 07:49:27 AM »

Zenit is known for being uber optimistic that the Orthodox are about to submit to Rome. 
My guess is that it is more like positive thinking.

I'd like to agree with you, but frankly I have to admit that I find it strange.

Just consider if the interview had instead said this:

"Q: What happened, then, to those disputed issues between Catholic and Presbyterians? For example, the most famous, predestination.

Father X: On the question of the predestination, there is nothing left, as the Catholic Church, in a declaration a few years ago, totally resolved the question, which today does not represent any difficulty with the Presbyterians."

We won't be seeing that, I'll bet you. What are we to conclude? That Catholics have more respect for Presbyterians than for Orthodox?
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,970


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #120 on: June 14, 2011, 10:00:13 AM »

It is unlikely that all bishops (Patriarchs are bishops, you don't need to list them seperately) and all theologeons (using the term loosly, as it is used in the west) would be wrong, but such an event itself is not something we believe to be impossible.

How? There is no Church without a Bishop. There has to be at least one (or three) left.

But nothing prevents bishops from repenting, as those who kissed the pope in Florence, corrected by the crowds of the faithful, changed their position to the side of truth.
Logged

Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #121 on: June 14, 2011, 11:38:12 AM »

It is unlikely that all bishops (Patriarchs are bishops, you don't need to list them seperately) and all theologeons (using the term loosly, as it is used in the west) would be wrong, but such an event itself is not something we believe to be impossible.

How? There is no Church without a Bishop. There has to be at least one (or three) left.

But nothing prevents bishops from repenting, as those who kissed the pope in Florence, corrected by the crowds of the faithful, changed their position to the side of truth.

Point for you.
« Last Edit: June 14, 2011, 12:01:39 PM by Michał Kalina » Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
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: 37,831



« Reply #122 on: June 14, 2011, 12:05:22 PM »

The Spirit is descended!
I happened upon an interesting tidbit today, "Eastern Schism: A Thing of the Past?" which is an "Interview With Father Marko Rupnik, of Aletti Center". (Don't ask me what the Aletti Center is, because I won't tell you.)
LOL. Hiding the horror?
http://www.centroaletti.com/
Quote
The Pontifical Oriental Institute ("Pontificium Institutum Orientalium" in Latin, "Pontificio Instituto Orientale" in Italian) is the premier center for the study of Eastern Christianity in Rome, Italy.  The pontifical school was established in 1917 by Pope Benedict XV. Pope Pius XI entrusted the Institute to the Society of Jesus in 1922, and with the 1928 encyclical "Rerum Orientalium", encouraged bishops to send students to the Institute to be formed as future professors in Oriental studies....The Institute has been located across from the Basilica of Santa Maria Maggiore since 1926. It is separated from the Collegium Russicum by the Church of Saint Antony.

According to article 16 of the Lateran Treaty, signed in 1929 between Italy and the Holy See, the property of the Oriental Institutue enjoys a certain level of extraterritoriality, with the Holy See having all rights over the infrastructure without interference from the Italian State, and free from all Italian taxation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontifical_Oriental_Institute

So, this is the opinion of the Vatican's expert on the East, what they are teaching those they are sending East. Like you said...
« Last Edit: June 14, 2011, 12:10:55 PM by ialmisry » 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
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,970


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #123 on: June 14, 2011, 12:38:24 PM »

It is unlikely that all bishops (Patriarchs are bishops, you don't need to list them seperately) and all theologeons (using the term loosly, as it is used in the west) would be wrong, but such an event itself is not something we believe to be impossible.

How? There is no Church without a Bishop. There has to be at least one (or three) left.

But nothing prevents bishops from repenting, as those who kissed the pope in Florence, corrected by the crowds of the faithful, changed their position to the side of truth.

Point for you.

Not sure what you mean by this.
Logged

Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #124 on: June 14, 2011, 02:01:26 PM »

Not sure what you mean by this.

It must be a Polish-only idiom. It means that you are right with that.
Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,970


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #125 on: June 14, 2011, 02:26:35 PM »

Not sure what you mean by this.

It must be a Polish-only idiom. It means that you are right with that.

Or it could be an idiom used on fora by persons far more tech-savvy than myself. Smiley
Logged

Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.
Kasatkin fan
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA - Archdiocese of Canada
Posts: 636



« Reply #126 on: June 14, 2011, 02:40:47 PM »

It is unlikely that all bishops (Patriarchs are bishops, you don't need to list them seperately) and all theologeons (using the term loosly, as it is used in the west) would be wrong, but such an event itself is not something we believe to be impossible.

How? There is no Church without a Bishop. There has to be at least one (or three) left.
True. I suppose it is impossible then.
Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #127 on: June 15, 2011, 01:05:06 AM »

Zenit is known for being uber optimistic that the Orthodox are about to submit to Rome. 
My guess is that it is more like positive thinking.

I'd like to agree with you, but frankly I have to admit that I find it strange.

Just consider if the interview had instead said this:

"Q: What happened, then, to those disputed issues between Catholic and Presbyterians? For example, the most famous, predestination.

Father X: On the question of the predestination, there is nothing left, as the Catholic Church, in a declaration a few years ago, totally resolved the question, which today does not represent any difficulty with the Presbyterians."

We won't be seeing that, I'll bet you. What are we to conclude? That Catholics have more respect for Presbyterians than for Orthodox?
I don't see an analogy between the situation of Catholics vis a vis Presbyterians and Catholics vis a vis Orthodox. Catholics recognise the Orthodox priesthood.
Logged
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,128



« Reply #128 on: June 15, 2011, 09:35:21 AM »

Zenit is known for being uber optimistic that the Orthodox are about to submit to Rome. 
My guess is that it is more like positive thinking.

I'd like to agree with you, but frankly I have to admit that I find it strange.

Just consider if the interview had instead said this:

"Q: What happened, then, to those disputed issues between Catholic and Presbyterians? For example, the most famous, predestination.

Father X: On the question of the predestination, there is nothing left, as the Catholic Church, in a declaration a few years ago, totally resolved the question, which today does not represent any difficulty with the Presbyterians."

We won't be seeing that, I'll bet you. What are we to conclude? That Catholics have more respect for Presbyterians than for Orthodox?
I don't see an analogy between the situation of Catholics vis a vis Presbyterians and Catholics vis a vis Orthodox. Catholics recognise the Orthodox priesthood.

I'm not sure what you're getting at. If you think about it, the fact that we recognize the validity of the Orthodox priesthood, but not the Presbyterian ministry, is all the more reason that we should be showing more respect toward Orthodox than toward Presbyterians.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,128



« Reply #129 on: June 15, 2011, 10:35:35 AM »

The Spirit is descended!
I happened upon an interesting tidbit today, "Eastern Schism: A Thing of the Past?" which is an "Interview With Father Marko Rupnik, of Aletti Center". (Don't ask me what the Aletti Center is, because I won't tell you.)
LOL. Hiding the horror?

You can't handle the truth. No, truth-handler, you. I deride your truth-handling abilities.

For anyone who doesn't already know, that line's from Robert "Sideshow Bob" Terwilliger (obviously a parody of A Few Good Men).

Seriously though, I could have said "Don't ask me what the Aletti Center is, because I don't know." But I decided it sounded better the other way.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
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: 37,831



« Reply #130 on: June 15, 2011, 11:37:29 AM »

The Spirit is descended!
I happened upon an interesting tidbit today, "Eastern Schism: A Thing of the Past?" which is an "Interview With Father Marko Rupnik, of Aletti Center". (Don't ask me what the Aletti Center is, because I won't tell you.)
LOL. Hiding the horror?

You can't handle the truth. No, truth-handler, you. I deride your truth-handling abilities.

For anyone who doesn't already know, that line's from Robert "Sideshow Bob" Terwilliger (obviously a parody of A Few Good Men).

Seriously though, I could have said "Don't ask me what the Aletti Center is, because I don't know." But I decided it sounded better the other way.
LOL. Truth-handling.  Is that like snake handling?
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
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,128



« Reply #131 on: June 15, 2011, 11:53:40 AM »

Careful there, if you keep joking with Catholics someone might think you're an ecumaniac.  Shocked
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,970


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #132 on: June 15, 2011, 02:03:57 PM »

Careful there, if you keep joking with Catholics someone might think you're an ecumaniac.  Shocked

I invented that word. Please, pay the royalty.
Logged

Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #133 on: June 15, 2011, 06:53:58 PM »

Zenit is known for being uber optimistic that the Orthodox are about to submit to Rome. 
My guess is that it is more like positive thinking.

I'd like to agree with you, but frankly I have to admit that I find it strange.

Just consider if the interview had instead said this:

"Q: What happened, then, to those disputed issues between Catholic and Presbyterians? For example, the most famous, predestination.

Father X: On the question of the predestination, there is nothing left, as the Catholic Church, in a declaration a few years ago, totally resolved the question, which today does not represent any difficulty with the Presbyterians."

We won't be seeing that, I'll bet you. What are we to conclude? That Catholics have more respect for Presbyterians than for Orthodox?
I don't see an analogy between the situation of Catholics vis a vis Presbyterians and Catholics vis a vis Orthodox. Catholics recognise the Orthodox priesthood.

I'm not sure what you're getting at. If you think about it, the fact that we recognize the validity of the Orthodox priesthood, but not the Presbyterian ministry, is all the more reason that we should be showing more respect toward Orthodox than toward Presbyterians.
Right
Logged
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,128



« Reply #134 on: June 15, 2011, 07:28:27 PM »

Careful there, if you keep joking with Catholics someone might think you're an ecumaniac.  Shocked

I invented that word. Please, pay the royalty.

Alright, but I invented the word royalty, so you owe me as well.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,192


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #135 on: June 16, 2011, 11:26:46 AM »

You know what, after years of considering this matter, I think that we Catholics really need to clean house before we can seriously provide something to which Eastern Orthodox Christians would want to be reunited.
1. The Liturgy must be reformed! -We are on our way, but have a long way to go.

2. We need to deal with the abuse crisis. -This must involve great openness on the part of Church hierarchic and prosecusion of the offending parties.

3. We must reform our fasting practices. -I think what has been happening in the U.K. is fantastic, but again, we all have a long way to go.

4. Theological liberals need to go. - Yup, get rid of the dissenting heretics in some seminaries and in the priesthood. I think His Holiness is working towards this but it is a slow process.

Once these issues are addressed, then we can commence with beating eachother over the head over issues like the Papacy, the Filioque, Purgatory, and the like.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
podkarpatska
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,474


Pokrov


WWW
« Reply #136 on: June 16, 2011, 11:31:01 AM »

You know what, after years of considering this matter, I think that we Catholics really need to clean house before we can seriously provide something to which Eastern Orthodox Christians would want to be reunited.
1. The Liturgy must be reformed! -We are on our way, but have a long way to go.

2. We need to deal with the abuse crisis. -This must involve great openness on the part of Church hierarchic and prosecusion of the offending parties.

3. We must reform our fasting practices. -I think what has been happening in the U.K. is fantastic, but again, we all have a long way to go.

4. Theological liberals need to go. - Yup, get rid of the dissenting heretics in some seminaries and in the priesthood. I think His Holiness is working towards this but it is a slow process.

Once these issues are addressed, then we can commence with beating eachother over the head over issues like the Papacy, the Filioque, Purgatory, and the like.

Can I get you an invite to the Consultations? The Orthodox will welcome your point of view!
Logged
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,192


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #137 on: June 16, 2011, 11:39:20 AM »

You know what, after years of considering this matter, I think that we Catholics really need to clean house before we can seriously provide something to which Eastern Orthodox Christians would want to be reunited.
1. The Liturgy must be reformed! -We are on our way, but have a long way to go.

2. We need to deal with the abuse crisis. -This must involve great openness on the part of Church hierarchic and prosecusion of the offending parties.

3. We must reform our fasting practices. -I think what has been happening in the U.K. is fantastic, but again, we all have a long way to go.

4. Theological liberals need to go. - Yup, get rid of the dissenting heretics in some seminaries and in the priesthood. I think His Holiness is working towards this but it is a slow process.

Once these issues are addressed, then we can commence with beating eachother over the head over issues like the Papacy, the Filioque, Purgatory, and the like.

Can I get you an invite to the Consultations? The Orthodox will welcome your point of view!
Of coure. Smiley
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #138 on: June 16, 2011, 11:48:38 AM »

You know what, after years of considering this matter, I think that we Catholics really need to clean house before we can seriously provide something to which Eastern Orthodox Christians would want to be reunited.
1. The Liturgy must be reformed! -We are on our way, but have a long way to go.

2. We need to deal with the abuse crisis. -This must involve great openness on the part of Church hierarchic and prosecusion of the offending parties.

3. We must reform our fasting practices. -I think what has been happening in the U.K. is fantastic, but again, we all have a long way to go.

4. Theological liberals need to go. - Yup, get rid of the dissenting heretics in some seminaries and in the priesthood. I think His Holiness is working towards this but it is a slow process.

Once these issues are addressed, then we can commence with beating eachother over the head over issues like the Papacy, the Filioque, Purgatory, and the like.

Can I get you an invite to the Consultations? The Orthodox will welcome your point of view!

You would not want me!!  I say that these things are all good and necessary but that communion transcends human weakness!!
Logged

Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,192


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #139 on: June 16, 2011, 12:11:39 PM »

You know what, after years of considering this matter, I think that we Catholics really need to clean house before we can seriously provide something to which Eastern Orthodox Christians would want to be reunited.
1. The Liturgy must be reformed! -We are on our way, but have a long way to go.

2. We need to deal with the abuse crisis. -This must involve great openness on the part of Church hierarchic and prosecusion of the offending parties.

3. We must reform our fasting practices. -I think what has been happening in the U.K. is fantastic, but again, we all have a long way to go.

4. Theological liberals need to go. - Yup, get rid of the dissenting heretics in some seminaries and in the priesthood. I think His Holiness is working towards this but it is a slow process.

Once these issues are addressed, then we can commence with beating eachother over the head over issues like the Papacy, the Filioque, Purgatory, and the like.

Can I get you an invite to the Consultations? The Orthodox will welcome your point of view!

You would not want me!!  I say that these things are all good and necessary but that communion transcends human weakness!!
There is something to that Maria, but when the boots hit the ground, I don't think that EOs will even want to address communion until we start acting like the Church we claim to be.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,128



« Reply #140 on: June 16, 2011, 12:28:36 PM »

You know what, after years of considering this matter, I think that we Catholics really need to clean house before we can seriously provide something to which Eastern Orthodox Christians would want to be reunited.
1. The Liturgy must be reformed! -We are on our way, but have a long way to go.

2. We need to deal with the abuse crisis. -This must involve great openness on the part of Church hierarchic and prosecusion of the offending parties.

3. We must reform our fasting practices. -I think what has been happening in the U.K. is fantastic, but again, we all have a long way to go.

4. Theological liberals need to go. - Yup, get rid of the dissenting heretics in some seminaries and in the priesthood. I think His Holiness is working towards this but it is a slow process.

Once these issues are addressed, then we can commence with beating eachother over the head over issues like the Papacy, the Filioque, Purgatory, and the like.

Can I get you an invite to the Consultations? The Orthodox will welcome your point of view!

It's always gratifying when traditional Catholic are welcome at the ecumenical table.  Smiley

Just yesterday I was reading an "oldie but a goodie", namely the thread increase of latin language in western rite will increase orthodox praxis. A lot of excellent statements there, but this caught my attention especially:

Additionally, with greater knowledge and usage of latin there would be a greater respect from some of those within the west who would be most sympathetic toward collaborating in some fashion with the Orthodox Church. Traditional latin/roman rite catholics.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,128



« Reply #141 on: June 16, 2011, 12:34:14 PM »

You know what, after years of considering this matter, I think that we Catholics really need to clean house before we can seriously provide something to which Eastern Orthodox Christians would want to be reunited.
1. The Liturgy must be reformed! -We are on our way, but have a long way to go.

2. We need to deal with the abuse crisis. -This must involve great openness on the part of Church hierarchic and prosecusion of the offending parties.

3. We must reform our fasting practices. -I think what has been happening in the U.K. is fantastic, but again, we all have a long way to go.

4. Theological liberals need to go. - Yup, get rid of the dissenting heretics in some seminaries and in the priesthood. I think His Holiness is working towards this but it is a slow process.

Once these issues are addressed, then we can commence with beating eachother over the head over issues like the Papacy, the Filioque, Purgatory, and the like.

Can I get you an invite to the Consultations? The Orthodox will welcome your point of view!

You would not want me!!  I say that these things are all good and necessary but that communion transcends human weakness!!
There is something to that Maria, but when the boots hit the ground, I don't think that EOs will even want to address communion until we start acting like the Church we claim to be.

That makes sense, but let's not forget the Anglican parishes that have come into communion with Rome recently. After all, they could have opted for communion with Constantinople instead, and yet they chose Rome.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
podkarpatska
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,474


Pokrov


WWW
« Reply #142 on: June 16, 2011, 12:50:42 PM »

You know what, after years of considering this matter, I think that we Catholics really need to clean house before we can seriously provide something to which Eastern Orthodox Christians would want to be reunited.
1. The Liturgy must be reformed! -We are on our way, but have a long way to go.

2. We need to deal with the abuse crisis. -This must involve great openness on the part of Church hierarchic and prosecusion of the offending parties.

3. We must reform our fasting practices. -I think what has been happening in the U.K. is fantastic, but again, we all have a long way to go.

4. Theological liberals need to go. - Yup, get rid of the dissenting heretics in some seminaries and in the priesthood. I think His Holiness is working towards this but it is a slow process.

Once these issues are addressed, then we can commence with beating eachother over the head over issues like the Papacy, the Filioque, Purgatory, and the like.

Can I get you an invite to the Consultations? The Orthodox will welcome your point of view!

It's always gratifying when traditional Catholic are welcome at the ecumenical table.  Smiley

Just yesterday I was reading an "oldie but a goodie", namely the thread increase of latin language in western rite will increase orthodox praxis. A lot of excellent statements there, but this caught my attention especially:

Additionally, with greater knowledge and usage of latin there would be a greater respect from some of those within the west who would be most sympathetic toward collaborating in some fashion with the Orthodox Church. Traditional latin/roman rite catholics.

I think that 'traditional Catholics' are the only ones welcomed by us! The problem lies, of course, in one's definition of 'traditional'! No room for the 'dancing bear' types.
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: 37,831



« Reply #143 on: June 16, 2011, 01:39:19 PM »

The Spirit is descended!
You know what, after years of considering this matter, I think that we Catholics really need to clean house before we can seriously provide something to which Eastern Orthodox Christians would want to be reunited.
1. The Liturgy must be reformed! -We are on our way, but have a long way to go.

2. We need to deal with the abuse crisis. -This must involve great openness on the part of Church hierarchic and prosecusion of the offending parties.

3. We must reform our fasting practices. -I think what has been happening in the U.K. is fantastic, but again, we all have a long way to go.

4. Theological liberals need to go. - Yup, get rid of the dissenting heretics in some seminaries and in the priesthood. I think His Holiness is working towards this but it is a slow process.

Once these issues are addressed, then we can commence with beating eachother over the head over issues like the Papacy, the Filioque, Purgatory, and the like.

Can I get you an invite to the Consultations? The Orthodox will welcome your point of view!

You would not want me!!  I say that these things are all good and necessary but that communion transcends human weakness!!
There is something to that Maria, but when the boots hit the ground, I don't think that EOs will even want to address communion until we start acting like the Church we claim to be.
Agreement.  Spooky.
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
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #144 on: June 16, 2011, 06:05:39 PM »

That makes sense, but let's not forget the Anglican parishes that have come into communion with Rome recently. After all, they could have opted for communion with Constantinople instead, and yet they chose Rome.

I was searching for the number of parishes in the Anglican Ordinariate

and was surprised to find there are zero!

This is because the Ordinariate does not even exist.

It is proposed to create it in the fall.

http://catholicknight.blogspot.com/2011/06/us-anglican-ordinariate-emerges.html
Logged
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #145 on: June 16, 2011, 06:25:42 PM »

You know what, after years of considering this matter, I think that we Catholics really need to clean house before we can seriously provide something to which Eastern Orthodox Christians would want to be reunited.
1. The Liturgy must be reformed! -We are on our way, but have a long way to go.

2. We need to deal with the abuse crisis. -This must involve great openness on the part of Church hierarchic and prosecusion of the offending parties.

3. We must reform our fasting practices. -I think what has been happening in the U.K. is fantastic, but again, we all have a long way to go.

4. Theological liberals need to go. - Yup, get rid of the dissenting heretics in some seminaries and in the priesthood. I think His Holiness is working towards this but it is a slow process.

Once these issues are addressed, then we can commence with beating eachother over the head over issues like the Papacy, the Filioque, Purgatory, and the like.

Can I get you an invite to the Consultations? The Orthodox will welcome your point of view!

You would not want me!!  I say that these things are all good and necessary but that communion transcends human weakness!!
There is something to that Maria, but when the boots hit the ground, I don't think that EOs will even want to address communion until we start acting like the Church we claim to be.

That's a bit of a kick in the slats for those Catholics who do indeed live the faith and have done so for generations, even at great personal expense.

There are many more of us quietly faithful than there are the faithless ones.

So if we are ALL waiting for that glorious Age of All Goodness...hell will freeze over first.... so we need to get on with looking for the good in the Catholic Church and let the schismatics paddle their own Swamp Cat.

M.
Logged

elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #146 on: June 16, 2011, 06:28:05 PM »

That makes sense, but let's not forget the Anglican parishes that have come into communion with Rome recently. After all, they could have opted for communion with Constantinople instead, and yet they chose Rome.

I was searching for the number of parishes in the Anglican Ordinariate

and was surprised to find there are zero!

This is because the Ordinariate does not even exist.

It is proposed to create it in the fall.

http://catholicknight.blogspot.com/2011/06/us-anglican-ordinariate-emerges.html

What in goodness name are you talking about?
Logged

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

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #147 on: June 16, 2011, 06:51:36 PM »

That makes sense, but let's not forget the Anglican parishes that have come into communion with Rome recently. After all, they could have opted for communion with Constantinople instead, and yet they chose Rome.

I was searching for the number of parishes in the Anglican Ordinariate

and was surprised to find there are zero!

This is because the Ordinariate does not even exist.

It is proposed to create it in the fall.

http://catholicknight.blogspot.com/2011/06/us-anglican-ordinariate-emerges.html

What in goodness name are you talking about?

I am trying to find out how many Anglican parishes have entered the Roman Catholic Church.

In this country with 552 Anglican parishes not one of them has made the move.
Logged
Kasatkin fan
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA - Archdiocese of Canada
Posts: 636



« Reply #148 on: June 16, 2011, 07:20:27 PM »

You know what, after years of considering this matter, I think that we Catholics really need to clean house before we can seriously provide something to which Eastern Orthodox Christians would want to be reunited.
1. The Liturgy must be reformed! -We are on our way, but have a long way to go.

2. We need to deal with the abuse crisis. -This must involve great openness on the part of Church hierarchic and prosecusion of the offending parties.

3. We must reform our fasting practices. -I think what has been happening in the U.K. is fantastic, but again, we all have a long way to go.

4. Theological liberals need to go. - Yup, get rid of the dissenting heretics in some seminaries and in the priesthood. I think His Holiness is working towards this but it is a slow process.

Once these issues are addressed, then we can commence with beating eachother over the head over issues like the Papacy, the Filioque, Purgatory, and the like.

Can I get you an invite to the Consultations? The Orthodox will welcome your point of view!

You would not want me!!  I say that these things are all good and necessary but that communion transcends human weakness!!
There is something to that Maria, but when the boots hit the ground, I don't think that EOs will even want to address communion until we start acting like the Church we claim to be.

That's a bit of a kick in the slats for those Catholics who do indeed live the faith and have done so for generations, even at great personal expense.

There are many more of us quietly faithful than there are the faithless ones.

So if we are ALL waiting for that glorious Age of All Goodness...hell will freeze over first.... so we need to get on with looking for the good in the Catholic Church and let the schismatics paddle their own Swamp Cat.

M.
Oh good, now we're schismatics. Two days ago we weren't even Christian's! Ecumenism at work, already you're more accepting of us!
Logged
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #149 on: June 16, 2011, 09:28:07 PM »

You know what, after years of considering this matter, I think that we Catholics really need to clean house before we can seriously provide something to which Eastern Orthodox Christians would want to be reunited.
1. The Liturgy must be reformed! -We are on our way, but have a long way to go.

2. We need to deal with the abuse crisis. -This must involve great openness on the part of Church hierarchic and prosecusion of the offending parties.

3. We must reform our fasting practices. -I think what has been happening in the U.K. is fantastic, but again, we all have a long way to go.

4. Theological liberals need to go. - Yup, get rid of the dissenting heretics in some seminaries and in the priesthood. I think His Holiness is working towards this but it is a slow process.

Once these issues are addressed, then we can commence with beating eachother over the head over issues like the Papacy, the Filioque, Purgatory, and the like.

Can I get you an invite to the Consultations? The Orthodox will welcome your point of view!

You would not want me!!  I say that these things are all good and necessary but that communion transcends human weakness!!
There is something to that Maria, but when the boots hit the ground, I don't think that EOs will even want to address communion until we start acting like the Church we claim to be.

That's a bit of a kick in the slats for those Catholics who do indeed live the faith and have done so for generations, even at great personal expense.

There are many more of us quietly faithful than there are the faithless ones.

So if we are ALL waiting for that glorious Age of All Goodness...hell will freeze over first.... so we need to get on with looking for the good in the Catholic Church and let the schismatics paddle their own Swamp Cat.

M.
Oh good, now we're schismatics. Two days ago we weren't even Christian's! Ecumenism at work, already you're more accepting of us!

O for pity's sake...don't be dents. 

We were talking about faithless Catholics, not faithless Orthodox Catholics!!...There's a de facto schism in the Catholic Church-not the Orthodox Catholics...though there are some there too.  I was speaking of the former and not the latter.

M.
Logged

Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,128



« Reply #150 on: June 16, 2011, 09:43:45 PM »

Oh good, now we're schismatics. Two days ago we weren't even Christian's! Ecumenism at work, already you're more accepting of us!

Who is Christian, and why aren't you his?

Seriously though, who said you weren't Christians?
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,128



« Reply #151 on: June 16, 2011, 09:47:29 PM »

That makes sense, but let's not forget the Anglican parishes that have come into communion with Rome recently. After all, they could have opted for communion with Constantinople instead, and yet they chose Rome.

I was searching for the number of parishes in the Anglican Ordinariate

and was surprised to find there are zero!

This is because the Ordinariate does not even exist.

It is proposed to create it in the fall.

http://catholicknight.blogspot.com/2011/06/us-anglican-ordinariate-emerges.html

You're right, I should have said "who are coming into communion with Rome".

But bottom line, they chose Catholicism over Orthodoxy.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,192


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #152 on: June 16, 2011, 09:54:59 PM »

You know what, after years of considering this matter, I think that we Catholics really need to clean house before we can seriously provide something to which Eastern Orthodox Christians would want to be reunited.
1. The Liturgy must be reformed! -We are on our way, but have a long way to go.

2. We need to deal with the abuse crisis. -This must involve great openness on the part of Church hierarchic and prosecusion of the offending parties.

3. We must reform our fasting practices. -I think what has been happening in the U.K. is fantastic, but again, we all have a long way to go.

4. Theological liberals need to go. - Yup, get rid of the dissenting heretics in some seminaries and in the priesthood. I think His Holiness is working towards this but it is a slow process.

Once these issues are addressed, then we can commence with beating eachother over the head over issues like the Papacy, the Filioque, Purgatory, and the like.

Can I get you an invite to the Consultations? The Orthodox will welcome your point of view!

You would not want me!!  I say that these things are all good and necessary but that communion transcends human weakness!!
There is something to that Maria, but when the boots hit the ground, I don't think that EOs will even want to address communion until we start acting like the Church we claim to be.

That's a bit of a kick in the slats for those Catholics who do indeed live the faith and have done so for generations, even at great personal expense.

There are many more of us quietly faithful than there are the faithless ones.

So if we are ALL waiting for that glorious Age of All Goodness...hell will freeze over first.... so we need to get on with looking for the good in the Catholic Church and let the schismatics paddle their own Swamp Cat.

M.
I agree. There are many good Catholics out there in the world.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
WetCatechumen
Roman Catholic
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic Christianity
Jurisdiction: Latin Rite - Archdiocese of Santa Fe; Ruthenian Byzantine Catholic Eparchy of Phoenix
Posts: 297



« Reply #153 on: June 16, 2011, 10:17:56 PM »

The Spirit is descended!
You know what, after years of considering this matter, I think that we Catholics really need to clean house before we can seriously provide something to which Eastern Orthodox Christians would want to be reunited.
1. The Liturgy must be reformed! -We are on our way, but have a long way to go.

2. We need to deal with the abuse crisis. -This must involve great openness on the part of Church hierarchic and prosecusion of the offending parties.

3. We must reform our fasting practices. -I think what has been happening in the U.K. is fantastic, but again, we all have a long way to go.

4. Theological liberals need to go. - Yup, get rid of the dissenting heretics in some seminaries and in the priesthood. I think His Holiness is working towards this but it is a slow process.

Once these issues are addressed, then we can commence with beating eachother over the head over issues like the Papacy, the Filioque, Purgatory, and the like.

Can I get you an invite to the Consultations? The Orthodox will welcome your point of view!

You would not want me!!  I say that these things are all good and necessary but that communion transcends human weakness!!
There is something to that Maria, but when the boots hit the ground, I don't think that EOs will even want to address communion until we start acting like the Church we claim to be.
Agreement.  Spooky.
At this point I am looking around expect Christ to have returned. ialmisry and Papist agreed on something.

I agree too. I have an Orthodox acquaintance from England (Bosporus Swim Class 2011) I recently just expressed similar sentiments when he, horrified, had posted a link on his wall of the "ordination" of RC Womenpriests. I explained to him that they were not Catholic, but that they and those like them had sympathetic factions within our church.

Orthodox and Catholics have a long way to go in the ground war. We've already proven, twice (Lyons and Florence) that top down restorations of communion don't work. We also proved with the Roman and Maronites churches reunion with portions of the Greek and various Miaphysite and Assyrian churches that it doesn't work.

The desire for reunion must come, not from the Pope and Ecumenical Patriarch or the Pope of Alexandria meeting, or even of bishops, but of an outpouring of love and humility and servitude from each Christian to another.

Sadly, in the West, our liturgy has become so deformed as to make it hardly recognizable to our Apostolic Brethren. It is getting better, but reunion cannot and should not happen until the Roman church gets its liturgy in order. Praxis in the local parish needs to change. There are many good things about Roman parishes - these can stay the same. But in some cases, the Orthodox outdo us. It doesn't mean we think you're right (see "The Way of a Pilgrim" when he talks about Old Believers - sometimes, I feel this way about you Orthodox - but not that harshly), but we acknowledge that we must change. Look at how badly the dismal change in the Roman Liturgy has trickled down to the Eastern churches - it's not been good. some Maronite parishes offer Qurbana facing the people. The use of liturgical languages has dropped off dramatically. The Ruthenian Pew Book got a major overhaul that was not the best.

But yes, liturgy and fasting and theological liberals. Liturgy is on the rise, theological liberals on the way out. We're getting better on the abuse crisis, but this needs to go. It needs to be out of the news - not because it's not being reported, but because there needs to be nothing to report. Pray for us sinners, brethren!

Fasting, we are way behind. I follow Greek fasting rules during Lent and Advent. It's been greatly beneficial to my spiritual life (plus I lost 20 pounds last Lent - my Greek Orthodox friend, also a convert - but swam the Bosporus - gains weight because he eats too much bread. Stupid carbs! I guess I'm too picky. :p )

But I've had other Catholic friends start fasting more. The thing is, the only way mandatory fasting will come back (and it would be beneficial for me) is if people start doing the fasting anyway without it being mandatory. If we removed the ability to substitute a different Friday penance (let's face it, who does anyway? Most good Catholics I know just abstain from meat anyway - and even many of the good Catholics I know are unaware of mandatory Friday penance).

Things will get better. But until they do, you have no business with us. But let's keep talking. As much as some of us love the "traditions" of First Communion and Confirmation, I wish we would just give them to infants. We're not Protestants who delay the receipt of grace until the one receiving can understand.
« Last Edit: June 16, 2011, 10:20:05 PM by WetCatechumen » Logged

"And because they have nothing better to do, they take cushion and chairs to Rome. And while the Pope is saying liturgy, they go, 'Oh, oh, oh, filioque!' And the Pope say, 'Filioque? That-uh sound nice! I think I divide-uh the Church over it!'" - Comrade Real Presence
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #154 on: June 16, 2011, 10:21:58 PM »

That makes sense, but let's not forget the Anglican parishes that have come into communion with Rome recently. After all, they could have opted for communion with Constantinople instead, and yet they chose Rome.

I was searching for the number of parishes in the Anglican Ordinariate

and was surprised to find there are zero!

This is because the Ordinariate does not even exist.

It is proposed to create it in the fall.

http://catholicknight.blogspot.com/2011/06/us-anglican-ordinariate-emerges.html

You're right, I should have said "who are coming into communion with Rome".

But bottom line, they chose Catholicism over Orthodoxy.

Will this Ordinariate really appear?

How many parishes?
Logged
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,192


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #155 on: June 16, 2011, 10:35:36 PM »



Things will get better. But until they do, you have no business with us. But let's keep talking. As much as some of us love the "traditions" of First Communion and Confirmation, I wish we would just give them to infants. We're not Protestants who delay the receipt of grace until the one receiving can understand.
Agreed. I think a return to the old practice of confirming and communing infants would be a very healthy move in the right direction.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
orthonorm
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,506



« Reply #156 on: June 16, 2011, 10:40:26 PM »



Things will get better. But until they do, you have no business with us. But let's keep talking. As much as some of us love the "traditions" of First Communion and Confirmation, I wish we would just give them to infants. We're not Protestants who delay the receipt of grace until the one receiving can understand.
Agreed. I think a return to the old practice of confirming and communing infants would be a very healthy move in the right direction.

Said it before, but I wasn't a practicing anything when I went to my first DL and the communing of infants and the very young somehow had an impact on me that nothing during the Liturgy did.

Would be nice if the RCs I know could experience that beauty as well.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
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 0.531 seconds with 186 queries.