OrthodoxChristianity.net
September 01, 2014, 08:45:46 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 »  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Why do the Orthodox need Catholics?  (Read 11657 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,114



« Reply #180 on: June 27, 2011, 01:07:40 PM »

Why can't the dialogue continue?
Logged

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

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #181 on: June 27, 2011, 01:17:57 PM »

Why can't the dialogue continue?

Apparently the only thing the Orthodox want to do is proselytize Catholics.

Unless you think that is a worthy reason to remain in bi-lateral dialogue, then why should we continue?

Mary
Logged

Cavaradossi
法網恢恢,疏而不漏
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Chalcedonian Automaton Serial No. 5Aj4bx9
Jurisdiction: Chalcedonian Automaton Factory 5
Posts: 1,556



« Reply #182 on: June 27, 2011, 01:18:25 PM »

In this case, I do believe that Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger and also Pope Benedict has been greeted and lauded by the Slavic Orthodox world, at least, and by the EP, as an exemplary representative of the papal Church.  So if there were a problem, I have NO doubt that we'd be hearing it loud and clear.

Also with respect to one of the other triumphal posts in line here over the last few days...IF the Catholic Church were not recognized by the bishops and patriarchs of Orthodoxy as a Church at all...we'd be hearing that as well...from something other than...what did Father Ambrose call it?...oh yes....the "lunatic fringe."


The thing is that I have never known any bishop, when asked if the Pope and the Catholic bishops are genuine and authentic and valid bishops to answer yes.   How many bishops will answer Yes? How many will answer No?  How many will avoid the question and change the subject?

Any Orthodox members have experience with this?  My impression is that our bishops treat the question of the episcopal Orders of the Pope with the same politeness that the Pope treats the Archbishop of Canterbury. 

The same thing happens with Catholic priests and bishops and questions concerning Orthodoxy.  They politely point to the statements coming from the highest levels.

There's no doubt in my mind that there are Catholic bishops who are repulsed by Orthodoxy.

But I wasn't talking about things at that level.

Heck...there are Orthodox bishops who are repulsed by other Orthodox bishops.

Resumption of Communion can never be predicated on fallen and venal humanity.

Nor can it be predicated on the refusal of every Orthodox Patriarch to acknowledge the validity of the Pope's episcopal Orders.  Mary, they simply won't do it.  They remember only two well the fate of their predecessors after Florence.  The faithful will not tolerate it.

Then y'all better write and let'em know the jig is up!!

Dear Mary,

The Patriarchs do not have to be told.  They already know.

Peruse the Statements which have been issued by the "Parliament" of monks of Mount Athos over the decades of the dialogue.  Not one Patriarch has sallied forth to say:  "Ignore the monks!  They are wrong.  Of course the Pope is a valid bishop."  Nor has any theologian stood against the monks.  They can't because in effect they would be denying the "Cyprianite" theology on sacraments outside the Church and in heresy which has been, by and large, the bedrock of Eastern teaching since the year dot.   To go against it would provoke schism and revolution in the Church.

Then, in good faith, the patriarchs need to stop the dialogue cold, and start the process of advertising to have the Papists become Orthodox. 

That needs to be done forthrightly.  At the moment it is too fuzzy and nobody is getting the message clearly.

There is no need to stop the dialogue. Are you telling me then that the Catholics do not intend to create a union through uniformity of faith? Such a false union would undoubtedly be unacceptable to the Orthodox.
Logged

Be comforted, and have faith, O Israel, for your God is infinitely simple and one, composed of no parts.
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #183 on: June 27, 2011, 01:27:54 PM »

In this case, I do believe that Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger and also Pope Benedict has been greeted and lauded by the Slavic Orthodox world, at least, and by the EP, as an exemplary representative of the papal Church.  So if there were a problem, I have NO doubt that we'd be hearing it loud and clear.

Also with respect to one of the other triumphal posts in line here over the last few days...IF the Catholic Church were not recognized by the bishops and patriarchs of Orthodoxy as a Church at all...we'd be hearing that as well...from something other than...what did Father Ambrose call it?...oh yes....the "lunatic fringe."


The thing is that I have never known any bishop, when asked if the Pope and the Catholic bishops are genuine and authentic and valid bishops to answer yes.   How many bishops will answer Yes? How many will answer No?  How many will avoid the question and change the subject?

Any Orthodox members have experience with this?  My impression is that our bishops treat the question of the episcopal Orders of the Pope with the same politeness that the Pope treats the Archbishop of Canterbury. 

The same thing happens with Catholic priests and bishops and questions concerning Orthodoxy.  They politely point to the statements coming from the highest levels.

There's no doubt in my mind that there are Catholic bishops who are repulsed by Orthodoxy.

But I wasn't talking about things at that level.

Heck...there are Orthodox bishops who are repulsed by other Orthodox bishops.

Resumption of Communion can never be predicated on fallen and venal humanity.

Nor can it be predicated on the refusal of every Orthodox Patriarch to acknowledge the validity of the Pope's episcopal Orders.  Mary, they simply won't do it.  They remember only two well the fate of their predecessors after Florence.  The faithful will not tolerate it.

Then y'all better write and let'em know the jig is up!!

Dear Mary,

The Patriarchs do not have to be told.  They already know.

Peruse the Statements which have been issued by the "Parliament" of monks of Mount Athos over the decades of the dialogue.  Not one Patriarch has sallied forth to say:  "Ignore the monks!  They are wrong.  Of course the Pope is a valid bishop."  Nor has any theologian stood against the monks.  They can't because in effect they would be denying the "Cyprianite" theology on sacraments outside the Church and in heresy which has been, by and large, the bedrock of Eastern teaching since the year dot.   To go against it would provoke schism and revolution in the Church.

Then, in good faith, the patriarchs need to stop the dialogue cold, and start the process of advertising to have the Papists become Orthodox. 

That needs to be done forthrightly.  At the moment it is too fuzzy and nobody is getting the message clearly.

There is no need to stop the dialogue. Are you telling me then that the Catholics do not intend to create a union through uniformity of faith? Such a false union would undoubtedly be unacceptable to the Orthodox.

Depends on what you envision by "uniformity" of faith...and really it depends on what is understood by "faith"...

Are you asking if the Catholic Church plans to "convert"...whatever that means to you...

The answer, most probably, given what I see around here is....No.  The Catholic Church is not in dialogue as preparation for conversion to Orthodoxy.  It has never been presented that way by either side, but apparently, according to Father Ambrose, that is what has been intended all along.
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: 37,473



« Reply #184 on: June 27, 2011, 01:42:08 PM »

Why can't the dialogue continue?

Apparently the only thing the Orthodox want to do is proselytize Catholics.

Unless you think that is a worthy reason to remain in bi-lateral dialogue, then why should we continue?
Your salvation.
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
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #185 on: June 27, 2011, 01:44:18 PM »

Why can't the dialogue continue?

Apparently the only thing the Orthodox want to do is proselytize Catholics.

Unless you think that is a worthy reason to remain in bi-lateral dialogue, then why should we continue?
Your salvation.

Not even.
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: 37,473



« Reply #186 on: June 27, 2011, 01:45:00 PM »

In this case, I do believe that Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger and also Pope Benedict has been greeted and lauded by the Slavic Orthodox world, at least, and by the EP, as an exemplary representative of the papal Church.  So if there were a problem, I have NO doubt that we'd be hearing it loud and clear.

Also with respect to one of the other triumphal posts in line here over the last few days...IF the Catholic Church were not recognized by the bishops and patriarchs of Orthodoxy as a Church at all...we'd be hearing that as well...from something other than...what did Father Ambrose call it?...oh yes....the "lunatic fringe."


The thing is that I have never known any bishop, when asked if the Pope and the Catholic bishops are genuine and authentic and valid bishops to answer yes.   How many bishops will answer Yes? How many will answer No?  How many will avoid the question and change the subject?

Any Orthodox members have experience with this?  My impression is that our bishops treat the question of the episcopal Orders of the Pope with the same politeness that the Pope treats the Archbishop of Canterbury. 

The same thing happens with Catholic priests and bishops and questions concerning Orthodoxy.  They politely point to the statements coming from the highest levels.

There's no doubt in my mind that there are Catholic bishops who are repulsed by Orthodoxy.

But I wasn't talking about things at that level.

Heck...there are Orthodox bishops who are repulsed by other Orthodox bishops.

Resumption of Communion can never be predicated on fallen and venal humanity.

Nor can it be predicated on the refusal of every Orthodox Patriarch to acknowledge the validity of the Pope's episcopal Orders.  Mary, they simply won't do it.  They remember only two well the fate of their predecessors after Florence.  The faithful will not tolerate it.

Then y'all better write and let'em know the jig is up!!

Dear Mary,

The Patriarchs do not have to be told.  They already know.

Peruse the Statements which have been issued by the "Parliament" of monks of Mount Athos over the decades of the dialogue.  Not one Patriarch has sallied forth to say:  "Ignore the monks!  They are wrong.  Of course the Pope is a valid bishop."  Nor has any theologian stood against the monks.  They can't because in effect they would be denying the "Cyprianite" theology on sacraments outside the Church and in heresy which has been, by and large, the bedrock of Eastern teaching since the year dot.   To go against it would provoke schism and revolution in the Church.

Then, in good faith, the patriarchs need to stop the dialogue cold, and start the process of advertising to have the Papists become Orthodox. 

That needs to be done forthrightly.  At the moment it is too fuzzy and nobody is getting the message clearly.
You meant they haven't noticed that the Orthodox are not negotiating the surrender of the Catholic Church to the Vatican's claims?
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
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #187 on: June 27, 2011, 01:52:19 PM »

In this case, I do believe that Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger and also Pope Benedict has been greeted and lauded by the Slavic Orthodox world, at least, and by the EP, as an exemplary representative of the papal Church.  So if there were a problem, I have NO doubt that we'd be hearing it loud and clear.

Also with respect to one of the other triumphal posts in line here over the last few days...IF the Catholic Church were not recognized by the bishops and patriarchs of Orthodoxy as a Church at all...we'd be hearing that as well...from something other than...what did Father Ambrose call it?...oh yes....the "lunatic fringe."


The thing is that I have never known any bishop, when asked if the Pope and the Catholic bishops are genuine and authentic and valid bishops to answer yes.   How many bishops will answer Yes? How many will answer No?  How many will avoid the question and change the subject?

Any Orthodox members have experience with this?  My impression is that our bishops treat the question of the episcopal Orders of the Pope with the same politeness that the Pope treats the Archbishop of Canterbury. 

The same thing happens with Catholic priests and bishops and questions concerning Orthodoxy.  They politely point to the statements coming from the highest levels.

There's no doubt in my mind that there are Catholic bishops who are repulsed by Orthodoxy.

But I wasn't talking about things at that level.

Heck...there are Orthodox bishops who are repulsed by other Orthodox bishops.

Resumption of Communion can never be predicated on fallen and venal humanity.

Nor can it be predicated on the refusal of every Orthodox Patriarch to acknowledge the validity of the Pope's episcopal Orders.  Mary, they simply won't do it.  They remember only two well the fate of their predecessors after Florence.  The faithful will not tolerate it.

Then y'all better write and let'em know the jig is up!!

Dear Mary,

The Patriarchs do not have to be told.  They already know.

Peruse the Statements which have been issued by the "Parliament" of monks of Mount Athos over the decades of the dialogue.  Not one Patriarch has sallied forth to say:  "Ignore the monks!  They are wrong.  Of course the Pope is a valid bishop."  Nor has any theologian stood against the monks.  They can't because in effect they would be denying the "Cyprianite" theology on sacraments outside the Church and in heresy which has been, by and large, the bedrock of Eastern teaching since the year dot.   To go against it would provoke schism and revolution in the Church.

Then, in good faith, the patriarchs need to stop the dialogue cold, and start the process of advertising to have the Papists become Orthodox. 

That needs to be done forthrightly.  At the moment it is too fuzzy and nobody is getting the message clearly.
You meant they haven't noticed that the Orthodox are not negotiating the surrender of the Catholic Church to the Vatican's claims?

That's not what is happening, but why should the Catholic Church care what Orthodoxy thinks at all,  if all the Orthodox are interested in is proselytizing us?
Logged

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

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,114



« Reply #188 on: June 27, 2011, 01:57:35 PM »

Apparently the only thing the Orthodox want to do is proselytize Catholics.

Source?
Logged

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

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,114



« Reply #189 on: June 27, 2011, 02:00:53 PM »

There is no need to stop the dialogue. Are you telling me then that the Catholics do not intend to create a union through uniformity of faith? Such a false union would undoubtedly be unacceptable to the Orthodox.

Yes and no. I definitely think the Catholic Church is open to a new union, but we are not using the means we used at, e.g., Brest or Florence to achieve a union.
Logged

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

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #190 on: June 27, 2011, 02:13:11 PM »

Apparently the only thing the Orthodox want to do is proselytize Catholics.

Source?

Isa and Father Ambrose and all other Orthodox who think as they do...which they claim are most all other Orthodox, especially bishops and patriarchs...
« Last Edit: June 27, 2011, 02:13:39 PM by elijahmaria » Logged

Father H
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian--God's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: UOCofUSA-Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 2,611



« Reply #191 on: June 27, 2011, 02:55:36 PM »

In this case, I do believe that Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger and also Pope Benedict has been greeted and lauded by the Slavic Orthodox world, at least, and by the EP, as an exemplary representative of the papal Church.  So if there were a problem, I have NO doubt that we'd be hearing it loud and clear.

Also with respect to one of the other triumphal posts in line here over the last few days...IF the Catholic Church were not recognized by the bishops and patriarchs of Orthodoxy as a Church at all...we'd be hearing that as well...from something other than...what did Father Ambrose call it?...oh yes....the "lunatic fringe."


The thing is that I have never known any bishop, when asked if the Pope and the Catholic bishops are genuine and authentic and valid bishops to answer yes.   How many bishops will answer Yes? How many will answer No?  How many will avoid the question and change the subject?

Any Orthodox members have experience with this?  My impression is that our bishops treat the question of the episcopal Orders of the Pope with the same politeness that the Pope treats the Archbishop of Canterbury. 

The same thing happens with Catholic priests and bishops and questions concerning Orthodoxy.  They politely point to the statements coming from the highest levels.

There's no doubt in my mind that there are Catholic bishops who are repulsed by Orthodoxy.

But I wasn't talking about things at that level.

Heck...there are Orthodox bishops who are repulsed by other Orthodox bishops.

Resumption of Communion can never be predicated on fallen and venal humanity.

Nor can it be predicated on the refusal of every Orthodox Patriarch to acknowledge the validity of the Pope's episcopal Orders.  Mary, they simply won't do it.  They remember only two well the fate of their predecessors after Florence.  The faithful will not tolerate it.

Then y'all better write and let'em know the jig is up!!

Dear Mary,

The Patriarchs do not have to be told.  They already know.

Peruse the Statements which have been issued by the "Parliament" of monks of Mount Athos over the decades of the dialogue.  Not one Patriarch has sallied forth to say:  "Ignore the monks!  They are wrong.  Of course the Pope is a valid bishop."  Nor has any theologian stood against the monks.  They can't because in effect they would be denying the "Cyprianite" theology on sacraments outside the Church and in heresy which has been, by and large, the bedrock of Eastern teaching since the year dot.   To go against it would provoke schism and revolution in the Church.

Then, in good faith, the patriarchs need to stop the dialogue cold, and start the process of advertising to have the Papists become Orthodox. 

That needs to be done forthrightly.  At the moment it is too fuzzy and nobody is getting the message clearly.
You meant they haven't noticed that the Orthodox are not negotiating the surrender of the Catholic Church to the Vatican's claims?

That's not what is happening, but why should the Catholic Church care what Orthodoxy thinks at all,  if all the Orthodox are interested in is proselytizing us?

For the same reason why Orthodoxy should still care what Rome thinks even if Rome is interested in proselytizing us:  because it is the mandate of our Savior that the faithful of all nations comprise one Body.   There is no way that God wants those who are or will be truly His sheep among 2 billion Christians not to be in communion with each other in the unity of the Faith delivered once for all.   So what are we doing about it?  Hopefully finding agreement where there is agreement in the Apostolic Faith held in common for 1000 years, and otherwise patiently working through the areas of disagreement or apparent disagreement without compromise, but not letting a difference in language to obscure sameness in substance.   Sometimes we often have strong language.  We shouldn't allow this to "shut down" dialogue.   Things get heated sometimes.  We are human.  We sometimes need to give each other a break.   Sometimes we need to be firm, but in this firmness we need to reach a place of forebearance as dialogue goes on, as our brethren often bear heavy burdens that are unseen and not apparent from our limited observation. 
   
Logged
orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,488



« Reply #192 on: June 27, 2011, 03:06:11 PM »

Apparently the only thing the Orthodox want to do is proselytize Catholics.

Source?

Really, gimme a break. You do realize there is no word in Greek for proselytize? //:=|
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,114



« Reply #193 on: June 27, 2011, 03:46:39 PM »

Apparently the only thing the Orthodox want to do is proselytize Catholics.

Source?

Isa and Father Ambrose and all other Orthodox who think as they do...

That's all very good and well, except that I can't read their thoughts.

which they claim are most all other Orthodox, especially bishops and patriarchs...

I'm skeptical about that claim (as are you, I imagine).
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Cavaradossi
法網恢恢,疏而不漏
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Chalcedonian Automaton Serial No. 5Aj4bx9
Jurisdiction: Chalcedonian Automaton Factory 5
Posts: 1,556



« Reply #194 on: June 27, 2011, 03:55:16 PM »

Apparently the only thing the Orthodox want to do is proselytize Catholics.

Source?

Really, gimme a break. You do realize there is no word in Greek for proselytize? //:=|

Pretty much. We don't proselytize; we evangelize others by exposing them to the truth and hoping that they will be drawn to it. Proselytism is such a nasty word with such ugly connotations like giving incentives for conversion. We give no incentive other than telling others about the truth in which we believe. Whether they should wish to convert, that is up to them.
Logged

Be comforted, and have faith, O Israel, for your God is infinitely simple and one, composed of no parts.
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #195 on: June 27, 2011, 04:58:58 PM »

In this case, I do believe that Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger and also Pope Benedict has been greeted and lauded by the Slavic Orthodox world, at least, and by the EP, as an exemplary representative of the papal Church.  So if there were a problem, I have NO doubt that we'd be hearing it loud and clear.

Also with respect to one of the other triumphal posts in line here over the last few days...IF the Catholic Church were not recognized by the bishops and patriarchs of Orthodoxy as a Church at all...we'd be hearing that as well...from something other than...what did Father Ambrose call it?...oh yes....the "lunatic fringe."


The thing is that I have never known any bishop, when asked if the Pope and the Catholic bishops are genuine and authentic and valid bishops to answer yes.   How many bishops will answer Yes? How many will answer No?  How many will avoid the question and change the subject?

Any Orthodox members have experience with this?  My impression is that our bishops treat the question of the episcopal Orders of the Pope with the same politeness that the Pope treats the Archbishop of Canterbury. 

The same thing happens with Catholic priests and bishops and questions concerning Orthodoxy.  They politely point to the statements coming from the highest levels.

There's no doubt in my mind that there are Catholic bishops who are repulsed by Orthodoxy.

But I wasn't talking about things at that level.

Heck...there are Orthodox bishops who are repulsed by other Orthodox bishops.

Resumption of Communion can never be predicated on fallen and venal humanity.

Nor can it be predicated on the refusal of every Orthodox Patriarch to acknowledge the validity of the Pope's episcopal Orders.  Mary, they simply won't do it.  They remember only two well the fate of their predecessors after Florence.  The faithful will not tolerate it.

Then y'all better write and let'em know the jig is up!!

Dear Mary,

The Patriarchs do not have to be told.  They already know.

Peruse the Statements which have been issued by the "Parliament" of monks of Mount Athos over the decades of the dialogue.  Not one Patriarch has sallied forth to say:  "Ignore the monks!  They are wrong.  Of course the Pope is a valid bishop."  Nor has any theologian stood against the monks.  They can't because in effect they would be denying the "Cyprianite" theology on sacraments outside the Church and in heresy which has been, by and large, the bedrock of Eastern teaching since the year dot.   To go against it would provoke schism and revolution in the Church.

Then, in good faith, the patriarchs need to stop the dialogue cold, and start the process of advertising to have the Papists become Orthodox. 

That needs to be done forthrightly.  At the moment it is too fuzzy and nobody is getting the message clearly.
You meant they haven't noticed that the Orthodox are not negotiating the surrender of the Catholic Church to the Vatican's claims?

That's not what is happening, but why should the Catholic Church care what Orthodoxy thinks at all,  if all the Orthodox are interested in is proselytizing us?

For the same reason why Orthodoxy should still care what Rome thinks even if Rome is interested in proselytizing us:  because it is the mandate of our Savior that the faithful of all nations comprise one Body.   There is no way that God wants those who are or will be truly His sheep among 2 billion Christians not to be in communion with each other in the unity of the Faith delivered once for all.   So what are we doing about it?  Hopefully finding agreement where there is agreement in the Apostolic Faith held in common for 1000 years, and otherwise patiently working through the areas of disagreement or apparent disagreement without compromise, but not letting a difference in language to obscure sameness in substance.   Sometimes we often have strong language.  We shouldn't allow this to "shut down" dialogue.   Things get heated sometimes.  We are human.  We sometimes need to give each other a break.   Sometimes we need to be firm, but in this firmness we need to reach a place of forebearance as dialogue goes on, as our brethren often bear heavy burdens that are unseen and not apparent from our limited observation. 
   
Yes. this sounds pretty reasonable to me.
Logged
Dart
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 655


« Reply #196 on: June 27, 2011, 06:19:23 PM »

The Church, however, is Christ as "I AM," and He is not socially contructed nor culturally informed.
But the question in this case would be "which Church is Christ?" Unless you subscribe to the idea that there can be more than one Church (eg "Branch Theory"), then only one of them can be Christ. The existence of two or more separate bodies claiming to be the "One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church" seems to me to make them ontologically different. One of them is Christ as experienced in the Community which forms His Body, the Church (which cannot be said to be devoid of social constructs since it is both a Divine and Human entity), and the others are social constructs which are just that.

The other possibility is that neither of the two churches is Christ. Maybe Christ is not found in a Church but within each and everyone of us and the Church of Christ is made up of all its members regardles of what cultural construct they attend.
Logged
Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #197 on: June 27, 2011, 06:53:32 PM »

The Spirit has descended!

The Orthodox=the Catholics.

I really wish our people would get this.   When the Fathers and the Ecumenical Councils speak of "Catholic Church" and "Catholics" they are speaking about us!   Why are any of us hesitant to speak of ourselves in the terminology that the Holy Fathers gave us?  

To be fair, I think a big part of it is a simple desire to avoid confusing people.
I think it is interesting that, even though I am sure that the majority of Roman Catholics here on the forum consider their faith to be orthodox, you do not see a great push from us to refer to our Church as the Orthodox Church or refer to ourselves as Orthodox Christians.

True. I guess there's no need, since the creed says "One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church", not "One Holy Orthodox and Apostolic Church".
Which makes sense I guess why the Orthodox lay claim to the word "catholic" and why they are opposed to us referring to ourselves as such.

On a related note, I think it is funny that Lutherans change the wording of the Creed. I'm not sure if this is across the board, but at least at my sister's Lutheran church here in town, when they recite the Nicene Creed they say they believe in "One, Holy, Christian, and Apostolic Church."  laugh
« Last Edit: June 27, 2011, 06:54:08 PM by Wyatt » Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #198 on: June 27, 2011, 07:47:31 PM »

Why can't the dialogue continue?

Apparently the only thing the Orthodox want to do is proselytize Catholics.

Unless you think that is a worthy reason to remain in bi-lateral dialogue, then why should we continue?


And what does the Pope want?  To subjugate and dominate the Orthodox.  Nowhere and never has he stated that he does not desire full and final authority over the Orthodox if we "return" to Rome.  He is far too artful to lay it it plainly.  He is acting in bad faith.

Metropolitan Anthony Bloom:

"It is time we realised that Rome is only interested in extinguishing Orthodoxy.
Theological encounters and 'accords' on the basis of texts lead us up a blind alley,
for behind them there looms a firm resolve of the Vatican to swallow up the Orthodox Church."


The whole thing is in "Sourozh" the diocesan magazine of the UK Russian diocese:
Metr. Anthony of Sourozh, "A Letter to Patriarch Alexis of Moscow and All
Russia", SOUROZH, 69 (August 1997), 17-22.

« Last Edit: June 27, 2011, 08:13:05 PM by Irish Hermit » Logged
Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #199 on: June 27, 2011, 07:50:37 PM »

Why can't the dialogue continue?

Apparently the only thing the Orthodox want to do is proselytize Catholics.

Unless you think that is a worthy reason to remain in bi-lateral dialogue, then why should we continue?


And what does the Pope want?  To subjugate and dominate the Orthodox.  Nowhere and never has he stated that he does not desire full and final authority over the Orthodox if we "return" to Rome.  He is fart too artful to lay it it plainly.  He is acting in bad faith.

Metropolitan Anthony Bloom:

"It is time we realised that Rome is only interested in extinguishing Orthodoxy.
Theological encounters and 'accords' on the basis of texts lead us up a blind alley,
for behind them there looms a firm resolve of the Vatican to swallow up the Orthodox Church."


The whole thing is in "Sourozh" the diocesan magazine of the UK Russian diocese:
Metr. Anthony of Sourozh, "A Letter to Patriarch Alexis of Moscow and All
Russia", SOUROZH, 69 (August 1997), 17-22.


That sounds like paranoia.
Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #200 on: June 27, 2011, 08:10:03 PM »

The answer, most probably, given what I see around here is....No.  The Catholic Church is not in dialogue as preparation for conversion to Orthodoxy.  It has never been presented that way by either side, but apparently, according to Father Ambrose, that is what has been intended all along.

O ye who have ears but hear only what suits you!

Read the major millennial statement on relationships with the non-orthodox promulgated by the Holy Synod of the Russian orthodox Church.  It lays  out the basis and the purpose.  And the purpose?   To bring every Christian to the holy Orthodox faith.  To the Orthodox mind there is ONLY the Orthodox faith and a bastardised faith or a negotiated faith won't cut it. 

Read message 83
at
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,37062.msg590493.html#msg590493


Read also the various official statements spanning 50 tears, from Oberlin 1957 to Ravenna 2007

Message 130
at
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,37062.msg590860.html#msg590860

So we see that the Church has tried mightily to interact with the non-Orthodox Christians and it has clearly and officially delineated its basis and purpose.  If such as Mary, well studied in many of these things, has no clue about the Orthodox view, then is there *anybody* listening to us from among the Catholics?  Or are we dialoguing with a deaf juggernaut which believes that in the end it will subdue us anyway?
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: 37,473



« Reply #201 on: June 27, 2011, 09:26:03 PM »

Why can't the dialogue continue?

Apparently the only thing the Orthodox want to do is proselytize Catholics.

Unless you think that is a worthy reason to remain in bi-lateral dialogue, then why should we continue?


And what does the Pope want?  To subjugate and dominate the Orthodox.  Nowhere and never has he stated that he does not desire full and final authority over the Orthodox if we "return" to Rome.  He is fart too artful to lay it it plainly.  He is acting in bad faith.

Metropolitan Anthony Bloom:

"It is time we realised that Rome is only interested in extinguishing Orthodoxy.
Theological encounters and 'accords' on the basis of texts lead us up a blind alley,
for behind them there looms a firm resolve of the Vatican to swallow up the Orthodox Church."


The whole thing is in "Sourozh" the diocesan magazine of the UK Russian diocese:
Metr. Anthony of Sourozh, "A Letter to Patriarch Alexis of Moscow and All
Russia", SOUROZH, 69 (August 1997), 17-22.


That sounds like paranoia.
Sounds like sound thinking based on the Vatican's track record.  Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.
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: 37,473



« Reply #202 on: June 27, 2011, 09:29:55 PM »

The Spirit has descended!

The Orthodox=the Catholics.

I really wish our people would get this.   When the Fathers and the Ecumenical Councils speak of "Catholic Church" and "Catholics" they are speaking about us!   Why are any of us hesitant to speak of ourselves in the terminology that the Holy Fathers gave us?  

To be fair, I think a big part of it is a simple desire to avoid confusing people.
I think it is interesting that, even though I am sure that the majority of Roman Catholics here on the forum consider their faith to be orthodox, you do not see a great push from us to refer to our Church as the Orthodox Church or refer to ourselves as Orthodox Christians.

True. I guess there's no need, since the creed says "One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church", not "One Holy Orthodox and Apostolic Church".
Which makes sense I guess why the Orthodox lay claim to the word "catholic" and why they are opposed to us referring to ourselves as such.

On a related note, I think it is funny that Lutherans change the wording of the Creed. I'm not sure if this is across the board, but at least at my sister's Lutheran church here in town, when they recite the Nicene Creed they say they believe in "One, Holy, Christian, and Apostolic Church."  laugh
Yes, it's extremely common.  The service books used to say "Christian" but some of the modern ones (odd in this instance) have "Catholic" with an asterisk with a footnote "or Christian."
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: 37,473



« Reply #203 on: June 27, 2011, 09:33:52 PM »

The Church, however, is Christ as "I AM," and He is not socially contructed nor culturally informed.
But the question in this case would be "which Church is Christ?" Unless you subscribe to the idea that there can be more than one Church (eg "Branch Theory"), then only one of them can be Christ. The existence of two or more separate bodies claiming to be the "One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church" seems to me to make them ontologically different. One of them is Christ as experienced in the Community which forms His Body, the Church (which cannot be said to be devoid of social constructs since it is both a Divine and Human entity), and the others are social constructs which are just that.

The other possibility is that neither of the two churches is Christ. Maybe Christ is not found in a Church but within each and everyone of us and the Church of Christ is made up of all its members regardles of what cultural construct they attend.
or maybe Christ isn't in any of us, but god is in us and the winds and the sun and the rocks, and if we love one another kumbaya.
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: 6,114



« Reply #204 on: June 27, 2011, 11:18:28 PM »

The Spirit has descended!

The Orthodox=the Catholics.

I really wish our people would get this.   When the Fathers and the Ecumenical Councils speak of "Catholic Church" and "Catholics" they are speaking about us!   Why are any of us hesitant to speak of ourselves in the terminology that the Holy Fathers gave us?  

To be fair, I think a big part of it is a simple desire to avoid confusing people.
I think it is interesting that, even though I am sure that the majority of Roman Catholics here on the forum consider their faith to be orthodox, you do not see a great push from us to refer to our Church as the Orthodox Church or refer to ourselves as Orthodox Christians.

True. I guess there's no need, since the creed says "One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church", not "One Holy Orthodox and Apostolic Church".
Which makes sense I guess why the Orthodox lay claim to the word "catholic" and why they are opposed to us referring to ourselves as such.

On a related note, I think it is funny that Lutherans change the wording of the Creed. I'm not sure if this is across the board, but at least at my sister's Lutheran church here in town, when they recite the Nicene Creed they say they believe in "One, Holy, Christian, and Apostolic Church."  laugh
Yes, it's extremely common.  The service books used to say "Christian" but some of the modern ones (odd in this instance) have "Catholic" with an asterisk with a footnote "or Christian."

I haven't had a lot of time for posting today, but I wanted to pop in here to mention something interesting I've heard (if I remember correctly) from Lutherans: they claimed that saying the creed with "Christian" in place of "Catholic" was already common in Germany before Martin Luther came along.
« Last Edit: June 27, 2011, 11:20:29 PM by Peter J » Logged

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

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,114



« Reply #205 on: June 27, 2011, 11:19:56 PM »

Or are we dialoguing with a deaf juggernaut which believes that in the end it will subdue us anyway?

So, in other words, are some Catholics similar to the liberal Protestants who "tend to assume the Orthodox commitment to the Tradition is ethnic and cultural, a product of their historical development—e.g., in places like Greece as opposed to Germany—not a doctrinal conviction that spans ethnic groups and cultures"? (cf. David Mills)

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,36642.0.html
Logged

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

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #206 on: June 27, 2011, 11:25:42 PM »

The Spirit has descended!

The Orthodox=the Catholics.

I really wish our people would get this.   When the Fathers and the Ecumenical Councils speak of "Catholic Church" and "Catholics" they are speaking about us!   Why are any of us hesitant to speak of ourselves in the terminology that the Holy Fathers gave us?  

To be fair, I think a big part of it is a simple desire to avoid confusing people.
I think it is interesting that, even though I am sure that the majority of Roman Catholics here on the forum consider their faith to be orthodox, you do not see a great push from us to refer to our Church as the Orthodox Church or refer to ourselves as Orthodox Christians.

True. I guess there's no need, since the creed says "One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church", not "One Holy Orthodox and Apostolic Church".
Which makes sense I guess why the Orthodox lay claim to the word "catholic" and why they are opposed to us referring to ourselves as such.

On a related note, I think it is funny that Lutherans change the wording of the Creed. I'm not sure if this is across the board, but at least at my sister's Lutheran church here in town, when they recite the Nicene Creed they say they believe in "One, Holy, Christian, and Apostolic Church."  laugh
Yes, it's extremely common.  The service books used to say "Christian" but some of the modern ones (odd in this instance) have "Catholic" with an asterisk with a footnote "or Christian."

I haven't had a lot of time for posting today, but I wanted to pop in here to mention something interesting I've heard (if I remember correctly) from Lutherans: they claimed that saying the creed with "Christian" in place of "Catholic" was already common in Germany before Martin Luther came along.
Lutherans seem to elevate German in a similar way to how Latin is elevated within the Roman Catholic Church...maybe even more so. The local Lutheran Church sings Silent Night in German at their Christmas Eve service and they have German celebrations at the church like Oktoberfest. It's kind of bizarre how many German culture is intertwined in their church.
Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #207 on: June 27, 2011, 11:32:50 PM »



"tend to assume the Orthodox commitment to the Tradition is ethnic and cultural, a product of their historical development—e.g., in places like Greece as opposed to Germany—not a doctrinal conviction that spans ethnic groups and cultures"? (cf. David Mills)

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,36642.0.html

The unanimity of Orthodox doctrine is spectacular - from the freezing monasteries of Siberia to the sunbaked churches of the Holy Land and the islands of the Mediterranean.  Ask a Zambian priest a question and he'll give you the same answer as a Japanese priest.  And all this unanimity maintained without any magisterium nor central headquarters and often through long centuries of isolation from one another, before the internet and the jetplane.   It is the Spirit who works this in the holy Church.  Mills' comment could not be further off the mark.
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: 37,473



« Reply #208 on: June 27, 2011, 11:34:38 PM »

The Spirit has descended!

The Orthodox=the Catholics.

I really wish our people would get this.   When the Fathers and the Ecumenical Councils speak of "Catholic Church" and "Catholics" they are speaking about us!   Why are any of us hesitant to speak of ourselves in the terminology that the Holy Fathers gave us?  

To be fair, I think a big part of it is a simple desire to avoid confusing people.
I think it is interesting that, even though I am sure that the majority of Roman Catholics here on the forum consider their faith to be orthodox, you do not see a great push from us to refer to our Church as the Orthodox Church or refer to ourselves as Orthodox Christians.

True. I guess there's no need, since the creed says "One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church", not "One Holy Orthodox and Apostolic Church".
Which makes sense I guess why the Orthodox lay claim to the word "catholic" and why they are opposed to us referring to ourselves as such.

On a related note, I think it is funny that Lutherans change the wording of the Creed. I'm not sure if this is across the board, but at least at my sister's Lutheran church here in town, when they recite the Nicene Creed they say they believe in "One, Holy, Christian, and Apostolic Church."  laugh
Yes, it's extremely common.  The service books used to say "Christian" but some of the modern ones (odd in this instance) have "Catholic" with an asterisk with a footnote "or Christian."

I haven't had a lot of time for posting today, but I wanted to pop in here to mention something interesting I've heard (if I remember correctly) from Lutherans: they claimed that saying the creed with "Christian" in place of "Catholic" was already common in Germany before Martin Luther came along.
Lutherans seem to elevate German in a similar way to how Latin is elevated within the Roman Catholic Church...maybe even more so. The local Lutheran Church sings Silent Night in German at their Christmas Eve service and they have German celebrations at the church like Oktoberfest. It's kind of bizarre how many German culture is intertwined in their church.
Maybe because your local Lutheran parish is German? Because I never noticed it among the Norwegians, Swedes or Arabs.
Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,553


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #209 on: June 27, 2011, 11:55:45 PM »

Quote
The local Lutheran Church sings Silent Night in German at their Christmas Eve service


Hardly surprising. The carol was originally written in German, and called Stille Nacht, Heilige Nacht.
Logged
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,114



« Reply #210 on: June 28, 2011, 12:13:13 AM »

The unanimity of Orthodox doctrine is spectacular - from the freezing monasteries of Siberia to the sunbaked churches of the Holy Land and the islands of the Mediterranean.  Ask a Zambian priest a question and he'll give you the same answer as a Japanese priest.  And all this unanimity maintained without any magisterium nor central headquarters and often through long centuries of isolation from one another, before the internet and the jetplane.   It is the Spirit who works this in the holy Church.  Mills' comment could not be further off the mark.

 Huh

To me, it sounds an awful lot like you agree with Mill's comment.
« Last Edit: June 28, 2011, 12:16:05 AM by Peter J » Logged

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

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,114



« Reply #211 on: June 28, 2011, 12:15:20 AM »

The Spirit has descended!

The Orthodox=the Catholics.

I really wish our people would get this.   When the Fathers and the Ecumenical Councils speak of "Catholic Church" and "Catholics" they are speaking about us!   Why are any of us hesitant to speak of ourselves in the terminology that the Holy Fathers gave us?  

To be fair, I think a big part of it is a simple desire to avoid confusing people.
I think it is interesting that, even though I am sure that the majority of Roman Catholics here on the forum consider their faith to be orthodox, you do not see a great push from us to refer to our Church as the Orthodox Church or refer to ourselves as Orthodox Christians.

True. I guess there's no need, since the creed says "One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church", not "One Holy Orthodox and Apostolic Church".
Which makes sense I guess why the Orthodox lay claim to the word "catholic" and why they are opposed to us referring to ourselves as such.

On a related note, I think it is funny that Lutherans change the wording of the Creed. I'm not sure if this is across the board, but at least at my sister's Lutheran church here in town, when they recite the Nicene Creed they say they believe in "One, Holy, Christian, and Apostolic Church."  laugh
Yes, it's extremely common.  The service books used to say "Christian" but some of the modern ones (odd in this instance) have "Catholic" with an asterisk with a footnote "or Christian."

I haven't had a lot of time for posting today, but I wanted to pop in here to mention something interesting I've heard (if I remember correctly) from Lutherans: they claimed that saying the creed with "Christian" in place of "Catholic" was already common in Germany before Martin Luther came along.
Lutherans seem to elevate German in a similar way to how Latin is elevated within the Roman Catholic Church...maybe even more so. The local Lutheran Church sings Silent Night in German at their Christmas Eve service and they have German celebrations at the church like Oktoberfest. It's kind of bizarre how many German culture is intertwined in their church.

I suspect that it seems strange to us Americans, but is actually common with respect to a lot of different cultures.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #212 on: June 28, 2011, 12:27:13 AM »

The unanimity of Orthodox doctrine is spectacular - from the freezing monasteries of Siberia to the sunbaked churches of the Holy Land and the islands of the Mediterranean.  Ask a Zambian priest a question and he'll give you the same answer as a Japanese priest.  And all this unanimity maintained without any magisterium nor central headquarters and often through long centuries of isolation from one another, before the internet and the jetplane.   It is the Spirit who works this in the holy Church.  Mills' comment could not be further off the mark.

 Huh

To me, it sounds an awful lot like you agree with Mill's comment.

That's strange.  Mills says "the Orthodox commitment to the Tradition ..... not a doctrinal conviction that spans ethnic groups and cultures."

I was pointing out the opposite, namely that it *is* a doctrinal conviction that spans ethnic groups and cultures.
Logged
Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #213 on: June 28, 2011, 01:11:52 AM »

The Spirit has descended!

The Orthodox=the Catholics.

I really wish our people would get this.   When the Fathers and the Ecumenical Councils speak of "Catholic Church" and "Catholics" they are speaking about us!   Why are any of us hesitant to speak of ourselves in the terminology that the Holy Fathers gave us?  

To be fair, I think a big part of it is a simple desire to avoid confusing people.
I think it is interesting that, even though I am sure that the majority of Roman Catholics here on the forum consider their faith to be orthodox, you do not see a great push from us to refer to our Church as the Orthodox Church or refer to ourselves as Orthodox Christians.

True. I guess there's no need, since the creed says "One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church", not "One Holy Orthodox and Apostolic Church".
Which makes sense I guess why the Orthodox lay claim to the word "catholic" and why they are opposed to us referring to ourselves as such.

On a related note, I think it is funny that Lutherans change the wording of the Creed. I'm not sure if this is across the board, but at least at my sister's Lutheran church here in town, when they recite the Nicene Creed they say they believe in "One, Holy, Christian, and Apostolic Church."  laugh
Yes, it's extremely common.  The service books used to say "Christian" but some of the modern ones (odd in this instance) have "Catholic" with an asterisk with a footnote "or Christian."

I haven't had a lot of time for posting today, but I wanted to pop in here to mention something interesting I've heard (if I remember correctly) from Lutherans: they claimed that saying the creed with "Christian" in place of "Catholic" was already common in Germany before Martin Luther came along.
Lutherans seem to elevate German in a similar way to how Latin is elevated within the Roman Catholic Church...maybe even more so. The local Lutheran Church sings Silent Night in German at their Christmas Eve service and they have German celebrations at the church like Oktoberfest. It's kind of bizarre how many German culture is intertwined in their church.
Maybe because your local Lutheran parish is German? Because I never noticed it among the Norwegians, Swedes or Arabs.
There are several families that attend their that trace their lineage to German roots, but I'm not sure you could consider the entire church German. I always just figured they did it as a way to honor the ethnic heritage of their founder.
Logged
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #214 on: June 28, 2011, 07:22:47 AM »



"tend to assume the Orthodox commitment to the Tradition is ethnic and cultural, a product of their historical development—e.g., in places like Greece as opposed to Germany—not a doctrinal conviction that spans ethnic groups and cultures"? (cf. David Mills)

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,36642.0.html

The unanimity of Orthodox doctrine is spectacular - from the freezing monasteries of Siberia to the sunbaked churches of the Holy Land and the islands of the Mediterranean.  Ask a Zambian priest a question and he'll give you the same answer as a Japanese priest.  And all this unanimity maintained without any magisterium nor central headquarters and often through long centuries of isolation from one another, before the internet and the jetplane.   It is the Spirit who works this in the holy Church.  Mills' comment could not be further off the mark.

The purity of this unanimity in Orthodoxy is not at all perfect in all of its particulars, from time to time and place to place.

Mary
Logged

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

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #215 on: June 28, 2011, 07:28:39 AM »



"tend to assume the Orthodox commitment to the Tradition is ethnic and cultural, a product of their historical development—e.g., in places like Greece as opposed to Germany—not a doctrinal conviction that spans ethnic groups and cultures"? (cf. David Mills)

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,36642.0.html

The unanimity of Orthodox doctrine is spectacular - from the freezing monasteries of Siberia to the sunbaked churches of the Holy Land and the islands of the Mediterranean.  Ask a Zambian priest a question and he'll give you the same answer as a Japanese priest.  And all this unanimity maintained without any magisterium nor central headquarters and often through long centuries of isolation from one another, before the internet and the jetplane.   It is the Spirit who works this in the holy Church.  Mills' comment could not be further off the mark.

The purity of this unanimity in Orthodoxy is not at all perfect in all of its particulars, from time to time and place to place.

Mary

Again.....hmmm... not one of your more insightful comments.   If you were being paid a stipend to destabilise the Orthodox on the internet I'd deduct dollars from your bonus this week!
Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #216 on: June 28, 2011, 07:34:58 AM »



"tend to assume the Orthodox commitment to the Tradition is ethnic and cultural, a product of their historical development—e.g., in places like Greece as opposed to Germany—not a doctrinal conviction that spans ethnic groups and cultures"? (cf. David Mills)

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,36642.0.html

The unanimity of Orthodox doctrine is spectacular - from the freezing monasteries of Siberia to the sunbaked churches of the Holy Land and the islands of the Mediterranean.  Ask a Zambian priest a question and he'll give you the same answer as a Japanese priest.  And all this unanimity maintained without any magisterium nor central headquarters and often through long centuries of isolation from one another, before the internet and the jetplane.   It is the Spirit who works this in the holy Church.  Mills' comment could not be further off the mark.

The purity of this unanimity in Orthodoxy is not at all perfect in all of its particulars, from time to time and place to place.

Mary

I don't think you want to push that too far when your Church has bishops denying papal infallibility, denying papal supremacy and denying the authority of the last 15 Ecumenical Councils held by the Pope!!.

For example see message 39
at
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,19903.msg296069.html#msg296069
« Last Edit: June 28, 2011, 07:35:51 AM by Irish Hermit » Logged
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,114



« Reply #217 on: June 28, 2011, 08:29:00 AM »

The unanimity of Orthodox doctrine is spectacular - from the freezing monasteries of Siberia to the sunbaked churches of the Holy Land and the islands of the Mediterranean.  Ask a Zambian priest a question and he'll give you the same answer as a Japanese priest.  And all this unanimity maintained without any magisterium nor central headquarters and often through long centuries of isolation from one another, before the internet and the jetplane.   It is the Spirit who works this in the holy Church.  Mills' comment could not be further off the mark.

 Huh

To me, it sounds an awful lot like you agree with Mill's comment.

That's strange.  Mills says "the Orthodox commitment to the Tradition ..... not a doctrinal conviction that spans ethnic groups and cultures."

If you can show that he said that, I'm all ears. But I find it very unlikely that he did say that, given that I've already shown that he said that Protestant liberals "tend to assume the Orthodox commitment to the Tradition is ethnic and cultural, a product of their historical development—e.g., in places like Greece as opposed to Germany—not a doctrinal conviction that spans ethnic groups and cultures." (emphasis added)

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,36642.0.html
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #218 on: June 28, 2011, 08:45:59 AM »

The unanimity of Orthodox doctrine is spectacular - from the freezing monasteries of Siberia to the sunbaked churches of the Holy Land and the islands of the Mediterranean.  Ask a Zambian priest a question and he'll give you the same answer as a Japanese priest.  And all this unanimity maintained without any magisterium nor central headquarters and often through long centuries of isolation from one another, before the internet and the jetplane.   It is the Spirit who works this in the holy Church.  Mills' comment could not be further off the mark.

 Huh

To me, it sounds an awful lot like you agree with Mill's comment.

That's strange.  Mills says "the Orthodox commitment to the Tradition ..... not a doctrinal conviction that spans ethnic groups and cultures."

If you can show that he said that, I'm all ears. But I find it very unlikely that he did say that, given that I've already shown that he said that Protestant liberals "tend to assume the Orthodox commitment to the Tradition is ethnic and cultural, a product of their historical development—e.g., in places like Greece as opposed to Germany—not a doctrinal conviction that spans ethnic groups and cultures." (emphasis added)

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,36642.0.html

Sorry... was I reading it too fast?  Was Mills speaking of the mistaken assumptions of Prostestant liberals and disavowing them?
Logged
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #219 on: June 28, 2011, 09:17:38 AM »



"tend to assume the Orthodox commitment to the Tradition is ethnic and cultural, a product of their historical development—e.g., in places like Greece as opposed to Germany—not a doctrinal conviction that spans ethnic groups and cultures"? (cf. David Mills)

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,36642.0.html

The unanimity of Orthodox doctrine is spectacular - from the freezing monasteries of Siberia to the sunbaked churches of the Holy Land and the islands of the Mediterranean.  Ask a Zambian priest a question and he'll give you the same answer as a Japanese priest.  And all this unanimity maintained without any magisterium nor central headquarters and often through long centuries of isolation from one another, before the internet and the jetplane.   It is the Spirit who works this in the holy Church.  Mills' comment could not be further off the mark.

The purity of this unanimity in Orthodoxy is not at all perfect in all of its particulars, from time to time and place to place.

Mary

I don't think you want to push that too far when your Church has bishops denying papal infallibility, denying papal supremacy and denying the authority of the last 15 Ecumenical Councils held by the Pope!!.

For example see message 39
at
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,19903.msg296069.html#msg296069

You are the one with the obsessive need to compare. 

I made a true statement about Orthodoxy.  It is clear in a multitude of ways that you ignore when it is convenient and praise when it seems to suit your purposes.  I mean you personally.

So again the only reason you would rebuke me for saying so is because I am Catholic, not because what I say is false.

Brilliant!!
Logged

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

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #220 on: June 28, 2011, 09:29:06 AM »



"tend to assume the Orthodox commitment to the Tradition is ethnic and cultural, a product of their historical development—e.g., in places like Greece as opposed to Germany—not a doctrinal conviction that spans ethnic groups and cultures"? (cf. David Mills)

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,36642.0.html

The unanimity of Orthodox doctrine is spectacular - from the freezing monasteries of Siberia to the sunbaked churches of the Holy Land and the islands of the Mediterranean.  Ask a Zambian priest a question and he'll give you the same answer as a Japanese priest.  And all this unanimity maintained without any magisterium nor central headquarters and often through long centuries of isolation from one another, before the internet and the jetplane.   It is the Spirit who works this in the holy Church.  Mills' comment could not be further off the mark.

The purity of this unanimity in Orthodoxy is not at all perfect in all of its particulars, from time to time and place to place.

Mary

I don't think you want to push that too far when your Church has bishops denying papal infallibility, denying papal supremacy and denying the authority of the last 15 Ecumenical Councils held by the Pope!!.

For example see message 39
at
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,19903.msg296069.html#msg296069

You are the one with the obsessive need to compare. 

I made a true statement about Orthodoxy.  It is clear in a multitude of ways that you ignore when it is convenient and praise when it seems to suit your purposes.  I mean you personally.

So again the only reason you would rebuke me for saying so is because I am Catholic, not because what I say is false.

Brilliant!!

My dear lady, who knows if what you alleged is false or not?  You made vague accusations which as usual you did not even bother to specify or substantiate (message 214.)

I on the other hand provided substantiation of what I said with my linked reference to the chaotic situation in the Catholic Church where some bishops reject papal infallibility and 15 of the Ecumenical Councils called by the Pope (message 216.)  What a nightmare!!
Logged
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #221 on: June 28, 2011, 09:39:34 AM »



"tend to assume the Orthodox commitment to the Tradition is ethnic and cultural, a product of their historical development—e.g., in places like Greece as opposed to Germany—not a doctrinal conviction that spans ethnic groups and cultures"? (cf. David Mills)

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,36642.0.html

The unanimity of Orthodox doctrine is spectacular - from the freezing monasteries of Siberia to the sunbaked churches of the Holy Land and the islands of the Mediterranean.  Ask a Zambian priest a question and he'll give you the same answer as a Japanese priest.  And all this unanimity maintained without any magisterium nor central headquarters and often through long centuries of isolation from one another, before the internet and the jetplane.   It is the Spirit who works this in the holy Church.  Mills' comment could not be further off the mark.

The purity of this unanimity in Orthodoxy is not at all perfect in all of its particulars, from time to time and place to place.

Mary

I don't think you want to push that too far when your Church has bishops denying papal infallibility, denying papal supremacy and denying the authority of the last 15 Ecumenical Councils held by the Pope!!.

For example see message 39
at
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,19903.msg296069.html#msg296069

You are the one with the obsessive need to compare. 

I made a true statement about Orthodoxy.  It is clear in a multitude of ways that you ignore when it is convenient and praise when it seems to suit your purposes.  I mean you personally.

So again the only reason you would rebuke me for saying so is because I am Catholic, not because what I say is false.

Brilliant!!

My dear lady, who knows if what you alleged is false or not? 


Of all the people I know, you do.
Logged

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

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,114



« Reply #222 on: June 28, 2011, 09:40:14 AM »

The unanimity of Orthodox doctrine is spectacular - from the freezing monasteries of Siberia to the sunbaked churches of the Holy Land and the islands of the Mediterranean.  Ask a Zambian priest a question and he'll give you the same answer as a Japanese priest.  And all this unanimity maintained without any magisterium nor central headquarters and often through long centuries of isolation from one another, before the internet and the jetplane.   It is the Spirit who works this in the holy Church.  Mills' comment could not be further off the mark.

 Huh

To me, it sounds an awful lot like you agree with Mill's comment.

That's strange.  Mills says "the Orthodox commitment to the Tradition ..... not a doctrinal conviction that spans ethnic groups and cultures."

If you can show that he said that, I'm all ears. But I find it very unlikely that he did say that, given that I've already shown that he said that Protestant liberals "tend to assume the Orthodox commitment to the Tradition is ethnic and cultural, a product of their historical development—e.g., in places like Greece as opposed to Germany—not a doctrinal conviction that spans ethnic groups and cultures." (emphasis added)

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,36642.0.html

Sorry... was I reading it too fast?  Was Mills speaking of the mistaken assumptions of Prostestant liberals and disavowing them?

I think that "disavowing them" was implied, even if it wasn't the point of what he was saying.

I've pulled up the full quote,

Quote
I would add to Steve’s comments that in my observation the Orthodox can get away with being so conservative in the WCC because modern Protestant liberals treat them as primitives or exotics. They tend to assume the Orthodox commitment to the Tradition is ethnic and cultural, a product of their historical development—e.g., in places like Greece as opposed to Germany—not a doctrinal conviction that spans ethnic groups and cultures.

I’ve heard this line taken especially on the Orthodox opposition to women’s ordination. Which means, among other things, that while the Orthodox may think they are having an influence, any stand they make for orthodoxy that offends the liberal consensus is dismissed as just “their thing,” as an Orthodox peculiarity that they will someday get over. If they have an influence for good on doctrinal matters, I suspect the liberals are open to their influence because liberals don’t care as much about doctrine as about ordaining women, and they further believe that all doctrines are just metaphors anyway, so why not let the Orthodox have their way?
Logged

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

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,114



« Reply #223 on: June 28, 2011, 09:45:53 AM »

I on the other hand provided substantiation of what I said with my linked reference to the chaotic situation in the Catholic Church where some bishops reject papal infallibility and 15 of the Ecumenical Councils called by the Pope (message 216.)  What a nightmare!!

Not to nit-pick, but I think you meant "14". ("15" implies accepting only 6 ecumenical councils.)

There's really nothing wrong with certain Catholics believing that there have only been 7 ecumenical councils, provided they affirm the teachings of all 21 general councils.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #224 on: June 28, 2011, 09:47:06 AM »



"tend to assume the Orthodox commitment to the Tradition is ethnic and cultural, a product of their historical development—e.g., in places like Greece as opposed to Germany—not a doctrinal conviction that spans ethnic groups and cultures"? (cf. David Mills)

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,36642.0.html

The unanimity of Orthodox doctrine is spectacular - from the freezing monasteries of Siberia to the sunbaked churches of the Holy Land and the islands of the Mediterranean.  Ask a Zambian priest a question and he'll give you the same answer as a Japanese priest.  And all this unanimity maintained without any magisterium nor central headquarters and often through long centuries of isolation from one another, before the internet and the jetplane.   It is the Spirit who works this in the holy Church.  Mills' comment could not be further off the mark.

The purity of this unanimity in Orthodoxy is not at all perfect in all of its particulars, from time to time and place to place.

Mary

I don't think you want to push that too far when your Church has bishops denying papal infallibility, denying papal supremacy and denying the authority of the last 15 Ecumenical Councils held by the Pope!!.

For example see message 39
at
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,19903.msg296069.html#msg296069

You are the one with the obsessive need to compare. 

I made a true statement about Orthodoxy.  It is clear in a multitude of ways that you ignore when it is convenient and praise when it seems to suit your purposes.  I mean you personally.

So again the only reason you would rebuke me for saying so is because I am Catholic, not because what I say is false.

Brilliant!!

My dear lady, who knows if what you alleged is false or not? 


Of all the people I know, you do.

Ah, flattery.... I am thinking of restoring your bonus this month.   laugh Cheesy
Logged
Tags: cheval mort 
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 »  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 0.237 seconds with 72 queries.